DOCSLIB.ORG

(Genus: Bombus): from the Organism to the Environment AD

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE Feeding and Foraging in Bumble bees (Genus: Bombus): From the Organism to the Environment A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Entomology by Kaleigh Fisher June 2021 Dissertation Committee: Dr. S. Hollis Woodard, Chairperson Dr. Jessica Purcell Dr. Naoki Yamanaka Dr. Anupama Dahanukar Copyright by Kaleigh Fisher 2021 The Dissertation of Kaleigh Fisher is approved: Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside Acknowledgements I would first like to thank my mentor Dr. S. Hollis Woodard for her exceptional mentorship and friendship over the course of my doctoral studies. Her support has been critical for my success as a scientist and I sincerely value all of the skills that I have developed through her mentorship. I thank her for always believing in my potential, encouraging me to pursue the exciting ideas, and showing me how to be an overall awesome scientist through her example as an amazing role model. I am also grateful for all of the members of my dissertation and qualifying exam committees Dr. Jessica Purcell, Dr. Naoki Yamanaka, Dr. Anupama Dahanukar, Dr. Quinn McFrederick, and Dr. Jason Stajich. I am especially grateful to Dr. Purcell for her encouragement and valuable conversations throughout my doctoral studies. It was such a great experience learning from her in classes as well as collaborating with her on a social insects review. I also thank her for being such an impactful role model for me. I am also especially grateful to Dr. Yamanaka and Dr. Dahanukar for collaborating on the taste projects and always offering their time, encouragement, and feedback on projects. It was such a pleasure to be able to work with such highly esteemed and kind scientists. I would also like to thank members of the Entomology Department in general for fostering such a positive and supportive department to work in, as well as all of the graduate students that I had the pleasure to interact with and work on outreach and departmental events with. I thank all of the staff in the Entomology Department for being so helpful and kind with logistics and administrative tasks. iv I would like to thank all of the members of the Woodard Lab who helped make all of these projects possible: Dr. Michelle Duennes, Kristal Watrous, Alexandra Vanececk, Christie Miranda, Natalie Fischer, Erica Sarro, Dr. Claudineia Costa, Sandara Brasil, Blanca Guillen, Yadira Romero Diaz, Damaris Rodriguez, and Alex Brinkley. Finally, I would like to thank all of my friends and family for their encouragement and support throughout this long process. I would especially like to thank my partner Dr. Aldo de la Mora Rodriguez, for always supporting and encouraging me, and always making me the best, bougiest coffee. I also thank my daughter Rafaela de la Mora Fisher, for always dancing, celebrating, and laughing with me. Chapter One was completed in collaboration with co-authors Blanca Guillen, Dr. Hugh M. Robertson, Dr. Naoki Yamanaka, Dr. Anupama Dahanukar, and Dr. S. Hollis Woodard. Funding for this project came from a U.S.D.A. N.I.F.A. Seed Grant. Chapter Two is currently in review for the Journal of Animal Behavior with Erica Sarro as a co-first author, who was so much fun to collaborate and learn with, as well as co-authors Christie Miranda, Blanca Guillen, and Dr. S. Hollis Woodard. Thank you to all of the amazing undergraduates Damaris Rodriguez-Arellano, Yadira Romero Diaz, Kate Neamsapaya, and Vanessa Uribe who also helped with experimental maintenance and watching videos of bumble bees for this project. Funding for the project came from the US-Israel Binational Science Foundation and the National Science Foundation. Chapter Three was completed in collaboration with Dr. Michelle Duennes and Dr. S. Hollis Woodard. I thank Dr. Jay Kirwood for assisting with metabolomics analysis. v Chapter Four is currently in revision at Ecology and Evolution in collaboration with co-authors Dr. Kristal M. Watrous, Dr. Leif L. Richardson, Dr. Neal M. Williams, and Dr. S. Hollis Woodard. Funding for this project came from U.S.D.A. A.P.H.I.S. I would also like to thank additional funding sources that supported various projects throughout my doctoral studies: UC-MEXUS, NRS Mathias Graduate Student Research Grant, and Shipley-Skinner. vi ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Feeding and Foraging in Bumble bees (Genus: Bombus): From the Organism to the Environment by Kaleigh Fisher Doctor of Philosophy, Graduate Program in Entomology University of California, Riverside, June 2021 Dr. S. Hollis Woodard, Chairperson Animal survival is dependent on the capacity to effectively find and consume nutritious food resources and avoid harmful components that may be present in food. This fundamental process operates at multiple scales in all animal species. The goal of this dissertation research was to establish a foundation for studying feeding and foraging in bumble bees at the scales of the organism, colony, insect-plant interactions, and the environment. Although bumble bee feeding and foraging behavior have been previously studied at most of these scales, there are several substantial gaps in our knowledge that this dissertation addresses. First, I first identified taste-related genes in Bombus impatiens and characterized the tissues in which these genes are expressed. I then examined how feeding and food-collection tasks are organized amongst workers in bumble bee colonies. Next, I tested whether pollen nutrients impact floral resource visitation in wild bumble bees. Finally, I examined what bumble bee species are present across several ecoregions vii in California. Together, this work provides a foundation to study the ecology and evolution of feeding and foraging in bumble bees. viii Table of Contents Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………...1 References ……………………………………………………………………...…7 Chapter 1: Tissue and caste related gene expression of gustatory receptors in the bumble bee Bombus impatiens Abstract…………………………………………………………………….……...8 Introduction…………………………………………………………………….….9 Materials and Methods…………………………………………………………...12 Results…...…………………………………………………………….…………16 Discussion…...…………………………………………………………….….….31 References...…………………………………………………………….…...…...37 Chapter 2: Worker task organization in incipient bumble bee nests Abstract…………………………………………………………………….…….41 Introduction…………………………………………………………………....…42 Materials and Methods…………………………………………………………...46 Results…...…………………………………………………………….…………61 Discussion…...…………………………………………………………….….….84 References...…………………………………………………………….…...…...94 Chapter 3: Pollen nutrients: a key feature of plant-pollinator interactions Abstract…………………………………………………………………….…...106 Introduction…………………………………………………………………......107 Materials and Methods……………………………………………………….....109 ix Results…...…………………………………………………………….………..115 Discussion…...………………………………………………………………….123 References...…………………………………………………………….…...….130 Chapter 4: A contemporary survey of bumble bee diversity across the state of California Abstract…………………………………………………………………….…...133 Introduction…………………………………………………………………......134 Materials and Methods……………………………………………………….…137 Results…...…………………………………………………………….………..141 Discussion…...………………………………………………………………….150 References...…………………………………………………………….…...….159 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………......166 x List of Figures Figure 1.1: Gustatory receptor gene tree. Tree was constructed using the neighbor joining method. The tree is rooted at Gr1 and Gr2, which are highly conserved across insects, which suggests they are the more basal gene group…………………………….18 Figure 1.2: Ionotropic receptor gene tree. Tree was constructed using the neighbor joining method. The tree is rooted at IR8a and IR25a, which are highly conserved across insects, which suggests they are the more basal gene group…………………………….20 Figure 1.3: Normalized counts of gustatory receptor gene expression in queens and workers. Points are jittered for easier visualization of overlapping points (width +/- 0.05; height +/- 2)……………………………………………………..……………………….24 Figure 1.4: Non-metric multidimensional scaling of samples based on similarity in GR expression of tissue and caste. Distance between points represents similarity in gene expression. Internal tissues were more similar to each other compared to external tissues. Greater similarity within a caste compared to between castes was not observed………..25 Figure 1.5: Normalized counts of ionotropic receptor gene expression. Points are jittered for easier visualization of overlapping points (width +/- 0.05; height +/- 2)…………….28 Figure 1.6: Non-metric multidimensional scaling of samples based on similarity in IR expression of tissue and caste. Distance between points represents similarity in gene expression. Internal tissues were more similar to each other compared to external tissues. Greater similarity within a caste compared to between castes was not observed. Fat body was dissimilar to brain within the internal tissues………………………………………30 Figure 2.1: Shannon diversity index for tasks in nests. A) Shannon task diversity for each tasks based on social configuration; W3 = Three Workers; W5 = Five Workers; QW3 = Queen + Three Workers; QW5 = Queen + Five Workers. Black dots represent mean Shannon diversity across all groups. Egg laying and pollen collection tasks were performed with more exclusivity (i.e., by fewer observed individuals) than nectar collection and brood feeding tasks (GLMM p < 0.0001). Brood feeding was more exclusive (lower Shannon
Recommended publications
  • Conceptual Design Documentation

    Conceptual Design Documentation

    Appendix A: Conceptual Design Documentation APPENDIX A Conceptual Design Documentation June 2019 A-1 APPENDIX A: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN DOCUMENTATION The environmental analyses in the NEPA and CEQA documents for the proposed improvements at Oceano County Airport (the Airport) are based on conceptual designs prepared to provide a realistic basis for assessing their environmental consequences. 1. Widen runway from 50 to 60 feet 2. Widen Taxiways A, A-1, A-2, A-3, and A-4 from 20 to 25 feet 3. Relocate segmented circle and wind cone 4. Installation of taxiway edge lighting 5. Installation of hold position signage 6. Installation of a new electrical vault and connections 7. Installation of a pollution control facility (wash rack) CIVIL ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS The purpose of this conceptual design effort is to identify the amount of impervious surface, grading (cut and fill) and drainage implications of the projects identified above. The conceptual design calculations detailed in the following figures indicate that Projects 1 and 2, widening the runways and taxiways would increase the total amount of impervious surface on the Airport by 32,016 square feet, or 0.73 acres; a 6.6 percent increase in the Airport’s impervious surface area. Drainage patterns would remain the same as both the runway and taxiways would continue to sheet flow from their centerlines to the edge of pavement and then into open, grassed areas. The existing drainage system is able to accommodate the modest increase in stormwater runoff that would occur, particularly as soil conditions on the Airport are conducive to infiltration. Figure A-1 shows the locations of the seven projects incorporated in the Proposed Action.
  • Floral Resource Competition Between Honey Bees and Wild Bees: Is There Clear Evidence and Can We Guide Management and Conservation?

    Floral Resource Competition Between Honey Bees and Wild Bees: Is There Clear Evidence and Can We Guide Management and Conservation?

    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325627761 Floral Resource Competition Between Honey Bees and Wild Bees: Is There Clear Evidence and Can We Guide Management and Conservation? Article in Environmental Entomology · June 2018 DOI: 10.1093/ee/nvy077 CITATIONS READS 12 603 4 authors, including: Victoria Wojcik Pollinator Partnership 11 PUBLICATIONS 72 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE All content following this page was uploaded by Victoria Wojcik on 19 June 2018. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Environmental Entomology, XX(X), 2018, 1–12 doi: 10.1093/ee/nvy077 Pollinator Ecology and Management Review Floral Resource Competition Between Honey Bees and Wild Bees: Is There Clear Evidence and Can We Guide Management and Conservation? Victoria A. Wojcik,1 Lora A. Morandin, Laurie Davies Adams, and Kelly E. Rourke Pollinator Partnership, 423 Washington Street, 5th floor, San Francisco, CA 94111, and 1Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected] Subject Editor: Gloria DeGrandi-Hoffman Received 31 October 2017; Editorial decision 2 May 2018 Abstract Supporting managed honey bees by pasturing in natural landscapes has come under review due to concerns that honey bees could negatively impact the survival of wild bees through competition for floral resources. Critique and assessment of the existing body of published literature against our criteria focussing on studies that can support best management resulted in 19 experimental papers. Indirect measures of competition examining foraging patterns and behavior yielded equivocal results. Direct measures of reproduction and growth were investigated in only seven studies, with six indicating negative impacts to wild bees from the presence of managed honey bees.
  • Bumble Bee Surveys in the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area of Oregon and Washington

    Bumble Bee Surveys in the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area of Oregon and Washington

    Bumble Bee Surveys in the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area of Oregon and Washington Final report from the Xerces Society to the U.S. Forest Service and Interagency Special Status/Sensitive Species Program (ISSSSP) Agreement L13AC00102, Modification 5 Bombus vosnesenskii on Balsamorhiza sagittata. Photo by Rich Hatfield, the Xerces Society. By Rich Hatfield, Sarina Jepsen, and Scott Black, the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation September 2017 1 Table of Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Methods ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 Site Selection ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Site Descriptions (west to east) ................................................................................................................ 7 T14ES27 (USFS) ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Cape Horn (USFS) .................................................................................................................................
  • Appendix E Threatened and Endangered Species

    Appendix E Threatened and Endangered Species

    Appendix E Threatened and Endangered Species Table E–1 Special Status Species in Plumas County Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status State Status CDFW CA Rare Status Plant Rank Animals – Amphibians Ambystoma macrodactylum southern long-toed salamander None None SSC – sigillatum Rana boylii foothill yellow-legged frog None Candidate SSC – Threatened Rana cascadae Cascades frog None Candidate SSC – Endangered Rana draytonii California red-legged frog Threatened None SSC – Rana muscosa southern mountain yellow- Endangered Endangered WL – legged frog Rana sierrae Sierra Nevada yellow-legged Endangered Threatened WL – frog Animals – Birds Accipiter gentilis northern goshawk None None SSC – Accipiter striatus sharp-shinned hawk None None WL – Aquila chrysaetos golden eagle None None FP ; WL – Buteo swainsoni Swainson's hawk None Threatened – – Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle Delisted Endangered FP – Ardea alba great egret None None – – Ardea herodias great blue heron None None – – Charadrius montanus mountain plover None None SSC – Falco mexicanus prairie falcon None None WL – Antigone canadensis tabida greater sandhill crane None Threatened FP – Riparia riparia bank swallow None Threatened – – Lanius ludovicianus loggerhead shrike None None SSC – Larus californicus California gull None None WL – Pandion haliaetus osprey None None WL – Setophaga petechia yellow warbler None None SSC – Spizella breweri Brewer's sparrow None None – – Phalacrocorax auritus double-crested cormorant None None WL – Melanerpes lewis Lewis' woodpecker None
  • Ukiah Western Hills Open Land Acquisition & Limited Development

    Ukiah Western Hills Open Land Acquisition & Limited Development

    Ukiah Western Hills Open Land Acquisition & Limited Development Agreement Draft Initial Study & Mitigated Negative Declaration Attachments April 16, 2021 ATTACHMENT A Existing Site Photographs Existing access road Existing water tank site Existing "house site" on one of the proposed Development Parcels ATTACHMENT B Prepared For: Michelle Irace, Planning Manager Department of Community Development 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482 APNs: 001-040-83, 157- 070-01, 157-070-02, and 003-190-01 Prepared by Jacobszoon & Associates, Inc. Alicia Ives Ringstad Senior Wildlife Biologist [email protected] Date: March 11, 2021 Updated: April 8, 2021 Biological Assessment Report Table of Contents Section 1.0: Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Section 2.0: Regulations and Descriptions ....................................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................................................................................. 2 2.2 Natural Communities and Sensitive Natural Communities .................................................................................................... 3 2.3 Special-Status Species...........................................................................................................................................................
  • Assessing the Potential for Deep Learning and Computer Vision to Identify Bumble Bee Species from Images Brian J

    Assessing the Potential for Deep Learning and Computer Vision to Identify Bumble Bee Species from Images Brian J

    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Assessing the potential for deep learning and computer vision to identify bumble bee species from images Brian J. Spiesman1*, Claudio Gratton2, Richard G. Hatfeld3, William H. Hsu4, Sarina Jepsen3, Brian McCornack1, Krushi Patel5 & Guanghui Wang5,6 Pollinators are undergoing a global decline. Although vital to pollinator conservation and ecological research, species-level identifcation is expensive, time consuming, and requires specialized taxonomic training. However, deep learning and computer vision are providing ways to open this methodological bottleneck through automated identifcation from images. Focusing on bumble bees, we compare four convolutional neural network classifcation models to evaluate prediction speed, accuracy, and the potential of this technology for automated bee identifcation. We gathered over 89,000 images of bumble bees, representing 36 species in North America, to train the ResNet, Wide ResNet, InceptionV3, and MnasNet models. Among these models, InceptionV3 presented a good balance of accuracy (91.6%) and average speed (3.34 ms). Species-level error rates were generally smaller for species represented by more training images. However, error rates also depended on the level of morphological variability among individuals within a species and similarity to other species. Continued development of this technology for automatic species identifcation and monitoring has the potential to be transformative for the felds of ecology and conservation. To this end, we present BeeMachine, a web application that allows anyone to use our classifcation model to identify bumble bees in their own images. Bees (Hymenoptera: Anthophila) serve a critical role in most terrestrial ecosystems as pollinators of crops and natural plant communities e.g.,1–3.
  • Guide to Bumble Bees of the Western United States

    Guide to Bumble Bees of the Western United States

    Bumble Bees of the Western United States By Jonathan Koch James Strange A product of the U.S. Forest Service and the Pollinator Partnership Paul Williams with funding from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Executive Editor Larry Stritch, Ph.D., USDA Forest Service Cover: Bombus huntii foraging. Photo Leah Lewis Executive and Managing Editor Laurie Davies Adams, The Pollinator Partnership Graphic Design and Art Direction Marguerite Meyer Administration Jennifer Tsang, The Pollinator Partnership IT Production Support Elizabeth Sellers, USGS Alphabetical Quick Reference to Species B. appositus .............110 B. frigidus ..................46 B. rufocinctus ............86 B. balteatus ................22 B. griseocollis ............90 B. sitkensis ................38 B. bifarius ..................78 B. huntii ....................66 B. suckleyi ...............134 B. californicus ..........114 B. insularis ...............126 B. sylvicola .................70 B. caliginosus .............26 B. melanopygus .........62 B. ternarius ................54 B. centralis ................34 B. mixtus ...................58 B. terricola ...............106 B. crotchii ..................82 B. morrisoni ...............94 B. vagans ...................50 B. fernaldae .............130 B. nevadensis .............18 B. vandykei ................30 B. fervidus................118 B. occidentalis .........102 B. vosnesenskii ..........74 B. flavifrons ...............42 B. pensylvanicus subsp. sonorus ....122 B. franklini .................98 2 Bumble Bees of the
  • IUCN Assessments for North American Bombus Spp

    IUCN Assessments for North American Bombus Spp

    IUCN Assessments for North American Bombus spp. Prepared by: Rich Hatfield*±, Sheila Colla†, Sarina Jepsen*, Leif Richardson‡, Robbin Thorp∆, and Sarah Foltz Jordan* Assessments completed December 2014 Document updated March 2, 2015 Bombus occidentalis on Solidago canadensis. Photo by R. Hatfield ± Corresponding author: [email protected] * The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, 628 NE Broadway, Suite 200, Portland, OR 97232, xerces.org † Wildlife Preservation Canada 5420 Side Road 6, Guelph, ON N1H 6J2 CANADA wildlifepreservation.ca ‡ Gund Institute for Ecological Economics, University of Vermont, 617 Main Street Burlington, VT 05405 ∆ University of California at Davis, Department of Entomology and Nematology Main Office, UC Davis Briggs Hall, Room 367, Davis, CA 95616-5270 Table of Contents Introducon ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Methods ................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Bombus affinis .......................................................................................................................................................... 8 Bombus appositus .................................................................................................................................................... 9 Bombus auricomus ..................................................................................................................................................
  • Measuring and Monitoring Pollinator Diversity Along Elevation Gradients in Olympic and North Cascades National Parks

    Measuring and Monitoring Pollinator Diversity Along Elevation Gradients in Olympic and North Cascades National Parks

    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Measuring and Monitoring Pollinator Diversity along Elevation Gradients in Olympic and North Cascades National Parks Natural Resource Report NPS/NOCA/NRR—2018/1634 ON THE COVER Row one (left to right): Bombus on Arnica (NOCA), subalpine meadow on McAlester Trail (NOCA); Row two: bee bowl on Obstruction Point Rd. (OLYM), B. occidentalis on thistle (Cirsium; OLYM); Row three: Fireweed (Chamerion) above Ross Lake (NOCA), J. Freilich and J.D. Herndon collecting bees in OLYM All photos by Jessica Rykken Measuring and Monitoring Pollinator Diversity along Elevation Gradients in Olympic and North Cascades National Parks Natural Resource Report NPS/NOCA/NRR—2018/1634 Jessica J. Rykken Museum of Comparative Zoology Harvard University 26 Oxford Street, Cambridge, MA 02138 May 2018 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service. The series supports the advancement of science, informed decision-making, and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series also provides a forum for presenting more lengthy results that may not be accepted by publications with page limitations.
  • General Biological Resources Assessment and Jurisdictional Delineation for the Big Bear Solar Observatory Solis Telescope Project

    General Biological Resources Assessment and Jurisdictional Delineation for the Big Bear Solar Observatory Solis Telescope Project

    General Biological Resources Assessment And Jurisdictional Delineation For the Big Bear Solar Observatory Solis Telescope Project City of Big Bear San Bernardino County, California Prepared for: Transtech Engineers, Inc. Attn: Bob Carlisle 577 Bonanza Trail, Suite B Big Bear Lake, CA 92315 Prepared January 2017 Prepared by: Jericho Systems, Inc. Shay Lawrey, President 47 1st Street Redlands, CA 92373 Certification Jericho Systems, Inc. 47 1st Street Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 915-5900 Contact: Shay Lawrey, President and Ecologist/Regulatory Specialist Certification: I hereby certify that the statements furnished herein, and in the attached exhibits present data and information required for this Biological Resources Repot to the best of my ability, and the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. This report was prepared in accordance with professional requirements and standards. Fieldwork conducted for this assessment was performed by me. I certify that I have not signed a non-disclosure or consultant confidentiality agreement with the project proponent and that I have no financial interest in the project. ______________________________________ Shay Lawrey, Ecologist/Regulatory Specialist Big Bear Solar Observatory JERICHO SYSTEMS, INC. Solis Telescope Project BRA & JD ii Table of Contents CERTIFICATION .......................................................................................................................................... II 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................
  • Appendix N Biological Database Queries and List of Species Observed

    Appendix N Biological Database Queries and List of Species Observed

    APPENDIX N BIOLOGICAL DATABASE QUERIES AND LIST OF SPECIES OBSERVED NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE REPORT United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource Department of Cooperative Soil Survey, Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for States Department of Agriculture and other Shasta-Trinity National Federal agencies, State Natural agencies including the Forest Area, Parts of Resources Agricultural Experiment Conservation Stations, and local Humboldt, Siskiyou, Shasta, Service participants Tehama, and Trinity Counties, California; and Siskiyou County, California, Central Part September 6, 2016 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases.

  • Appendix 3 Biological Resources Assessment

    Initial Study Maple Hill Community Fields Project – Conditional Use Permit APN: 0312-311-13 and 0312-311-25 March 2021 APPENDIX 3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE BEAR VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT EDUCATION FOUNDATION MAPLE HILL FIELDS COMPLEX PROJECT Unincorporated Community of Sugarloaf, San Bernardino County, California USGS – Big Bear City Quadrangle Section 13 of Township 2 North, Range 1 East Date Prepared: February 2021 Prepared for: Bear Valley Unified School District Education Foundation PO Box 1529 Big Bear Lake, CA 92315 On Behalf of: Tom Dodson and Associates 2150 N Arrowhead Avenue San Bernardino, CA 92405 Prepared by: Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. 55616 Pipes Canyon Road Yucca Valley, California 92284 CERTIFICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe that the information is true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment. _________________________________________________________________________ Lisa Patterson, National Senior Environmental Project Manager 2021 Tom Dodson & Associates BVUSD Education Foundation Maple Hill Fields Complex Project Biological Resources Assessment ii Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................