DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter Ii – Cookhouse Meadow Restoration Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter Ii – Cookhouse Meadow Restoration Project CHAPTER II – COOKHOUSE MEADOW RESTORATION PROJECT Written in conjunction with the USDA Forest Service Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit and Kathi L. Borgmann1, Julie Groce2, and Michael L. Morrison2 _______________ 1Arizona Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, School of Natural Resources, 104 Biological Sciences East, the University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, 85721. Email: [email protected] 2Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, 210 Nagle Hall, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2258. Email: [email protected], [email protected] 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 7 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................12 PROJECT GOALS ........................................................................................................................13 Riparian conservation strategies ....................................................................................... 13 Specific project goals and objectives ................................................................................ 14 Hydrological and vegetation objectives ............................................................................ 14 Vegetation objectives ........................................................................................................ 14 Wildlife objectives ............................................................................................................ 15 RESTORATION ACTIONS .......................................................................................................... 15 CONTROL SITE DESCRIPTIONS ............................................................................................... 16 EFFECTIVENESS MONITORING METHODS ........................................................................... 17 OBJECTIVES AND ASSOCIATED WILDLIFE METRICS, METHODS, AND ANALYSIS .. 17 Vegetation objectives .......................................................................................................... 17 Butterflies ............................................................................................................................ 18 Reptiles and amphibians ..................................................................................................... 19 Birds .................................................................................................................................... 19 Owls .................................................................................................................................... 20 Bats ..................................................................................................................................... 21 Small mammals ................................................................................................................... 21 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................... 23 Vegetation objectives .......................................................................................................... 23 Butterflies ............................................................................................................................ 25 Reptiles and amphibians ..................................................................................................... 27 Birds .................................................................................................................................... 27 Owls .................................................................................................................................... 34 Bats ..................................................................................................................................... 34 Small mammals ................................................................................................................... 36 MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................. 40 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................................. 41 LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................................... 42 LIST OF TABLES 2.1. Species richness and relative frequency of use by desired condition bat species detected at Cookhouse and associated control sites, Big Meadow, and Grass Lake, 2004–2007............................................................................................................... 35 2.2. Number of small mammals trapped per 100 trap nights (i.e., relative frequency) in meadow and upland areas at Cookhouse and associated control sites, Big Meadow, and Grass Lake, 2004–2007. No desired condition species were detected at Grass Lake. The sixth small mammal desired condition species, broad-footed mole, was not detected at any site in any year ............................................ 36 Chapter II – Cookhouse Restoration Project 2 LIST OF FIGURES 2.1. Percent of Cookhouse Meadow containing dry soils, moist soils, and standing water throughout the summer months post-restoration (2007). The percentage of the meadow containing moist soil decreased throughout the season and more than half of the meadow was dry by 20 June 2007 ............................................................ 23 2.2. Butterfly species richness at Cookhouse from pre-restoration (2004-2006) and post-restoration (2007) compared to the number of butterfly species detected at the control sites (Big Meadow and Grass Lake). The arrow indicates when restoration occurred. Restoration actions did not appear to alter butterfly species richness .................................................................................................................. 26 2.3. Desired condition butterfly species richness at Cookhouse Meadow pre- restoration (2004-2006) and post-restoration (2007) compared to control sites (Big Meadow and Grass Lake). The arrow indicates when restoration occurred. Desired butterfly species richness was similar at Cookhouse and Big Meadow pre- and post-restoration suggesting that restoration did not affect richness of desired butterfly species ................................................................................... 26 2.4. Abundance of desired condition butterfly species corrected for size of meadow area surveyed at Cookhouse (6 ha), Big Meadow (19 ha), and Grass Lake (2.75 ha), pre-restoration (2004-2006) and post-restoration (2007). The arrow indicates when restoration occurred ................................................................................... 27 2.5. Number of songbird species detected within 50 m of point-count stations pre- restoration (2004-2006) and post-restoration (2007) at Cookhouse Meadow relative to two control sites (Big Meadow and Grass Lake). The arrow indicates when restoration occurred. One year, post restoration, species richness increased by 38% at Cookhouse ........................................................................... 28 2.6. Number of desired condition songbird species detected within 50 m of point- count stations pre-restoration (2004-2006) and post-restoration (2007) at Cookhouse Meadow relative to two control sites (Big Meadow and Grass Lake). The arrow indicates when restoration occurred. One year, post restoration, richness of desired condition species increased at Cookhouse compared to control sites .................................................................................................... 29 2.7. Abundance of desired condition songbird species (± SE) detected per point at Cookhouse pre-restoration (2004, 2005, and 2006) and post-restoration (2007) compared to abundance of desired condition species detected at the control sites (Big Meadow and Grass Lake). The arrow indicates when restoration occurred. Abundance of desired condition bird species detected post restoration did not change at Cookhouse and all three sites showed an increase in abundance in 2007 .......................................................................................................... 29 Chapter II – Cookhouse Restoration Project 3 2.8. Daily nest survival of Dusky flycatchers (a), Wilson’s warblers (b), and warbling vireos (c) at Cookhouse Meadow and control sites (Big Meadow and Grass Lake) pre-restoration (2004-2006) and post-restoration (2007). Numbers above the bars indicate the number of nests monitored and the arrow indicates when restoration occurred .................................................................................................. 32 2.9. Percentage of dusky flycatchers (a), Wilson’s warblers (b), and warbling vireo (c) nests parasitized by brown-headed cowbirds pre-restoration (2004-2006) and post-restoration (2007) at Cookhouse Meadow and two control sites (Big Meadow and Grass Lake). Number above the bars indicates the number of nests monitored and the arrow indicates when restoration occurred .................................. 33 2.10. Owl species richness at Cookhouse, Big Meadow, and Grass Lake, 2004–2007. Numbers include species detected during nocturnal broadcast surveys and incidentally (e.g., during songbird nest searching). The arrow indicates when restoration occurred .........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MOTHS and BUTTERFLIES LEPIDOPTERA DISTRIBUTION DATA SOURCES (LEPIDOPTERA) * Detailed Distributional Information Has Been J.D
    MOTHS AND BUTTERFLIES LEPIDOPTERA DISTRIBUTION DATA SOURCES (LEPIDOPTERA) * Detailed distributional information has been J.D. Lafontaine published for only a few groups of Lepidoptera in western Biological Resources Program, Agriculture and Agri-food Canada. Scott (1986) gives good distribution maps for Canada butterflies in North America but these are generalized shade Central Experimental Farm Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C6 maps that give no detail within the Montane Cordillera Ecozone. A series of memoirs on the Inchworms (family and Geometridae) of Canada by McGuffin (1967, 1972, 1977, 1981, 1987) and Bolte (1990) cover about 3/4 of the Canadian J.T. Troubridge fauna and include dot maps for most species. A long term project on the “Forest Lepidoptera of Canada” resulted in a Pacific Agri-Food Research Centre (Agassiz) four volume series on Lepidoptera that feed on trees in Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Canada and these also give dot maps for most species Box 1000, Agassiz, B.C. V0M 1A0 (McGugan, 1958; Prentice, 1962, 1963, 1965). Dot maps for three groups of Cutworm Moths (Family Noctuidae): the subfamily Plusiinae (Lafontaine and Poole, 1991), the subfamilies Cuculliinae and Psaphidinae (Poole, 1995), and ABSTRACT the tribe Noctuini (subfamily Noctuinae) (Lafontaine, 1998) have also been published. Most fascicles in The Moths of The Montane Cordillera Ecozone of British Columbia America North of Mexico series (e.g. Ferguson, 1971-72, and southwestern Alberta supports a diverse fauna with over 1978; Franclemont, 1973; Hodges, 1971, 1986; Lafontaine, 2,000 species of butterflies and moths (Order Lepidoptera) 1987; Munroe, 1972-74, 1976; Neunzig, 1986, 1990, 1997) recorded to date.
    [Show full text]
  • CA Checklist of Butterflies of Tulare County
    Checklist of Buerflies of Tulare County hp://www.natureali.org/Tularebuerflychecklist.htm Tulare County Buerfly Checklist Compiled by Ken Davenport & designed by Alison Sheehey Swallowtails (Family Papilionidae) Parnassians (Subfamily Parnassiinae) A series of simple checklists Clodius Parnassian Parnassius clodius for use in the field Sierra Nevada Parnassian Parnassius behrii Kern Amphibian Checklist Kern Bird Checklist Swallowtails (Subfamily Papilioninae) Kern Butterfly Checklist Pipevine Swallowtail Battus philenor Tulare Butterfly Checklist Black Swallowtail Papilio polyxenes Kern Dragonfly Checklist Checklist of Exotic Animals Anise Swallowtail Papilio zelicaon (incl. nitra) introduced to Kern County Indra Swallowtail Papilio indra Kern Fish Checklist Giant Swallowtail Papilio cresphontes Kern Mammal Checklist Kern Reptile Checklist Western Tiger Swallowtail Papilio rutulus Checklist of Sensitive Species Two-tailed Swallowtail Papilio multicaudata found in Kern County Pale Swallowtail Papilio eurymedon Whites and Sulphurs (Family Pieridae) Wildflowers Whites (Subfamily Pierinae) Hodgepodge of Insect Pine White Neophasia menapia Photos Nature Ali Wild Wanderings Becker's White Pontia beckerii Spring White Pontia sisymbrii Checkered White Pontia protodice Western White Pontia occidentalis The Butterfly Digest by Cabbage White Pieris rapae Bruce Webb - A digest of butterfly discussion around Large Marble Euchloe ausonides the nation. Frontispiece: 1 of 6 12/26/10 9:26 PM Checklist of Buerflies of Tulare County hp://www.natureali.org/Tularebuerflychecklist.htm
    [Show full text]
  • Invertebrates
    State Wildlife Action Plan Update Appendix A-5 Species of Greatest Conservation Need Fact Sheets INVERTEBRATES Conservation Status and Concern Biology and Life History Distribution and Abundance Habitat Needs Stressors Conservation Actions Needed Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 2015 Appendix A-5 SGCN Invertebrates – Fact Sheets Table of Contents What is Included in Appendix A-5 1 MILLIPEDE 2 LESCHI’S MILLIPEDE (Leschius mcallisteri)........................................................................................................... 2 MAYFLIES 4 MAYFLIES (Ephemeroptera) ................................................................................................................................ 4 [unnamed] (Cinygmula gartrelli) .................................................................................................................... 4 [unnamed] (Paraleptophlebia falcula) ............................................................................................................ 4 [unnamed] (Paraleptophlebia jenseni) ............................................................................................................ 4 [unnamed] (Siphlonurus autumnalis) .............................................................................................................. 4 [unnamed] (Cinygmula gartrelli) .................................................................................................................... 4 [unnamed] (Paraleptophlebia falcula) ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Yukon Butterflies a Guide to Yukon Butterflies
    Wildlife Viewing Yukon butterflies A guide to Yukon butterflies Where to find them Currently, about 91 species of butterflies, representing five families, are known from Yukon, but scientists expect to discover more. Finding butterflies in Yukon is easy. Just look in any natural, open area on a warm, sunny day. Two excellent butterfly viewing spots are Keno Hill and the Blackstone Uplands. Pick up Yukon’s Wildlife Viewing Guide to find these and other wildlife viewing hotspots. Visitors follow an old mining road Viewing tips to explore the alpine on top of Keno Hill. This booklet will help you view and identify some of the more common butterflies, and a few distinctive but less common species. Additional species are mentioned but not illustrated. In some cases, © Government of Yukon 2019 you will need a detailed book, such as , ISBN 978-1-55362-862-2 The Butterflies of Canada to identify the exact species that you have seen. All photos by Crispin Guppy except as follows: In the Alpine (p.ii) Some Yukon butterflies, by Ryan Agar; Cerisy’s Sphynx moth (p.2) by Sara Nielsen; Anicia such as the large swallowtails, Checkerspot (p.2) by Bruce Bennett; swallowtails (p.3) by Bruce are bright to advertise their Bennett; Freija Fritillary (p.12) by Sonja Stange; Gallium Sphinx presence to mates. Others are caterpillar (p.19) by William Kleeden (www.yukonexplorer.com); coloured in dull earth tones Butterfly hike at Keno (p.21) by Peter Long; Alpine Interpretive that allow them to hide from bird Centre (p.22) by Bruce Bennett.
    [Show full text]
  • Specimen Records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895
    Catalog: Oregon State Arthropod Collection 2019 Vol 3(2) Specimen records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895 Jon H. Shepard Paul C. Hammond Christopher J. Marshall Oregon State Arthropod Collection, Department of Integrative Biology, Oregon State University, Corvallis OR 97331 Cite this work, including the attached dataset, as: Shepard, J. S, P. C. Hammond, C. J. Marshall. 2019. Specimen records for North American Lepidoptera (Insecta) in the Oregon State Arthropod Collection. Lycaenidae Leach, 1815 and Riodinidae Grote, 1895. Catalog: Oregon State Arthropod Collection 3(2). (beta version). http://dx.doi.org/10.5399/osu/cat_osac.3.2.4594 Introduction These records were generated using funds from the LepNet project (Seltmann) - a national effort to create digital records for North American Lepidoptera. The dataset published herein contains the label data for all North American specimens of Lycaenidae and Riodinidae residing at the Oregon State Arthropod Collection as of March 2019. A beta version of these data records will be made available on the OSAC server (http://osac.oregonstate.edu/IPT) at the time of this publication. The beta version will be replaced in the near future with an official release (version 1.0), which will be archived as a supplemental file to this paper. Methods Basic digitization protocols and metadata standards can be found in (Shepard et al. 2018). Identifications were confirmed by Jon Shepard and Paul Hammond prior to digitization. Nomenclature follows that of (Pelham 2008). Results The holdings in these two families are extensive. Combined, they make up 25,743 specimens (24,598 Lycanidae and 1145 Riodinidae).
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Overview of Butterflies in the Southern Headwaters at Risk Project (SHARP) Area
    Conservation Overview of Butterflies in the Southern Headwaters at Risk Project (SHARP) Area Al Alberta Species at Risk Report No. 80 Conservation Overview of Butterflies in the Southern Headwaters at Risk Project (SHARP) Area Norbert G. Kondla Alberta Species at Risk Report No. 80 January 2004 Publication No. I/136 ISBN: 0-7785-2954-1 (Printed Edition) ISBN: 0-7785-2955-X (On-line Edition) ISSN: 1496-7219 (Printed Edition) ISSN: 1496-7146 (On-line Edition) Cover photograph: Norbert Kondla, Plebejus melissa (Melissa Blue), Maycroft, AB For copies of this report, contact: Information Centre- Publications Alberta Environment/ Alberta Sustainable Resource Development Main Floor, Great West Life Building 9920- 108 Street Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T5K 2M4 Telephone: (780) 422-2079 OR Information Service Alberta Environment/ Alberta Sustainable Resource Development #100, 3115- 12 Street NE Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2E 7J2 Telephone: (403) 297- 3362 OR Visit our web site at: http://www3.gov.ab.ca/srd/fw/riskspecies/ This publication may be cited as: Kondla, N.G. 2004. Conservation overview of butterflies in the southern headwaters at risk project (SHARP) area. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Fish and Wildlife Division, Alberta Species at Risk Report No. 80. Edmonton, AB. 35 pp. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................................ ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Studies of Rhopalocera in a Sierra Nevadan Community-Donner Pass, California
    344 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS' SOCIETY ECOLOGICAL STUDIES OF RHOPALOCERA IN A SIERRA NEVADAN COMMUNITY-DONNER PASS, CALIFORNIA. V. FAUNAL ADDITIONS AND FOODPLANT RECORDS SINCE 1962 JOHN F. EMMELl AND THOMAS C. EMMEL Department of Zoology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611 Ten years have passed since the publication of the last of a series of four papers (Emmel & Emmel, 1962a, 1962b, 1963a, 1963b) on the butter­ fly associations and distributional factors affecting some 74 species of Rhopalocera in a montane ecosystem of the Sierra Nevada in California. With further study since our initially reported observations, a number of additional butterfly species have been recorded for this Donner Pass region and subsequent intensive invesetigations of hostplant relationships have been carried out by the authors and other California workers. A total of 83 butterfly species are now known for this four-square-mile area, making it the richest montane fauna of any reported temperate-zone area of comparable size (Emmel & Emmel, 1963b, p. 99). In the following report, species for which new hostplant infoDl1ation is known are listed by family name and the species number previously used in Emmel & Emmel (1962a). Some of the host identifications made in 1956 and 1960 in the Donner Pass region have been changed from the original botanical names given to the the authors, and listed in Emmel & Emmel (1962a), due to subsequent submission of voucher material to other botanical specialists. The butterfly species new to the previously­ recorded fauna are also listed (with an asterisk) at the end of each family section, with numbers subsequent to those for species recorded originally for the family.
    [Show full text]
  • NORTH AMERICAN BUTTERFLY ASSOCIATION 4 Delaware Road, Morristown, NJ 07960
    NORTH AMERICAN BUTTERFLY ASSOCIATION 4 Delaware Road, Morristown, NJ 07960 tel. 973-285-0907 fax 973-285-0936 web: www.naba.org 41st ANNUAL NABA BUTTERFLY COUNT - 2015 INSTRUCTIONS (CANADA) COUNTERS & COUNT CIRCLES Please report your 2015 count results directly to NABA through Unless your count is an existing 1st of July count started before our online count form at www.naba.org. The online form 2008, at least 4 adult observers must participate. One or more allows compilers to enter all data for their counts through the groups of counters always produce better results. It is usually Web and also allows the regional editors to review and edit the desirable to visit several habitats and areas within a count circle, reports more efficiently. Most importantly, Butterfly Count which may be done best by several parties. Since counts are information will be entered and stored in a database which in the open for public participation, we encourage you to publicize future will allow it to be available online to NABA members your count plans! and the public. All compilers are now requested to enter the data A count is held at one or more selected sites within a for their counts through the online count form. If this presents 15-mile diameter CIRCLE. Groups starting a new count MUST any difficulty, please contact NABA for assistance. designate this 15-mile diameter circle. No count circles may overlap—that is, count centers must be a minimum of 15 miles COUNT PROGRAM OVERVIEW apart. Groups repeating a count held a previous year MUST use In order to encourage increased participation in the NABA the same circle, and count the same sites and habitats as before Butterfly Count Program and to encourage even more so far as practical.
    [Show full text]
  • Nevada Butterflies and Their Biology to Forward Such for Inclusion in the Larger Study
    Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 39(2). 1985. 95-118 NEV ADA BUTTERFLIES: PRELIMINARY CHECKLIST AND DISTRIBUTION GEORGE T. AUSTIN Nevada State Museum and Historical Society, 700 Twin Lakes Drive, Las Vegas, Nevada 89107 ABSTRACT. The distribution by county of the 189 species (over 300 taxa) of but­ terflies occurring in Nevada is presented along with a list of species incorrectly recorded for the state. There are still large areas which are poorly or not collected. Nevada continues as one of the remaining unknown areas in our knowledge of butterfly distribution in North America. Although a com­ prehensive work on the state's butterflies is in preparation, there is sufficient demand for a preliminary checklist to justify the following. It is hoped this will stimulate those who have any data on Nevada butterflies and their biology to forward such for inclusion in the larger study. Studies of Nevada butterflies are hampered by a paucity of resident collectors, a large number of mountain and valley systems and vast areas with little or no access. Non-resident collectors usually funnel into known and well worked areas, and, although their data are valu­ able, large areas of the state remain uncollected. Intensive collecting, with emphasis on poorly known areas, over the past seven years by Nevada State Museum personnel and associates has gone far to clarify butterfly distribution within the state. The gaps in knowledge are now more narrowly identifiable and will be filled during the next few sea­ sons. There is no all encompassing treatment of Nevada's butterfly fauna. The only state list is an informal recent checklist of species (Harjes, 1980).
    [Show full text]
  • Papilio (New Series) #12, Some O
    (NEW Dec. 3, PAPILIO SERIES) 2008 GEOGRAPHIC VARIATION AND NEW TAXA OF WESTERN NORTH AMERICAN BUTTERFLIES, ESPECIALLY FROM COLORADO By James A. Scott & Michaels. Fisher, with some parts by David M. Wright, Stephen M. Spomer, Norbert G. Kondla, Todd Stout, Matthew C. Garhart, & Gary M. Marrone Introduction and Abstract Michael Fisher is currently updating the 1957 book Colorado Butterflies, by F. Martin Brown, J. Donald Eff, and Bernard Rotger (Fisher 2005a, 2005b, 2006). This project has emphasized the necessity of naming certain butterflies in Colorado and vicinity that are distinctive, but currently have no name, as part of our goal of applying correct species/ subspecies names to all Colorado butterflies. Eleven of those distinctive butterflies are named here, in the genera Anthocharis, Neominois, Asterocampa, Argynnis (Speyeria), Euphydryas, Lycaena, and Hesperia. New life histories are reported for species or subspecies of Neominois & Oeneis & Euphydryas & Lycaena that were recently described or recently elevated in status. Lycaena jlorUs differs in hostplant, egg morphology, and somewhat in a seta on 151 -stage larvae. We also report the results ofresearch elsewhere in North America that was needed to determine which of the current subspecies names should be applied to other butterflies in Colorado, in the genera Anthocharis, Neominois, Apodemia, Callophrys, At/ides, Euphilotes, PlebeJus, Polites, & Hylephila. This research has added additional species to the total of Colorado butterflies. Nomenclatural problems in Colorado Lycaena & Calloph1ys are settled with lectotypes and designations of type localities and two pending petitions to suppress toxotaxa. Difficulties with the ICZN Code in properly applying names to clines are explored, and new terminology is given to some necessary biological solutions.
    [Show full text]
  • A SKELETON CHECKLIST of the BUTTERFLIES of the UNITED STATES and CANADA Preparatory to Publication of the Catalogue Jonathan P
    A SKELETON CHECKLIST OF THE BUTTERFLIES OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA Preparatory to publication of the Catalogue © Jonathan P. Pelham August 2006 Superfamily HESPERIOIDEA Latreille, 1809 Family Hesperiidae Latreille, 1809 Subfamily Eudaminae Mabille, 1877 PHOCIDES Hübner, [1819] = Erycides Hübner, [1819] = Dysenius Scudder, 1872 *1. Phocides pigmalion (Cramer, 1779) = tenuistriga Mabille & Boullet, 1912 a. Phocides pigmalion okeechobee (Worthington, 1881) 2. Phocides belus (Godman and Salvin, 1890) *3. Phocides polybius (Fabricius, 1793) =‡palemon (Cramer, 1777) Homonym = cruentus Hübner, [1819] = palaemonides Röber, 1925 = ab. ‡"gunderi" R. C. Williams & Bell, 1931 a. Phocides polybius lilea (Reakirt, [1867]) = albicilla (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) = socius (Butler & Druce, 1872) =‡cruentus (Scudder, 1872) Homonym = sanguinea (Scudder, 1872) = imbreus (Plötz, 1879) = spurius (Mabille, 1880) = decolor (Mabille, 1880) = albiciliata Röber, 1925 PROTEIDES Hübner, [1819] = Dicranaspis Mabille, [1879] 4. Proteides mercurius (Fabricius, 1787) a. Proteides mercurius mercurius (Fabricius, 1787) =‡idas (Cramer, 1779) Homonym b. Proteides mercurius sanantonio (Lucas, 1857) EPARGYREUS Hübner, [1819] = Eridamus Burmeister, 1875 5. Epargyreus zestos (Geyer, 1832) a. Epargyreus zestos zestos (Geyer, 1832) = oberon (Worthington, 1881) = arsaces Mabille, 1903 6. Epargyreus clarus (Cramer, 1775) a. Epargyreus clarus clarus (Cramer, 1775) =‡tityrus (Fabricius, 1775) Homonym = argentosus Hayward, 1933 = argenteola (Matsumura, 1940) = ab. ‡"obliteratus"
    [Show full text]
  • Blue Jay, Vol.52, Issue 2
    INSECTS BUTTERFLIES OF THE PEACE RIVER REGION OF ALBERTA AND BRITISH COLUMBIA NORBERT G. KONDLA, British Columbia Forest Service, Box 672, McBride, British Columbia, VOJ 6E0, EDWARD M. PIKE, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4, and FELIX A. H. SPERLING, Department of Biology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario. K1N 6N5 Introduction Although the Peace to 1986 and was the first to find River valley and surrounding area many of the interesting butterfly taxa were explored early in Alberta’s his¬ resident in this area. Sperling ex¬ tory and have been settled since the plored the region while conducting early 1900s, little has been published research on the genus Papilio from regarding its insect fauna.20 Works 1980 to 1986. Kondla conducted ex¬ describing various aspects of the tensive surveys over eight years natural history of the Peace River from 1979 to 1992. We also include valley include Spalding with a gen¬ records provided by K. Avery, C. eral synthesis, Moss on plants, and Schmidt, C. Guppy, G.J. Hilchie, J. Soper on mammals and Pelham, A.W. Rupp and J. Shepard. birds.25'26’36'37'38 The primary purpose of this paper is to report on the results of this in¬ With respect to butterflies, Llewel- creased activity since 1979. lyn-Jones lists 12 species from the Peace River district of British Colum¬ The study area we deal with herein bia, and Bowman mentions six spe¬ consists of the Peace River valley cies from the Peace River district of from Bullhead Mountain/ Dunlevy Alberta.1,21 Case
    [Show full text]