DOCSLIB.ORG

APPENDIX 3 Program Biological Resources Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
APPENDIX 3 Program Biological Resources Report APPENDIX 3 Program Biological Resources Report Program Biological Resources Report Optimum Basin Management Program Update March 15, 2020 Chino Basin Watermaster and Inland Empire Utilities Agency Jacobs, OBMPU Program Biological Resources Report Jacobs_ Program Biological Resources Report March 2020 STATE OF CALIFORNIA Chino Basin Watermaster and Inland Empire Utilities Agency Prepared By: Date: Lisa M. Patterson, Ecologist/Regulatory Specialist/QSP (909) 838-1333 Jacobs 55616 Pipes Canyon Road, Yucca Valley, CA 92284 Recommended for Approval by: Date: Sylvie Lee email: [email protected] Tel: (909) 993-1646 Inland Empire Utilities Agency 6075 Kimball Avenue Chino, CA 91708 Recommended for Approval by: Date: Peter Kavounas email: [email protected] Tel: (909) 484-3888 Chino Basin Watermaster 9641 San Bernardino Road Rancho Cuamonga, CA 91730 i OBMPU Program Biological Resources Report Jacobs_ Contents Chapter 1. Project Description .................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Project Location ................................................................................................................................................... 7 1.3 PROJECT PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES ........................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4 Project Characteristics (Original OBMP, OBMP Implementation to Date, and OBMPU Program Elements) ..... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4.2 Project Characteristics .............................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4.3 2020 OBMPU Program Elements .............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4.4 Summary of All Facilities .......................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4.5 Summary of Operational Scenarios ........................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4.6 Construction Scenarios ............................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4.7 Entitlements, Approvals and Other Agency Participation .......................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4.8 CEQA Responsible Agencies...................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.4.9 Cumulative Projects ................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. Chapter 2. Study Methods ........................................................................................................................................ 9 2.1 Regulatory Requirements ..................................................................................................................................... 9 2.1.1 Federal ................................................................................................................................................................ 9 2.1.2 State .................................................................................................................................................................. 11 2.2 Studies Required ................................................................................................................................................ 13 2.2.1 Limitations That May Influence Results .............................................................................................................. 13 Chapter 3. Results: Environmental Setting.............................................................................................................. 14 3.1 Descriptions of the Existing Biological and Physical Conditions of the STUDY AREA ............................................. 14 3.1.1 Study Area ............................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 3.1.2 Physical Conditions ............................................................................................................................................ 18 3.1.3 Topography and Soils ......................................................................................................................................... 19 3.1.4 Biological and Physical Conditions of the Study Areas ......................................................................................... 20 3.1.5 Regional Habitat and Land Use in the Assessment Areas ..................................................................................... 20 3.1.6 General Wildlife Resources in the Project Area ................................................................................................... 20 3.2 Regional Special Status Species and Habitats of Concern .................................................................................... 22 3.2.1 Special Status Plant and Animal Species Potentially Occurring Along or Within the Project Assessment Areas ..... 26 Chapter 4. Discussion of Impacts and Mitigation .................................................................................................... 50 4.1 Discussion of Project Impacts ............................................................................................................................. 50 4.2 Mitigation Measures .......................................................................................................................................... 51 4.3 Regulatory Compliance ...................................................................................................................................... 56 4.3.1 Regulatory Agency Access .................................................................................................................................. 56 4.4 Critical Habitat ................................................................................................................................................... 56 ii OBMPU Program Biological Resources Report Jacobs_ 4.4.1 Wetlands and Other Waters Coordination Summary .......................................................................................... 57 4.5 Cumulative Impacts............................................................................................................................................ 58 Chapter 5. References ............................................................................................................................................ 59 Chapter 6. Figures ................................................................................................................................................... 63 Table 1.1 AGGREGATE WATER SUPPLY PLAN FOR WATERMASTER PARTIES: 2015 TO 2040 . Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 1.2 WATERMASTER MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS......................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 1.3 ESTIMATED RECHARGE CAPACITIES IN THE CHINO BASIN ..................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 1.4 POINT-SOURCE SITES TRACKED BY WATERMASTER .............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 1.5 ASR WELLS PER PROGRAM ELEMENT .................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 1.6 RANGE OF EXISTING AND NEW FACILITIES REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT STORAGE AND RECOVERY PROGRAMS ............................................................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 3.1 SOIL TYPES IN THE PROGRAM AREA ................................................................................................................. 19 Table 3.2 PROJECT AREA WILDLIFE HABITAT TYPES, LAND USES, AND TYPICAL VEGETATION .......................................... 22 Table 3.3 FLORA AND FAUNA WITH POTENTIAL TO OCCUR IN THE PROGRAM AREA ...................................................... 30 iii OBMPU Program Biological Resources Report Jacobs_ List of Abbreviated Terms amsl average mean sea level APE Area of Potential Effect BAA Biological Analysis Area BNSF BNSF Railway Company BSA Biological Study Area Caltrans California Department of Transportation CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQ Council on Environmental Quality CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CESA California Endangered Species Act CFGC California Fish and Game Code CFR Code of Federal Regulations CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database CRLF California red-legged frogs CWA Clean Water Act DCH Designated Critical Habitats Eagle Act The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act EFH Essential Fish Habitat EIR Environmental Impact Report EIS Environmental Impact Statement EO Executive Orders EOC Emergency Operations Center EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act FE Federally Endangered FESA Federal Endangered Species Act FMPs Fishery Management Plans FT Federally Threatened ITC Intermodal Transit Center ITP Incidental Take Permit MBTA
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Delhi Sands Flowerloving Fly Survey Report 2010
    Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Biological Monitoring Program Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis) Survey Report 2010 23 March 2011 Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly Survey Report 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................1 SURVEY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................................2 METHODS………… ....................................................................................................................................2 PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT............................................................................................................2 PERSONNEL AND TRAINING...........................................................................................................3 STUDY SITE SELECTION AND TRANSECT PLACEMENT ..................................................................3 SURVEY METHODS........................................................................................................................5 DATA ANALYSIS ...........................................................................................................................6 RESULTS…….. ............................................................................................................................................6 DISCUSSION….. ........................................................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • 805.921.0683 Cell: 805.415.9595 Em
    July 11, 2018 Mr. Tal Shoshan, CEO c/o T-Rose Investments, LLC 3880 E. Ebony Ontario, CA 91761 SUBJECT: Results of a Habitat Suitability Evaluation, 2.76-acre Site, City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California Dear Mr. Shoshan: This letter report presents findings of a reconnaissance-level survey conducted to generally evaluate the suitability of a ±2.76-acre site to support the federally-listed endangered Delhi Sands flower-loving fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis-DSFF). Introduction The subject 2.76-acre site is regionally located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California (Plate 1). More specifically, the site is located north of 4th Street, east of Hermosa Avenue, west of Center Avenue, and south of Trademark Street; Township 1 South, Range 7 West, Section 14 on the “Guasti” USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle map (Plate 2). Plate 3 provides an aerial photograph of the site. In order to meet the environmental documentation and review requirements, potentially occurring sensitive biological resources must be addressed to demonstrate the applicant’s conformance to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the federal Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended. As such, this report is intended to provide biological information to the applicant and reviewing agencies in support of the environmental review process. Selected Species Overview The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) listed the DSFF as an endangered species on September 23, 1993. This species is only known to occur in association with Delhi sand deposits (FWS 1997), primarily on twelve disjunct sites within a radius of about eight miles in the cities of Colton, Rialto, and Fontana in southwestern San Bernardino and northwestern Riverside counties.
    [Show full text]
  • Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly Habitat Suitability Evaluation
    Appendix C Habitat Suitability Evaluation, Arborist Report, and Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly Habitat Suitability Evaluation FONTANA FOOTHILLS COMMERCE CENTER DRAFT EIR Habitat Suitability Evaluation April 15, 2020 Chad Manista REDA Acquisitions, LLC 4450 MacArthur Blvd., Ste. 100 Newport Beach, CA 92660 SUBJECT: Results of a Habitat Suitability Evaluation, ±33-acre Site, City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California Dear Chad: This letter report presents findings of a reconnaissance-level survey conducted to generally evaluate the suitability of a 33-acre site to support special-status biological resources in support of the environmental review process. Introduction The study area is regionally located in San Bernardino County, California (Plate 1). Specifically, the project site is located in the City of Fontana (City), generally south of Santa Ana Avenue, east of Juniper Avenue, north of Jurupa Avenue, and west of Sierra Avenue. The site occurs on the “Fontana” USGS 7.5- minute topographic map (Plate 2). The site occurs on the "Fontana" 7.5-minute USGS Quadrangle Map, Township 1 South, Range 5 West, Section 30. Projects proposed in this area that contain potentially suitable habitat to support sensitive biological resources must demonstrate to reviewing agencies that potential project-related impacts to sensitive biological resources are adequately addressed and mitigated pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the federal Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended. Accordingly, results of this habitat suitability evaluation are intended to provide the applicant and resource agencies with preliminary biological information required for planning and permitting decisions concerning the proposed project. Due to the inherent limitations of unseasonal or habitat-based data, definitive conclusions regarding the actual presence or absence of certain sensitive biological resources cannot necessarily be made in this report.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016-2021 Long Range Objectives
    © 2016-RIVERSIDE-CORONA RCD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED PHOTO BY KERWIN RUSSELL © 2010-RIVERSIDE-CORONA RCD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED PHOTO BY ARLEE MONTALVO © 2016-RIVERSIDE-CORONA RCD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED PHOTO BY KERWIN RUSSELL RIVERSIDE-CORONA RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT RESOURCECONSERVATION RIVERSIDE-CORONA 2016-2021 Objectives Long Range © 2016-RIVERSIDE-CORONA RCD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED PHOTO BY ARLEE MONTALVO © 2016-RIVERSIDE-CORONA RCD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED PHOTO BY ARLEE MONTALVO Plan willbedevelopedforeachyearbasedonthislongtermactionplan. Annual Work An within willbeusedtoplanfutureprojects,programming,anddistrictoperations. The objectivesprovided Riverside-Corona ResourceConservationDistrict(RCRCD)(District). This documentisanassessmentoftheresourcemanagementandoutreachneeds 2016-2021 Objectives Long Range ©© 2014-RIVERSIDE-CORONA RCD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED PHOTO BY KERWIN RUSSELL Riverside-Corona ResourceConservationDistrict 2 3 Long Range Objectives 2016-2021 Contents About the RCRCD 5 Programs 9 Assist Land Users with Resource Planning and Management 10 Conserve Habitat Land and Species 11 Foster Stewardship through Education, Citizen Science and Outreach 20 Goals and Objectives 28 GOAL 1—Assist Land Users with Resource Planning and Management 29 GOAL 2—Conserve Habitat Land and Species 31 GOAL 3—Foster Stewardship through Education, Citizen Science, and Outreach 34 GOAL 4—Help Create Sustainable Communities and Partnerships 39 GOAL 5—Conduct Programs Efficiently 41 Land Uses 45 Native Habitats 45 Urban and Surburban Areas 46 Agriculture
    [Show full text]
  • Explorations in Ethnobiology: the Legacy of Amadeo Rea
    Explorations in Ethnobiology: The Legacy of Amadeo Rea Edited by Marsha Quinlan and Dana Lepofsky Explorations in Ethnobiology: The Legacy of Amadeo Rea Edited by Marsha Quinlan and Dana Lepofsky Copyright 2013 ISBN-10: 0988733013 ISBN-13: 978-0-9887330-1-5 Library of Congress Control Number: 2012956081 Society of Ethnobiology Department of Geography University of North Texas 1155 Union Circle #305279 Denton, TX 76203-5017 Cover photo: Amadeo Rea discussing bird taxonomy with Mountain Pima Griselda Coronado Galaviz of El Encinal, Sonora, Mexico, July 2001. Photograph by Dr. Robert L. Nagell, used with permission. Contents Preface to Explorations in Ethnobiology: The Legacy of Amadeo Rea . i Dana Lepofsky and Marsha Quinlan 1 . Diversity and its Destruction: Comments on the Chapters . .1 Amadeo M. Rea 2 . Amadeo M . Rea and Ethnobiology in Arizona: Biography of Influences and Early Contributions of a Pioneering Ethnobiologist . .11 R. Roy Johnson and Kenneth J. Kingsley 3 . Ten Principles of Ethnobiology: An Interview with Amadeo Rea . .44 Dana Lepofsky and Kevin Feeney 4 . What Shapes Cognition? Traditional Sciences and Modern International Science . .60 E.N. Anderson 5 . Pre-Columbian Agaves: Living Plants Linking an Ancient Past in Arizona . .101 Wendy C. Hodgson 6 . The Paleobiolinguistics of Domesticated Squash (Cucurbita spp .) . .132 Cecil H. Brown, Eike Luedeling, Søren Wichmann, and Patience Epps 7 . The Wild, the Domesticated, and the Coyote-Tainted: The Trickster and the Tricked in Hunter-Gatherer versus Farmer Folklore . .162 Gary Paul Nabhan 8 . “Dog” as Life-Form . .178 Eugene S. Hunn 9 . The Kasaga’yu: An Ethno-Ornithology of the Cattail-Eater Northern Paiute People of Western Nevada .
    [Show full text]
  • Western Riverside County MSHCP Biological Monitoring Program Arthropod 2018 Pilot Study Protocol
    Arthropod 2018 Pilot Study Protocol Western Riverside County MSHCP Biological Monitoring Program Arthropod 2018 Pilot Study Protocol INTRODUCTION The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan covers two insect species, one of which is the federally endangered Delhi sands flower-loving fly (Delhi fly, Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis). To date, conservation of the species within the Plan Area has only occurred within the Jurupa Hills Core Area (Teledyne site); therefore, this site must be able to support a healthy population of the Delhi fly. We will collect data regarding the food resources of larval Delhi fly, a stage which may last two years or longer depending on availability of food, temperature, rainfall, and other environmental conditions (USFWS 1997). These data will be coupled with environmental data collected via an on-site HOBO weather station and vegetation surveys to infer the quality of the Delhi sand dunes at Teledyne (Hulton et al. 2013). This survey is designed to provide researchers with information that could be used to improve the Delhi fly’s habitat and resource availability. By randomly placing arthropod pitfall traps across the site, we can collect more specific data on co-occurring arthropod species than the Delhi sands flower-loving fly surveys can provide alone in order to meet the goals and objectives listed below. Goals and Objectives 1. Gather data regarding co-occurring arthropod species within Core Areas. a. Use the data to track the relative abundance and richness of the arthropod community, which the predacious Delhi fly larvae presumably utilize as a food resource (Ken Osborne, consultant, personal communication).
    [Show full text]
  • D1) Biological Resources Existing Conditions
    SAN BERNARDINO COUNTYWIDE PLAN DRAFT PEIR COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO Appendices Appendix D: Biological Resources Existing Conditions Report June 2019 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTYWIDE PLAN DRAFT PEIR COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO Appendices This page intentionally left blank. PlaceWorks DRAFT San Bernardino Countywide Plan Biological Resources Existing Conditions Prepared for: County of San Bernardino Land Use Services Division, Advance Planning Division 385 North Arrowhead Avenue, 1st Floor San Bernardino, California 94215-0182 Contact: Terri Rahhal Prepared by: 3544 University Avenue Riverside, California 92501 Contact: Linda Archer DATA AND ANALYSIS AS NOVEMBER 2016 UPDATED WITH OUTREACH SUMMARY IN NOVEMBER 2018 DRAFTMAY 2019 D-1 REPORT USE, INTENT, AND LIMITATIONS This Background Report was prepared to inform the preparation of the Countywide Plan. This report is not intended to be continuously updated and may contain out-of-date material and information. This report reflects data collected in 2016 and analyzed in 2016 and 2017 as part of due diligence and issue identification. This report is not intended to be comprehensive and does not address all issues that were or could have been considered and discussed during the preparation of the Countywide Plan. Additionally, many other materials (reports, data, etc.) were used in the preparation of the Countywide Plan. This report is not intended to be a compendium of all reference materials. This report may be used to understand some of the issues considered and discussed during the preparation of the Countywide Plan, but should not be used as the sole reference for data or as confirmation of intended or desired policy direction. Final policy direction was subject to change based on additional input from the general public, stakeholders, and decision makers during regional outreach meetings, public review of the environmental impact report, and public adoption hearings.
    [Show full text]
  • 8.0 REFERENCES CITED Adams, M.J, Pearl C.A, and Bury, R.B. 2003
    FINAL Pre-Application Document Devil Canyon Project Relicensing 8.0 REFERENCES CITED Adams, M.J, Pearl C.A, and Bury, R.B. 2003. Indirect facilitation of an anuran invasion by non-native fishes. Ecology Letters 6:1–9 Allen, M.F. and T. Tennant. 2000. Evaluation of critical habitat for the California red- legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii). UC Riverside: Center for Conservation Biology. Alvarez, J.A., D G. Cook, J. l. Yee, M. G. van Hattem, D.R. Fong, and R.N. Fisher. 2013. Comparative microhabitat characteristics at oviposition sites of the California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii). Herpetological Conservation and Biology 8:539−551. American Trails. 2015. http://www.americantrails.org/resources/info/National-Scenic- Trails.html. Accessed: 9/10/15. Aspen Environmental Group. 2006. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study, Horsethief Creek Bridge Mojave Siphon Maintenance Road Project. Prepared for DWR. January 2006. Submitted to FERC and filed on June 21, 2006. Aspen Environmental Group Arroyo and Hunt & Associates Biological Consulting. 2005. Arroyo Toad Survey and Habitat Evaluation along the Horsethief Creek and Check 66 Access Road for the Horsethief Creek Repairs Project. Prepared for DWR. October 2005. Atwater, Tanya and Helmut Ehrenspeck. 2000. The Incredible Cenozoic Geologic History of Southern California, National Association of Geoscience Teachers-Far Western Section for Spring Field Conference-April 14-16, 2000 by Department of Geosciences, California State University, Northridge. Backlin, A. R., C. J. Hitchcock, R. N. Fisher, M. L. Warburton, P. Trenham, S. A. Hathaway, and C. S. Brehme. 2003. Natural History and Recovery Analysis for Southern California Populations of the Mountain Yellow-Legged Frog (Rana muscosa), Annual Report.
    [Show full text]
  • Declines in Insect Abundance and Diversity: We Know Enough to Act Now
    Received: 5 May 2019 Revised: 28 May 2019 Accepted: 4 June 2019 DOI: 10.1111/csp2.80 PERSPECTIVES AND NOTES Declines in insect abundance and diversity: We know enough to act now Matthew L. Forister1 | Emma M. Pelton2 | Scott H. Black2 1Program in Ecology, Evolution and Conservation Biology, Department of Abstract Biology, University of Nevada Reno, Reno, Recent regional reports and trends in biomonitoring suggest that insects are Nevada experiencing a multicontinental crisis that is apparent as reductions in abundance, 2 The Xerces Society for Invertebrate diversity, and biomass. Given the centrality of insects to terrestrial ecosystems and Conservation, Portland, Oregon the food chain that supports humans, the importance of addressing these declines Correspondence cannot be overstated. The scientific community has understandably been focused Matthew L. Forister, Biology Department on establishing the breadth and depth of the phenomenon and on documenting fac- Mail Stop 314, University of Nevada Reno, 1664 N Virginia Street, Reno, NV 89557. tors causing insect declines. In parallel with ongoing research, it is now time for Email: [email protected] the development of a policy consensus that will allow for a swift societal response. We point out that this response need not wait for full resolution of the many physi- ological, behavioral, and demographic aspects of declining insect populations. To these ends, we suggest primary policy goals summarized at scales from nations to farms to homes. KEYWORDS climate change, ecosystem function, habitat loss, insect declines, pesticides, pollination, species loss 1 | INTRODUCTION diversity and abundance are apparent in studies that include faunal and biomass assessments as well as status reviews of For variety, abundance and ecological impact, insects have key indicator groups like butterflies and charismatic individ- no rival among multicellular life on this planet (Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Occurrence Report California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database
    Occurrence Report California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database Map Index Number: 34038 EO Index: 12605 Key Quad: Merritt (3812157) Element Code: AAAAA01180 Occurrence Number: 384 Occurrence Last Updated: 1996-07-09 Scientific Name: Ambystoma californiense Common Name: California tiger salamander Listing Status: Federal: Threatened Rare Plant Rank: State: Threatened Other Lists: CDFW_SSC-Species of Special Concern IUCN_VU-Vulnerable CNDDB Element Ranks: Global: G2G3 State: S2S3 General Habitat: Micro Habitat: CENTRAL VALLEY DPS FEDERALLY LISTED AS THREATENED. SANTA NEED UNDERGROUND REFUGES, ESPECIALLY GROUND SQUIRREL BARBARA & SONOMA COUNTIES DPS FEDERALLY LISTED AS BURROWS, & VERNAL POOLS OR OTHER SEASONAL WATER ENDANGERED. SOURCES FOR BREEDING. Last Date Observed: 1993-01-31 Occurrence Type: Natural/Native occurrence Last Survey Date: 1993-01-31 Occurrence Rank: Unknown Owner/Manager: PVT Trend: Unknown Presence: Presumed Extant Location: SOUTH WEST CORNER OF COVELL BLVD AND LAKE BLVD, IN THE CITY OF DAVIS. Detailed Location: FOUND IN THE PARKING LOT AT THE WILLOWS APARTMENTS. Ecological: Threats: URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AGRICULTURAL FIELDS AND TWO VERY BUSY ROADS. General: APARTMENT COMPLEX PARKING LOT LOCATED ACROSS LAKE BLVD FROM "WET POND" A CITY OWNED WILDLIFE HABITAT AREA MANAGED BY THE YOLO AUDUBON SOCIETY. PLSS: T08N, R02E, Sec. 07 (M) Accuracy: 80 meters Area (acres): 0 UTM: Zone-10 N4268740 E605722 Latitude/Longitude: 38.56082 / -121.78655 Elevation (feet): 50 County Summary: Quad Summary: Yolo
    [Show full text]
  • Nearctic Diptera: Twenty Years Later
    CHAPTER ONE NEARCTIC DIPTERA: TWENTY YEARS LATER F. CHRISTIAN THOMPSON Systematic Entomology Laboratory, PSI, Agricultural Research Service, Washington, DC, USA INTRODUCTION Flies are found abundantly almost everywhere; they are only rare in oce- anic and extreme arctic and antarctic areas. More than 150,000 extant species are now documented (Evenhuis et al. 2008). So, given this great diversity, understanding is aided by dividing the whole into pieces. Sclater (1858) proposed a series of regions for the better understanding of biotic diversity. Those areas were based on common shared distribution of bird species and now are understood to reflect the evolution and dispersal/ vicariance of species since the mid-Mesozoic era. While the biotic regions defined by Sclater (1858) have been accepted by most zoologists, the precise definition used here follows the standards of the BioSystematic Database of World Diptera [BDWD] (Thompson 1999a). Biotic regions are statisti- cal concepts that try to maximize the common (unique to one area only) elements and minimize the shared elements (Darlington 1957, Thomp- son 1972). For pragmatic reasons, the BDWD has taken the traditional definitions of the biotic regions and normalized them so that they follow political boundaries, which make the assignment of data easier (Thomp- son 1999a). Earlier authors (Osten Sacken 1858, 1878; Aldrich 1905) di- vided the New World into a northern and southern component. So their catalogs covered all the species of North America, that is, the Americas north of Colombia. Unfortunately, most subsequent authors decided to re-define both North America and the Nearctic Region as the area north of Mexico (most recently, Poole 1996 & Adler et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Delhi Sands Flowerloving Fly Survey Report 2016
    Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Biological Monitoring Program 2016 Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis) Survey Report 27 September 2017 2016 Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly Survey Report TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1 SURVEY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................... 1 METHODS ............................................................................................................................ 2 PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................ 2 TRAINING ........................................................................................................................................... 2 STUDY SITE SELECTION AND TRANSECT PLACEMENT ....................................................................... 3 SURVEY METHODS ............................................................................................................................ 3 DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................ 6 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................. 7 LINE-TRANSECT SURVEYS ................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]