DOCSLIB.ORG

Western Monarch Butterfly Conservation Plan 2018-2068

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Western Monarch Butterfly Conservation Plan 2018-2068 DRAFT 2018Westmonarchpubliccommdft.20181105 DRAFT WESTERN MONARCH BUTTERFLY CONSERVATION PLAN 2018-2068 Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies October 2018 DRAFT 2018Westmonarchpubliccommdft.20181105 DRAFT Western Monarch Butterfly Conservation Plan 2018–2068 Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Prepared by Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Western Monarch Working Group Taylor Cotten – Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Jim DeVos – Arizona Game and Fish Department Chris Keleher – Utah Department of Natural Resources Stafford Lehr – California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Executive Sponsor Samantha Marcum – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Karen Miner – California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Working Group Chair Jennifer Newmark – Nevada Department of Wildlife Davia Palmeri – Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Rex Sallabanks – Idaho Department of Fish and Game Maria Ulloa Bustos – Bureau of Land Management Bill Van Pelt – Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Mindy Wheeler – Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Contributing Authors Cheri Boucher – Arizona Game and Fish Department Vikki Finn – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Region Mike Houts – Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies Ann Potter – Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Daydre Roser – California Department of Fish and Wildlife Helen Swagerty – California Department of Fish and Wildlife Leona Svancara – Idaho Department of Fish and Game Paul Thompson – Utah Department of Natural Resources Editor: Beth Waterbury – Idaho Department of Fish and Game, retired Recommended citation: Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. 2018. Western monarch butterfly conservation plan, 2018– 2068. Version 1.0. Cover photo credits: Left: Adult monarchs nectaring on showy milkweed. Photo: Idaho Department of Fish and Game. Center: Overwintering cluster of monarchs in eucalyptus. Photo: Candace Fallon/The Xerces Society Right: Fifth instar monarch caterpillar feeding on showy milkweed. Photo: Idaho Department of Fish and Game Page ii DRAFT 2018Westmonarchpubliccommdft.20181105 DRAFT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Western Monarch Working Group is grateful to the panel of western monarch researchers who generously provided their time and energy to this effort: Elizabeth Crone, Thomas Dilts, Matthew Forister, Sarina Jepsen, Gail Morris, Emma Pelton, and Cheryl Schultz. In addition, selected individuals representing various agencies and public sectors provided comments on a preliminary rough draft of the plan. Their thoughtful review and input was invaluable in the formulation of this draft plan. We thank the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation for providing a grant to support the development of the Western Monarch Conservation Plan. Page iii DRAFT 2018Westmonarchpubliccommdft.20181105 DRAFT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The monarch butterfly is one of the most familiar and charismatic insects of North America, renowned for its distinctive migratory phenomena and reliance on milkweed, the monarch’s larval host plant. Once widespread and common throughout its range, populations have undergone recent and rapid declines. The western population of monarchs that breeds west of the Rocky Mountains and largely overwinters in coastal California has declined 74% since the late 1990s. The much larger eastern population that breeds east of the Rockies and overwinters in Mexico has declined at a similar rate. In 2014, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) was petitioned to list the monarch as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA). The USFWS found that the petition contained sufficient information to demonstrate that listing may be warranted and initiated a formal status review to inform their listing decision, anticipated in June 2019. Concurrent with the status review, USFWS and the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies have actively promoted collaborative efforts across state, organizational, and land ownership boundaries to address threats and opportunities facing monarchs and other pollinators. In 2017, the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA) established the Western Monarch Working Group (WMWG) to proactively lead a multistate cooperative agenda for conservation of the western monarch population. If implemented in a timely manner, WMWG efforts could preclude the need to list the monarch under the ESA. This document, The Western Monarch Butterfly Conservation Plan (hereafter “Plan”), is intended to articulate and attain WAFWA’s vision to identify and promote a shared set of unified, ecosystem-based conservation strategies across all partner agencies to achieve the vision of a viable western monarch population. The Plan currently encompasses the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, which comprise the core of the western monarch range. In contrast to the eastern range, the western range is unique in containing overwintering, breeding, and migratory habitats comprising the entirety of the monarch’s migratory life cycle. With the exception of the California wintering sites, critical knowledge gaps still exist on the distribution and quality of monarch breeding and migratory habitats and primary threat factors influencing monarch declines in the western landscape. The Plan’s various sections and appendices describe these features in more detail. Section 1: Introduction and Plan Overview describes the need, purpose, planning approach, and state authorities for developing the Plan. Section 2: Western Monarch Butterfly Ecology is a primer on monarch life history, habitat requirements, and population status of western monarchs. Section 3: Summary of Potential Threat Factors provides an overview of a unique suite of potential threats impacting the western monarch population and its habitat. Page iv DRAFT 2018Westmonarchpubliccommdft.20181105 DRAFT Section 4: Current Conservation Efforts summarizes recent and ongoing activities of federal and state agencies, NGOs, academia, industry sectors, and citizen scientists on behalf of monarch and pollinator conservation. Section 5: Monarch Population and Habitat Goals establishes near term (10-year) measurable objectives for population size and habitat targets with the goal of reversing western monarch declines and providing for population growth. Section 6: Overwintering Habitat Conservation Strategies outlines approaches to protect and restore overwintering groves, including development of site-specific grove management plans. Section 7: Breeding Habitat Conservation Strategies addresses strategies for conserving monarch habitats (breeding, migratory) in natural lands, urban, rights-of-way, and agricultural habitat sectors. Section 8: Education and Outreach Strategies harnesses the widespread appeal of the monarch to engage eight different audiences in education, conservation, and scientific research programs. Section 9: Research and Monitoring Needs identifies research priorities for overwintering sites, breeding/migratory habitats, and monarch vital rates; and monitoring priorities to track population trends, threat reduction efforts, and progress towards achieving Plan goals and objectives. Section 10: Capacity, Funding, and Implementation provides summary-level clarity to the question of how WMWG state members will mechanize Plan implementation as a matter of law, funding, and governance structure. Section 11: Adaptive Management describes a framework for monitoring conservation activities in the Plan to identify whether they are producing the desired results or whether adjustments in approaches under the adaptive management process are warranted. This Plan is a call to action. It provides a collaborative framework for action and accountability among state, federal, NGO, academic, private, and local partners to advance near-term and long-term objectives to address and ameliorate threats and ensure improvement and long-term persistence of the western monarch population into the foreseeable future (50 years). Page v DRAFT 2018Westmonarchpubliccommdft.20181105 DRAFT CONTENTS Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................... iii Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... iv Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in this Document .................................................................... ix SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION AND PLAN OVERVIEW ....................................................................... 1 1.1. Need .................................................................................................................................... 2 1.2. Purpose Statement ............................................................................................................. 2 1.3. Planning Approach .............................................................................................................. 3 1.4. State Authorities ................................................................................................................. 3 SECTION 2: WESTERN MONARCH BUTTERFLY ECOLOGY ............................................................... 5 2.1. Description .......................................................................................................................... 5 2.2. Taxonomy ...........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • To: Donita Cotter, Monarch Conservation Strategy Coordinator From: Dr. Benjamin N. Tuggle, Regional Director, Southwest
    To: Donita Cotter, Monarch Conservation Strategy Coordinator From: Dr. Benjamin N. Tuggle, Regional Director, Southwest Region (R2) Subject: Region 2 Monarch Butterfly Conservation Strategy and Action Plan Template Date: November 12, 2014 On 4 September 2014, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Director issued a memorandum to the Service Directorate to develop a Service strategy for monarch conservation addressing plans for habitat restoration and enhancement, education and outreach, and monitoring and research needs. On October 7, the Director sent an email to all Regional Directors challenging them to commit to a goal of 100 Million Monarchs by 2020, and for Region 2 to provide a goal of 20,000 acres of new habitat for monarchs. The Director’s requests followed an agreement among President Obama, President Peña Nieto of Mexico, and Prime Minister Harper of Canada to “establish a working group to ensure the conservation of the Monarch butterfly, a species that symbolizes our association.” Also, on June 20, 2014, President Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum, “Creating a Federal Strategy to Promote the Health of Honey Bees and Other Pollinators,” outlining an expedited agenda to address the devastating declines in honey bees and native pollinators, including the monarch butterfly. Secretary Jewell tasked the Director with convening an interagency High Level Working Group to develop and implement a U.S. strategy for monarch conservation, coordinate our efforts with Mexico and Canada through the Trilateral Committee, and ensure that the monarch strategy is coordinated with development of the Federal Pollinator Strategy and DOI assignments in the Presidential Memo. To accomplish these initiatives and provide information to update the 2008 North American Monarch Conservation Plan by March 2015 and completion of the Federal Pollinator Strategy due to the White House mid-December 2014, the following tasks were specifically requested in the Director’s memorandum: I.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Monarch Conservation Implementation Plan
    2019 Monarch Conservation Implementation Plan Prepared by the Monarch Joint Venture staff and partner organizations. 1 | Page Contents Executive Summary 3 Plan Priorities 4 Monarch Habitat Conservation, Maintenance and Enhancement 4 Education to Enhance Awareness of Monarch Conservation Issues and Opportunities 5 Research and Monitoring to Inform Monarch Conservation Efforts 5 Partnerships and collaboration to advance monarch conservation 5 Monarch Joint Venture Mission and Vision 6 2019 Monarch Conservation Implementation Plan 6 Priority 1: Monarch Habitat Conservation, Maintenance and Enhancement 7 Objective 1: Create, restore, enhance, and maintain habitat on public and private lands. 7 Objective 2: Develop consistent, regionally appropriate Asclepias and nectar resources for habitat enhancement and creation on public and private lands. 15 Objective 3: Address overwintering habitat issues in the United States. 18 Priority 2: Education to Enhance Awareness of Monarch Conservation Issues & Opportunities 19 Objective 1: Raise awareness to increase conservation actions and support for monarchs. 19 Objective 2: Increase learning about monarchs and their habitat in formal and informal settings. 24 Objective 3: Foster networking between stakeholders involved in monarch conservation. 26 Priority 3: Research and Monitoring to Inform Monarch Conservation Efforts 28 Objective 1: Study monarch habitat and population status. 28 Objective 2: Expand citizen science and other monitoring, data exchange, and data analyses to inform conservation efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • 1995-2006 Activities Report
    WILDLIFE WITHOUT BORDERS WILDLIFE WITHOUT BORDERS WITHOUT WILDLIFE M E X I C O The most wonderful mystery of life may well be EDITORIAL DIRECTION Office of International Affairs U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service the means by which it created so much diversity www.fws.gov PRODUCTION from so little physical matter. The biosphere, all Agrupación Sierra Madre, S.C. www.sierramadre.com.mx EDITORIAL REVISION organisms combined, makes up only about one Carole Bullard PHOTOGRAPHS All by Patricio Robles Gil part in ten billion [email protected] Excepting: Fabricio Feduchi, p. 13 of the earth’s mass. [email protected] Patricia Rojo, pp. 22-23 [email protected] Fulvio Eccardi, p. 39 It is sparsely distributed through MEXICO [email protected] Jaime Rojo, pp. 44-45 [email protected] a kilometre-thick layer of soil, Antonio Ramírez, Cover (Bat) On p. 1, Tamul waterfall. San Luis Potosí On p. 2, Lacandon rainforest water, and air stretched over On p. 128, Fisherman. Centla wetlands, Tabasco All rights reserved © 2007, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service a half billion square kilometres of surface. The rights of the photographs belongs to each photographer PRINTED IN Impresora Transcontinental de México EDWARD O. WILSON 1992 Photo: NASA U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE DIVISION OF INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION WILDLIFE WITHOUT BORDERS MEXICO ACTIVITIES REPORT 1995-2006 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE At their roots, all things hold hands. & When a tree falls down in the forest, SECRETARÍA DE MEDIO AMBIENTE Y RECURSOS NATURALES MEXICO a star falls down from the sky. CHAN K’IN LACANDON ELDER LACANDON RAINFOREST CHIAPAS, MEXICO FOREWORD onservation of biological diversity has truly arrived significant contributions in time, dedication, and C as a global priority.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Biology of Tile Marsh Fritillary Butterfly Euphydryas a Urinia
    CONSERVATION BIOLOGY OF TILE MARSH FRITILLARY BUTTERFLY EUPHYDRYAS A URINIA CAROLINE ROSE BULMAN Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Leeds School of Biology Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation September 2001 The candidate confirms that the work submitted is her own and that appropriate credit has been given where reference has been made to the work of others. 11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to Chris Thomas for his constant advice, support, inspiration and above all enthusiasm for this project. Robert Wilson has been especially helpful and I am very grateful for his assistance, in particular with the rPM. Alison Holt and Lucia Galvez Bravo made the many months of fieldwork both productive and enjoyable, for which I am very grateful. Thanks to Atte Moilanen for providing advice and software for the IFM, Otso Ovaskainen for calculating the metapopulation capacity and to Niklas Wahlberg and Ilkka Hanski for discussion. This work would have been impossible without the assistance of the following people andlor organisations: Butterfly Conservation (Martin Warren, Richard Fox, Paul Kirland, Nigel Bourn, Russel Hobson) and Branch volunteers (especially Bill Shreeve and BNM recorders), the Countryside Council for Wales (Adrian Fowles, David Wheeler, Justin Lyons, Andy Polkey, Les Colley, Karen Heppingstall), English Nature (David Sheppard, Dee Stephens, Frank Mawby, Judith Murray), Dartmoor National Park (Norman Baldock), Dorset \)Ji\thife Trust (Sharoii Pd'bot), )eNorI Cornwall Wildlife Trust, Somerset Wildlife Trust, the National Trust, Dorset Environmental Records Centre, Somerset Environmental Records Centre, Domino Joyce, Stephen Hartley, David Blakeley, Martin Lappage, David Hardy, David & Liz Woolley, David & Ruth Pritchard, and the many landowners who granted access permission.
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape-Scale Conservation for Butterflies and Moths Lessons from the UK Landscape-Scale Conservation for Butterflies and Moths: Lessons from the UK
    Landscape-scale conservation for butterflies and moths Lessons from the UK Landscape-scale conservation for butterflies and moths: lessons from the UK Landscape-scale conservation for butterflies and moths | 1 Landscape-scale conservation for butterflies and moths: lessons from the UK by Sam Ellis, Nigel Bourn and Caroline Bulman This report would not have been possible without the significant support of the national Government Agencies: Natural England, Scottish Natural Heritage and Countryside Council for Wales, as well as the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, who together grant-aided the development of most of our landscape-scale projects. We are also indebted to the volunteers who have contributed to these projects, including those from some of Butterfly Conservation’s network of 31 Branches around the UK, but also from our many partner organisations. We are also grateful to all the landowners and land managers who have allowed Butterfly Conservation, its contractors and volunteers access to their land to enable project delivery. Special thanks are due to: Karen Aylward (Natural England), Norman Baldock (Dartmoor National Park Authority), Anja Borsje (previous Two Moors Threatened Butterfly ProjectOfficer, Butterfly Conservation), Gill Barter (Countryside Council for Wales), Steve Batt (Warwickshire Wildlife Trust), Frank Berney (University of Sunderland), Richard Boles (Forestry Commission England), Rona Charles (North York Moors National Park Authority), Mike Clark, Paul Dunn (Glamorgan Heritage Coast), Mike Enfield (Kent Wildlife Trust),
    [Show full text]
  • Butterfly Conservation's Uk Conservation Strategy 2025
    BUTTERFLY CONSERVATION’S UK CONSERVATION STRATEGY 2025 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 3 2. WHY CONSERVE BUTTERFLIES AND MOTHS? ........................................................................ 3 3. THE DECLINING STATUS OF BUTTERFLIES AND MOTHS ...................................................... 3 3.1 Species Trends ............................................................................................................................. 4 3.2 Grouped Species Trends .............................................................................................................. 4 4. DRIVERS OF DECLINE ................................................................................................................. 6 5. HABITAT SPECIALISTS AND WIDER COUNTRYSIDE SPECIES .............................................. 7 5.1 Conserving Habitat Specialist Species ......................................................................................... 8 5.2 Conserving Wider Countryside Species ....................................................................................... 8 6. SPECIES RECOVERY STRATEGY AND THE SPECIES RECOVERY CURVE ........................ 10 6.1 STATUS ASSESSMENT (Stage 1): PRIORITISING THREATENED SPECIES........................ 12 6.1.1 Assessing UK Threat Priority using Distribution and Abundance Criteria ........................... 12 6.1.2 Changing Threat Status of UK Butterflies ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Buglife Strategy 2021-2030
    Buglife Strategy 2021-2030 The winning image in the ‘Aquatic Bugs’ category 2020. A diamond squid, shot in Siladen, Indonesia during a blackwater dive © Galice Hoarau Cover photo - An acorn weevil Curculio glandium takes flight, first place in the ‘Beetles’ category 2020 © Christian Brockes Buglife - The Invertebrate Conservation Trust is a company limited by guarantee, Registered in England at The Lindens, 86 Lincoln Rd, Peterborough, PE1 2SN Company no. 4132695 Registered charity no. 1092293 Scottish charity no. SC040004 President – Germaine Greer Chairman – Steve Ormerod Chief Executive – Matt Shardlow Contents Why bugs need Buglife ............................................................................................................ 3 Buglife’s identity ..................................................................................................................... 4 Our Vision ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Our Mission ................................................................................................................................... 4 Our Strapline ................................................................................................................................. 4 Our Character ................................................................................................................................ 4 Buglife’s outcomes .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape-Scale Conservation of Farmland Moths
    CHAPTER 8 Landscape-scale conservation of farmland moths Thomas Merckx and David W. Macdonald When through the old oak forest I am gone, Let me not wander in a barren dream John Keats, On Sitting Down to Read King Lear Once Again. 8.1 Scope of agri-environment schemes the ecosystem services (such as crop pollination, pest control, water retention, and soil protection) provided Biodiversity has declined substantially throughout by the adjoining non-farmed land. Nevertheless, some much of the European wider countryside. The most biodiversity of the original ecosystems may be re- promising tools to reverse these declines are widely tained within farmland ecosystems, its amount heavily thought to be agri-environment schemes (AES) (Don- dependent on the spatial extent and degree of farm- ald and Evans 2006). These governmental schemes land intensification. Indeed, although species typic- provide financial rewards for ‘environmentally ally ‘prefer’ one ecosystem, they often occur in, and friendly’ methods of farmland management. However, use resources from, neighbouring ecosystems (Pereira AES do not always produce significant biodiversity and Daily 2006; Dennis 2010). As such, many species benefits (Kleijn et al. 2006; Batáry et al. 2010). For ex- may manage to persist within farmland systems, with ample, in the UK, the broad and shallow ‘Entry Level at least some of them, such as the speckled wood Pa- Stewardship’ has often been unrewarding for wildlife rarge aegeria, originally a woodland butterfly, adapting (e.g. Davey et al. 2010, but see Baker et al. 2012), but, to these ‘novel’ ecosystems (Merckx et al. 2003). As a in many cases, the more targeted ‘higher level’ scheme result, extensively farmed systems can often be char- has exceeded expectations (Jeremy Thomas, pers.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildflower-Rich Brownfields Can Be Refuges for Butterflies That Have Declined Across the UK Due to Agricultural Intensification and Afforestation
    © Scott Shanks Wildflower-rich brownfields can be refuges for butterflies that have declined across the UK due to agricultural intensification and afforestation. The mosaic of habitats that develop on some brownfields can be the sole resources in the landscape that provide butterflies with all of the appropriate larval foodplants, adult nectar sources, bare ground and shelter required to survive. Around 30 butterfly species can regularly exploit brownfields, including scarce and declining species that rely heavily on a network of brownfields to support populations. Key species of butterfly on brownfields remains. The Small blue is rare and localised throughout the UK, with populations in England, Scotland Wales and Ireland, This document focuses on five species, the Small blue (Cupido but its stronghold is in the south of England. The Grayling is minimus), Grayling (Hipparchia semele), Dingy skipper (Erynnis found throughout the UK, but it has a mainly coastal tages), Grizzled skipper (Pyrgus malvae) and Wall (Lasiommata megera). Other butterflies which can be strongly reliant on distribution, with inland colonies typically on heathland or brownfields include Common blue (Polyommatus Icarus), brownfield sites. The Dingy skipper is found throughout the Brown argus (Aricia agestis), Small copper (Lycaena phlaeas), UK, but with a stronghold in central and southern England. Essex skipper (Thymelicus lineola), Dark green fritillary Key brownfield habitat features for butterflies (Argynnis aglaja), Marbled white (Melanargia galathea) and Small heath (Coenonympha pamphilus). Warm, sunny microclimate on dry, well-drained soils. Bare ground for basking and warm microclimate. Species distributions Specific larval foodplants in abundance. All five butterfly species have suffered from significant declines Diverse nectar resource for adults during flight period.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Woodland for Butterflies and Moths
    Managing woodland for butterflies and moths Why manage woodland at all? Surely a natural woodland, without (or with minimum) intervention would best supply sustainable habitat for butterflies and moths? The answer lies in the processes cleared woodland habitats. The For many species, the speed and that have formed our present natural processes that produce such extent of this change has made it landscape. Almost no woodland habitats within woodland (such as very difficult to adapt and landscape in Britain today can be considered fires, storms and the natural collapse changes have reduced opportunities wholly natural. We have inherited a of aging trees) typically occur too to relocate to suitable habitat long history of forestry use that has infrequently to provide the continuous elsewhere. substantially modified even our most cycle of clearings needed by these ancient woodlands. We have, and species. Woodlands would also have Overall objectives still are, continuously changing the been subject to regular, extensive This guide outlines specific woodland composition and structure of woods grazing and browsing by large management options designed to to meet our needs. The woodland herbivores which are now absent, benefit butterflies and moths. These wildlife we see today is a product of and these effects are not replicated options are designed to achieve the that history and many Lepidoptera by the increasing number of deer following overall objectives: survive in woodland habitats only now browsing our woods. The small because of repeated human use of size and fragmentation of most • Structural complexity woodland resources. woods in the UK also prevent natural • Habitat diversity processes operating at a sufficient scale to conserve the full range of • Foodplant diversity woodland wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • The AFWA Strategist
    The AFWA Strategist Update for Members and Partners of the Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies October 2014 2014-2015 AFWA Officers & Executive Committee Larry Voyles, Director of the Arizona Game and Fish Department, was elected AFWA’s 2014-2015 President on 9/24 durinG the Association’s 104th Annual MeetinG. The full slate of officers and Executive Committee members include: 2014-2015 AFWA Officers & Executive Committee Officers President: Larry Voyles (AZ) Vice President: Carter Smith (TX) Secretary/Treasurer: Glenn Normandeau (NH) AFWA Annual Meeting Past President: Dan Forster (GA) Executive Committee Blue Ribbon Panelists Chair: Dave Chanda (NJ) Vice Chair: Nick Wiley (FL) Members Announced John Arway (PA-FBC) Ed Carter (TN) On 9/22, Johnny Morris and Dave Freudenthal--co-chairs Jim DouGlas (NE) Marc Miller (IL) of the national Blue Ribbon Panel on Sustaining America’s VirGil Moore (ID) Bob Ziehmer (MO) Diverse Fish & Wildlife Resources--announced the names of Ex Officio Voting Members 20 Panelists that will help develop a 21st century model Canada: Mike Sullivan (NB) Midwest: Ed BoGGess (MN) for funding conservation: Northeast: Cathy Sparks (RI) Southeast: Gordon Myers (NC) Kevin Butt: Toyota Motor Engineering and Manufacturing Western: Terry Steinwand (ND) North America, Inc. Jeff Crane: Congressional Sportsman’s Foundation Business Meeting Resolutions John Doerr: Pure Fishing, Inc. Jim Faulstich: Daybreak Ranch AFWA’s votinG membership passed four resolutions durinG its 9/24 Business MeetinG: John Fitzpatrick: Cornell Lab of Ornithology Greg Hill: Hess Corporation SUPPORT FOR MONARCH BUTTERFLY CONSERVATION Supports voluntary and incentive-based efforts to address threats of loss, fragmentation and Rebecca Humphries: National Wild Turkey Federation modification of monarch breedinG habitat and encouraGes a continental Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Audit Committee: Biodiversity and Ecosystems Evidence from Buglife – the Invertebrate Conservation Trust
    BIO0024 Environmental Audit Committee: Biodiversity and Ecosystems Evidence from Buglife – The Invertebrate Conservation Trust Introduction 1. Buglife – The Invertebrate Conservation Trust is the charity that represents the needs of all invertebrate species. Buglife has 35 member organisations, including all the leading invertebrate specialist societies, and over 2,000 individual supporters. Buglife’s aim is to halt the extinction of invertebrates and to achieve sustainable populations of invertebrates. 2. Invertebrates are a key part of the UK’s biodiversity. 64% of all UK species are invertebrates. Invertebrates provide us with nutritional, ecological, agricultural, medical and technological benefits – for instance about half our marine fisheries income comes from invertebrate species. Invertebrates are key to healthy ecosystem function - many of our wildflowers would disappear without insect pollination and most birds and mammals would starve. As well as providing us with many ecosystem services, their future value is not yet understood; they are increasingly being used in medicine and biological pest control. 3. Recent studies reveal a picture of declines in invertebrates across the planet (see Annex). A well-publicised review1 recently concluded that current rates of decline could lead to the extinction of 40% of the world’s insect species over the next few decades. Butterflies, moths, bees, wasps, and dung beetles are amongst the most at risk, along with freshwater insects such as stoneflies, caddisflies, and mayflies. A small number of mobile, pollutant-tolerant species can cope with the damage that humans are doing to our planet. These generalist species are replacing the rich diversity of species that make up the fabric of life on Earth.
    [Show full text]