DOCSLIB.ORG

Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-Eared Bats a Symposium

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-Eared Bats a Symposium Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-eared Bats A Symposium y Edited b Susan C. Loeb, Michael J. Lacki, and Darren A. Miller U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Research Station General Technical Report SRS-145 DISCLAIMER The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture of any product or service. Papers published in these proceedings were submitted by authors in electronic media. Some editing was done to ensure a consistent format. Authors are responsible for content and accuracy of their individual papers and the quality of illustrative materials. Cover photos: Large photo: Craig W. Stihler; small left photo: Joseph S. Johnson; small middle photo: Craig W. Stihler; small right photo: Matthew J. Clement. December 2011 Southern Research Station 200 W.T. Weaver Blvd. Asheville, NC 28804 Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-eared Bats: A Symposium Athens, Georgia March 9–10, 2010 Edited by: Susan C. Loeb U.S Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Research Station Michael J. Lacki University of Kentucky Darren A. Miller Weyerhaeuser NR Company Sponsored by: Forest Service Bat Conservation International National Council for Air and Stream Improvement (NCASI) Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources Offield Family Foundation ContEntS Preface . v Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-Eared Bats: An Introduction . 1 Susan C. Loeb, Michael J. Lacki, and Darren A. Miller Distribution and Status of Eastern Big-eared Bats (Corynorhinus Spp .) . 13 Mylea L. Bayless, Mary Kay Clark, Richard C. Stark, Barbara S. Douglas, and Shauna M. Ginger Ecology of tree-Roosting Rafinesque’s Big-Eared Bats in the Eastern United States . 27 Austin W. Trousdale Diet and Foraging Behavior of Corynorhinus in Eastern north America . 39 Michael J. Lacki and Luke E. Dodd Conservation and Management of Eastern Big-Eared Bats (Corynorhinus Spp .) . 53 Darren A. Miller, Craig W. Stihler, D. Blake Sasse, Rick Reynolds, Paul Van Deusen, and Steven B. Castleberry Rafinesque’s Big-Eared Bat (Corynorhinus Rafinesquii) in Mississippi: Distribution, Current Status, and Conservation needs . 63 Chester O. Martin, Alison S. McCartney, David Richardson, Austin W. Trousdale, and Monica S. Wolters Status of the Virginia Big-Eared Bat (Corynorhinus Townsendii Virginianus) in West Virginia: twenty-Seven Years of Monitoring Cave Roosts . 75 Craig W. Stihler Phylogenetic and Population Genetic Assessment of Rafinesque’s Big-Eared Bat (Corynorhinus Rafinesquii) . 85 Antoinette J. Piaggio, David A. Saugey, and D. Blake Sasse Characteristics of Roosts Used by Rafinesque’s Big-Eared Bat (Corynorhinus Rafinesquii) on Camp Mackall, north Carolina . 101 Piper L. Roby, Mark W. Gumbert, Price L. Sewell, and Steven W. Brewer iii Seasonal and Multiannual Roost Use by Rafinesque’s Big-eared Bats in the Coastal Plain of South Carolina . 111 Susan C. Loeb and Stanley J. Zarnoch Winter Roosting Behavior of Rafinesque’s Big-Eared Bat in Southwestern Arkansas . 123 D. Blake Sasse, David A. Saugey, and Daniel R. England Foraging and Roosting Ecology of Rafinesque’s Big-Eared Bat at the northern Edge of the Range . 129 Joseph S. Johnson and Michael J. Lacki Radiotelemetry Studies of Female Virginia Big-Eared Bats (Corynorhinus Townsendii Virginianus) in Pendleton County, West Virginia . 139 Craig W. Stihler Comparison of Survey Methods for Rafinesque’s Big-Eared Bats . 147 Matthew J. Clement and Steven B. Castleberry iv PREFACE In February 2007, the inaugural meeting of the Rafinesque’s Authors were encouraged, but not required, to submit Big-Eared Bat Working Group was held in Destin, FL. their contributions for publication in these proceedings. The goal of the working group was to provide a forum for The symposium was sponsored by Bat Conservation communication on research, management, and conservation International; the National Council for Air and Stream of Rafinesque’s big-eared bats (Corynorhinus rafinesquii), Improvement; the U.S. Forest Service, Savannah River; the a rare and sensitive species. There was consensus among Offield Family Foundation; the Southeastern Bat Diversity participants at the meeting that much information remained Network; and the University of Georgia, Warnell School of to be acquired before effective management of these animals Forestry and Natural Resources. The planning committee was possible. It was also evident from the presentations and was chaired by Steven B. Castleberry, University of Georgia. discussion that a considerable amount of research had been Other members of the planning committee were Mary Kay conducted on the species, especially over the past several Clark, Moonlight Environmental Consulting; Susan C. Loeb, years, but much of the research has not been published or is U.S. Forest Service, Southern Research Station; Darren A. not readily available. Thus, potentially valuable information Miller, Weyerhaeuser NR Company; and David A. Saugey, remained in filing cabinets and desk drawers and not in the U.S. Forest Service, Ouachita National Forest. hands of the people who need it most—the biologists and managers of State, Federal, and private lands that harbor The goal of these proceedings is to provide an easily these bats, and the State and Federal Agencies responsible accessible publication that can be used by biologists for their conservation. It was also agreed that a similar and managers as they draft management strategies and situation likely existed for the two other taxa of big-eared policy, and to further the understanding of the ecology of bats in the Eastern United States, the Virginia big-eared bat these species. The papers in this volume were subjected (C. t. virginianus) and the Ozark big-eared bat (C. t. ingens), to the scientific peer-review process. Each manuscript which are federally listed as endangered. Thus, it was was assigned to one of the three editors and reviewed by decided to hold a symposium to encourage researchers two professionals familiar with the organisms and topic. and biologists to present and publish new information on Comments and suggestions by the reviewers improved the biology, ecology, and status of eastern big-eared bats the quality of the manuscripts and we are grateful to the and to synthesize existing information. A further goal following professionals for their time and expertise: Michael of this symposium was to stimulate discussion on future Baker, Troy Best, Eric Britzke, Timothy Carter, Brian Carver, conservation, management, and research needs of these bats. Steven Castleberry, Matthew Clement, Chris Comer, Barbara Douglas, Mark Ford, Shauna Ginger, Joe Johnson, Matina The symposium, held in Athens, GA, in March 2010, Kalcounis-Rüeppell, Jim Kennedy, Dennis Krusac, Paul consisted of 7 invited presentations on general ecological Leberg, Chester Martin, Darren Miller, Joy O’Keefe, Richard topics, 15 contributed oral presentations and 3 poster Reynolds, Christopher Rice, Lynn Robbins, Blake Sasse, presentations on more specific research results, and a panel David Saugey, Austin Trousdale, Maarten Vonhof, John discussion on future directions in research and management. Whitaker, and Bently Wigley. v CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT OF EASTERN BIG-EARED BATS: AN INTRODUCTION Susan C. Loeb, Research Ecologist, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Clemson, SC 29634 Michael J. Lacki, Professor, University of Kentucky, Department of Forestry, Lexington, KY 40546 Darren A. Miller, Manager, Weyerhaeuser NR Company, Southern Environmental Research, Columbus, MS 39704 Abstract—Three taxa of big-eared bats (genus Corynorhinus) inhabit the Eastern United States. Rafinesque’s big- eared bats (C. rafinesquii) are widely distributed from West Virginia to Texas whereas the Virginia big-eared bat (C. t. virginianus) and the Ozark big-eared bat (C. t. ingens) have limited ranges. Over the past 20 years, research on the biology, ecology, and conservation of bats throughout the world has increased, but research on big-eared bats of the Eastern United States has been less extensive. In evaluating the current state of knowledge, we reviewed the existing literature on big-eared bats that inhabit the Eastern United States and found 155 references, of which 101 were research notes, full articles, or review papers. In contrast, we found 239 references on the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis), an endangered species with a similar geographic range size in the Eastern United States. Through our assessment of the literature on big-eared bats, we identified many gaps in our knowledge and understanding, including demography, population dynamics, social organization, hibernation and other aspects of physiological ecology, foraging behavior and diet, the effects of forest management, and the effects of conservation efforts. We also found that research on Virginia and Ozark big-eared bats has decreased in recent years while research on Rafinesque’s big-eared bats has increased. Papers in these proceedings fill many of the knowledge gaps but much research is still needed to provide managers with the information they need to conserve these sensitive species. INTRODUCTION Piaggio and others 2009; Szymanski 2009; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1995, 2008). Urbanization and development Big-eared bats (genus Corynorhinus) are some of the are projected to increase in the coming decades (Alig and most striking and recognizable bats in the Eastern United others 2003,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ANOTHER RECORD for AZALEA AS AFOODPLANT of Satyrilj
    • FOUNDED VOL.7 NO.1 1978 MAY'1985 THE OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE SOUTHERN LEPIDOPTERISTS' SOCIETY, ORGANIZED TO PROMOTE SCIENTIFIC INTEREST AND KNOWLEDGE RELATED TO UNDERSTANDING THE LEPIDOPTERA FAUNA OF THE SOUTHERN REGION OF THE UNITED STATES. ANOTHER RECORD FOR AZALEA AS AFOODPLANT 1985 ANNUAL MEETING SATYRIlJ~1 OF LIPAROPS LIPAROPS CB & U NEAR ST I MARKS NWR, FLOR IDA By Bob Cavanaugh By Dave Baggett ON March 16, 1985 while searching over I AM working towards setting up the 1985 the leaves of a wild azalea bush (Rho­ annual meeting in or near St. Marks NWR dodendron canescens (Michaux)) I found (Inner Big Bend area along the NW Gulf a pale green, slug shaped larva which Coast, about 40 miles south of Tallahassee). reared out to be a male Satyrium ~­ There has been very limited exploration in arops liparops. The description of the the area, and I think it is one that holds larva contained in Klots' A FIELD GUIDE a great deal of promise. The date will be TO THE BUTTERFLIES is accurate for this Labor Day weekend (Aug. 30 - Sept. 1). This subspecies. The larva turned a pretty could be a bit early for the area, but then lavender color three days prior to pu­ again, it might just be right on target. pation. Pupation occurred on April 1st The immediate area adjacent holds a lot of and the adult emerged on the morning of promise for several field trips, especially April 18th. in conjunction with the long holiday week­ end. The azalea plant was in full bloom and the leaves were young and soft.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Appendix 3. Thousand Islands National Park Taxonomy Report
    Appendix 3. Thousand Islands National Park Taxonomy Report Class Order Family Genus Species Arachnida Araneae Agelenidae Agelenopsis Agelenopsis potteri Agelenopsis utahana Anyphaenidae Anyphaena Anyphaena celer Hibana Hibana gracilis Araneidae Araneus Araneus bicentenarius Larinioides Larinioides cornutus Larinioides patagiatus Clubionidae Clubiona Clubiona abboti Clubiona bishopi Clubiona canadensis Clubiona kastoni Clubiona obesa Clubiona pygmaea Elaver Elaver excepta Corinnidae Castianeira Castianeira cingulata Phrurolithus Phrurolithus festivus Dictynidae Emblyna Emblyna cruciata Emblyna sublata Eutichuridae Strotarchus Strotarchus piscatorius Gnaphosidae Herpyllus Herpyllus ecclesiasticus Zelotes Zelotes hentzi Linyphiidae Ceraticelus Ceraticelus atriceps 1 Collinsia Collinsia plumosa Erigone Erigone atra Hypselistes Hypselistes florens Microlinyphia Microlinyphia mandibulata Neriene Neriene radiata Soulgas Soulgas corticarius Spirembolus Lycosidae Pardosa Pardosa milvina Pardosa moesta Piratula Piratula canadensis Mimetidae Mimetus Mimetus notius Philodromidae Philodromus Philodromus peninsulanus Philodromus rufus vibrans Philodromus validus Philodromus vulgaris Thanatus Thanatus striatus Phrurolithidae Phrurotimpus Phrurotimpus borealis Pisauridae Dolomedes Dolomedes tenebrosus Dolomedes triton Pisaurina Pisaurina mira Salticidae Eris Eris militaris Hentzia Hentzia mitrata Naphrys Naphrys pulex Pelegrina Pelegrina proterva Tetragnathidae Tetragnatha 2 Tetragnatha caudata Tetragnatha shoshone Tetragnatha straminea Tetragnatha viridis
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera of North America 5
    Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera by Valerio Albu, 1411 E. Sweetbriar Drive Fresno, CA 93720 and Eric Metzler, 1241 Kildale Square North Columbus, OH 43229 April 30, 2004 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Cover illustration: Blueberry Sphinx (Paonias astylus (Drury)], an eastern endemic. Photo by Valeriu Albu. ISBN 1084-8819 This publication and others in the series may be ordered from the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 Abstract A list of 1531 species ofLepidoptera is presented, collected over 15 years (1988 to 2002), in eleven southern West Virginia counties. A variety of collecting methods was used, including netting, light attracting, light trapping and pheromone trapping. The specimens were identified by the currently available pictorial sources and determination keys. Many were also sent to specialists for confirmation or identification. The majority of the data was from Kanawha County, reflecting the area of more intensive sampling effort by the senior author. This imbalance of data between Kanawha County and other counties should even out with further sampling of the area. Key Words: Appalachian Mountains,
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Native Animals of RI
    RARE NATIVE ANIMALS OF RHODE ISLAND Revised: March, 2006 ABOUT THIS LIST The list is divided by vertebrates and invertebrates and is arranged taxonomically according to the recognized authority cited before each group. Appropriate synonomy is included where names have changed since publication of the cited authority. The Natural Heritage Program's Rare Native Plants of Rhode Island includes an estimate of the number of "extant populations" for each listed plant species, a figure which has been helpful in assessing the health of each species. Because animals are mobile, some exhibiting annual long-distance migrations, it is not possible to derive a population index that can be applied to all animal groups. The status assigned to each species (see definitions below) provides some indication of its range, relative abundance, and vulnerability to decline. More specific and pertinent data is available from the Natural Heritage Program, the Rhode Island Endangered Species Program, and the Rhode Island Natural History Survey. STATUS. The status of each species is designated by letter codes as defined: (FE) Federally Endangered (7 species currently listed) (FT) Federally Threatened (2 species currently listed) (SE) State Endangered Native species in imminent danger of extirpation from Rhode Island. These taxa may meet one or more of the following criteria: 1. Formerly considered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for Federal listing as endangered or threatened. 2. Known from an estimated 1-2 total populations in the state. 3. Apparently globally rare or threatened; estimated at 100 or fewer populations range-wide. Animals listed as State Endangered are protected under the provisions of the Rhode Island State Endangered Species Act, Title 20 of the General Laws of the State of Rhode Island.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Survey of Four Longleaf Pine Preserves
    A SURVEY OF THE MOTHS, BUTTERFLIES, AND GRASSHOPPERS OF FOUR NATURE CONSERVANCY PRESERVES IN SOUTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA Stephen P. Hall and Dale F. Schweitzer November 15, 1993 ABSTRACT Moths, butterflies, and grasshoppers were surveyed within four longleaf pine preserves owned by the North Carolina Nature Conservancy during the growing season of 1991 and 1992. Over 7,000 specimens (either collected or seen in the field) were identified, representing 512 different species and 28 families. Forty-one of these we consider to be distinctive of the two fire- maintained communities principally under investigation, the longleaf pine savannas and flatwoods. An additional 14 species we consider distinctive of the pocosins that occur in close association with the savannas and flatwoods. Twenty nine species appear to be rare enough to be included on the list of elements monitored by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (eight others in this category have been reported from one of these sites, the Green Swamp, but were not observed in this study). Two of the moths collected, Spartiniphaga carterae and Agrotis buchholzi, are currently candidates for federal listing as Threatened or Endangered species. Another species, Hemipachnobia s. subporphyrea, appears to be endemic to North Carolina and should also be considered for federal candidate status. With few exceptions, even the species that seem to be most closely associated with savannas and flatwoods show few direct defenses against fire, the primary force responsible for maintaining these communities. Instead, the majority of these insects probably survive within this region due to their ability to rapidly re-colonize recently burned areas from small, well-dispersed refugia.
    [Show full text]
  • Maine State Legislature
    MAINE STATE LEGISLATURE The following document is provided by the LAW AND LEGISLATIVE DIGITAL LIBRARY at the Maine State Law and Legislative Reference Library http://legislature.maine.gov/lawlib Reproduced from scanned originals with text recognition applied (searchable text may contain some errors and/or omissions) FOREST & SHADE TREE INSECT & DISEASE CONDITIONS FOR MAINE A Surrmary of the 1988 Situation Insect & Disease Management Division Maine Forest Service Surrmary Report No. 3 MAINE DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION March 1989 Augusta, Maine C O N T E N T S Page Introduction 1 Highlights of Division Activities for 1988 .............................. 1 Organizational Chart (I & DM) ••••••••• 2 Entomology Technician Districts (Map) ••• 3 Publications ....................................... 4 1988 Pest Summary 5 (A) Forest Pests - Softwoods 6 Insects ............... ~ .......... ~ ................................ 6 Diseases 10 (B) Forest Pests Hardwoods 12 Insects ......................................................... 12 Diseases ........................................................... 19 (C) Plantation, Regeneration, Nursery and Christmas Tree Pests (Conifers Only) ............................................................... 21 Insects .............................................. • ............. 21 Diseases and Miscellaneous Problems ....... •........................ 25 (D) Shade Tree, Ornamental and Miscellaneous Pests 26 Insects and Ticks .................................................. 26 Diseases and Miscellaneous Problems
    [Show full text]
  • Big Creek Lepidoptera Checklist
    Big Creek Lepidoptera Checklist Prepared by J.A. Powell, Essig Museum of Entomology, UC Berkeley. For a description of the Big Creek Lepidoptera Survey, see Powell, J.A. Big Creek Reserve Lepidoptera Survey: Recovery of Populations after the 1985 Rat Creek Fire. In Views of a Coastal Wilderness: 20 Years of Research at Big Creek Reserve. (copies available at the reserve). family genus species subspecies author Acrolepiidae Acrolepiopsis californica Gaedicke Adelidae Adela flammeusella Chambers Adelidae Adela punctiferella Walsingham Adelidae Adela septentrionella Walsingham Adelidae Adela trigrapha Zeller Alucitidae Alucita hexadactyla Linnaeus Arctiidae Apantesis ornata (Packard) Arctiidae Apantesis proxima (Guerin-Meneville) Arctiidae Arachnis picta Packard Arctiidae Cisthene deserta (Felder) Arctiidae Cisthene faustinula (Boisduval) Arctiidae Cisthene liberomacula (Dyar) Arctiidae Gnophaela latipennis (Boisduval) Arctiidae Hemihyalea edwardsii (Packard) Arctiidae Lophocampa maculata Harris Arctiidae Lycomorpha grotei (Packard) Arctiidae Spilosoma vagans (Boisduval) Arctiidae Spilosoma vestalis Packard Argyresthiidae Argyresthia cupressella Walsingham Argyresthiidae Argyresthia franciscella Busck Argyresthiidae Argyresthia sp. (gray) Blastobasidae ?genus Blastobasidae Blastobasis ?glandulella (Riley) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.1) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.2) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.3) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.4) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.5) Blastobasidae Holcocera (sp.6) Blastobasidae Holcocera gigantella (Chambers) Blastobasidae
    [Show full text]
  • Assabet River National Wildlife Refuge Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan January 2005
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Assabet River National Wildlife Refuge Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan January 2005 This goose, designed by J.N. “Ding” Darling, has become the symbol of the National Wildlife Refuge System The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the principle federal agency for conserving, protecting, and enhancing fish and wildlife in their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service manages the 96-million acre National Wildlife Refuge System comprised of 544 national wildlife refuges and thousands of waterfowl production areas. It also operates 65 national fish hatcheries and 78 ecological services field stations. The agency enforces federal wildlife laws, manages migratory bird populations, restores significant fisheries, conserves and restores wildlife habitat such as wetlands, administers the Endangered Species Act, and helps foreign governments with their conservation efforts. It also oversees the Federal Aid program which distributes hundreds of millions of dollars in excise taxes on fishing and hunting equipment to state wildlife agencies. Comprehensive Conservation Plans provide long term guidance for management decisions; set forth goals, objectives, and strategies needed to accomplish refuge purposes; and, identify the Service’s best estimate of future needs. These plans detail program planning levels that are sometimes substantially above current budget allocations and, as such, are primarily for Service strategic planning and program prioritization purposes. The plans do not constitute
    [Show full text]
  • Moths & Butterflies of Grizzly Peak Preserve
    2018 ANNUAL REPORT MOTHS & BUTTERFLIES OF GRIZZLY PEAK PRESERVE: Inventory Results from 2018 Prepared and Submi�ed by: DANA ROSS (Entomologist/Lepidoptera Specialist) Corvallis, Oregon SUMMARY The Grizzly Peak Preserve was sampled for butterflies and moths during May, June and October, 2018. A grand total of 218 species were documented and included 170 moths and 48 butterflies. These are presented as an annotated checklist in the appendix of this report. Butterflies and day-flying moths were sampled during daylight hours with an insect net. Nocturnal moths were collected using battery-powered backlight traps over single night periods at 10 locations during each monthly visit. While many of the documented butterflies and moths are common and widespread species, others - that include the Western Sulphur (Colias occidentalis primordialis) and the noctuid moth Eupsilia fringata - represent more locally endemic and/or rare taxa. One geometrid moth has yet to be identified and may represent an undescribed (“new”) species. Future sampling during March, April, July, August and September will capture many more Lepidoptera that have not been recorded. Once the site is more thoroughly sampled, the combined Grizzly Peak butterfly-moth fauna should total at least 450-500 species. INTRODUCTION The Order Lepidoptera (butterflies and moths) is an abundant and diverse insect group that performs essential ecological functions within terrestrial environments. As a group, these insects are major herbivores (caterpillars) and pollinators (adults), and are a critical food source for many species of birds, mammals (including bats) and predacious and parasitoid insects. With hundreds of species of butterflies and moths combined occurring at sites with ample habitat heterogeneity, a Lepidoptera inventory can provide a valuable baseline for biodiversity studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera of the Tolman Bridge Area (2000-2011)
    LEPIDOPTERA OF THE TOLMAN BRIDGE AREA, ALBERTA, 2000-2011 Charles Bird, 8 March 2012 Box 22, Erskine, AB T0C 1G0 [email protected] The present paper includes a number of redeterminations and additions to the information in earlier reports. It also follows the up-to-date order and taxonomy of Pohl et al. (2010), rather than that of Hodges et al. (1983). Brian Scholtens, Greg Pohl and Jean-François Landry collecting moths at a sheet illuminated by a mercury vapor (MV) light, Tolman Bridge, 24 July 2003, during the 2003 Olds meetings of the Lepidopterist’s Society (C.D. Bird image). Tolman Bridge, is located in the valley of the Red Deer River, 18 km (10 miles) east of the town of Trochu. The bridge and adjoining Park land are in the north half of section 14, range 22, township 34, west of the Fourth Meridian. The coordinates at the bridge are 51.503N and 113.009W. The elevation ranges from around 600 m at the river to 800 m or so near the top of the river breaks. In a Natural Area Inspection Report dated 25 June 1982 and in the 1989 Trochu 82 P/14, 1:50,000 topographic map, the land southwest of the bridge was designated as the “Tolman Bridge Municipal Park” while that southeast of the bridge was referred to as the “Tolman Bridge Recreation Area”. In an Alberta, Department of the Environment, Parks and Protected Areas Division paper dated 9 May 2000, the areas on both sides of the river are included in “Dry Island Buffalo Jump Provincial Park”.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Fruitworms
    NEW YORK'S FOOD AND LIFE SCIENCES BULLETIN NO. 50, OCTOBER 1974 NEW YORK STATE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION, GENEVA, A DIVISION OF THE NEW YORK STATE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND LIFE SCIENCES, A STATUTORY COLLEGE OF THE STATE UNIVERSITY, CORNELL UNIVERSITY, ITHACA Green Fruitworms P. J. Chapman and S. E. Lienk INTRODUCTION Young apple and pear fruits may be fed upon by several species of relatively large, stout-bodied green caterpillars (Fig. 1). Their dominant green color is relieved by dots, dashes, lines, and stripes of white, cream, or yellow. For more than a century now, these native insects have been known to commercial and amateur fruit growers as "green fruitworms" (6, 10, 17, 21, 22). Ten species of green fruitworms occur in New York. Tax- onomically, these constitute an artificial assemblage for while all are members of the same family (Noctuidae), four genera are represented in the group. However, six are members of the genus Lithophane. J ustif ication for treating these species as a unit rests on the fact that they form a quite distinctive pest complex. Thus, in the larval or cater- pillar stage, they are of very similar appearance and habits, feed at the same season, cause the same kind of feeding injury, and produce single generations annually. So, while the primary reason for treating these insects collectively has an economic basis, we expect the informa- tion given here will prove useful both to those having a Figure 2. —Young apple fruits showing green fruitworm technical interest in these species as well as to those hav- feeding injury.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effect of Insects on Seed Set of Ozark Chinquapin, Castanea Ozarkensis" (2017)
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 5-2017 The ffecE t of Insects on Seed Set of Ozark Chinquapin, Castanea ozarkensis Colton Zirkle University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Botany Commons, Entomology Commons, and the Plant Biology Commons Recommended Citation Zirkle, Colton, "The Effect of Insects on Seed Set of Ozark Chinquapin, Castanea ozarkensis" (2017). Theses and Dissertations. 1996. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1996 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. The Effect of Insects on Seed Set of Ozark Chinquapin, Castanea ozarkensis A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Entomology by Colton Zirkle Missouri State University Bachelor of Science in Biology, 2014 May 2017 University of Arkansas This thesis is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. ____________________________________ Dr. Ashley Dowling Thesis Director ____________________________________ ______________________________________ Dr. Frederick Paillet Dr. Neelendra Joshi Committee Member Committee Member Abstract Ozark chinquapin (Castanea ozarkensis), once found throughout the Interior Highlands of the United States, has been decimated across much of its range due to accidental introduction of chestnut blight, Cryphonectria parasitica. Efforts have been made to conserve and restore C. ozarkensis, but success requires thorough knowledge of the reproductive biology of the species. Other Castanea species are reported to have characteristics of both wind and insect pollination, but pollination strategies of Ozark chinquapin are unknown.
    [Show full text]