DOCSLIB.ORG

Delaware Wildlife Action Plan 2007 - 2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Delaware Wildlife Action Plan 2007 - 2017 DelawareDelaware WildlifeWildlife ActionAction PlanPlan Keeping Today’s Wildlife from Becoming Tomorrow’s Memory Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control Division of Fish and Wildlife 89 King Highway Dover, Delaware 19901 [email protected] Delaware Wildlife Action Plan 2007 - 2017 Submitted to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 300 Westgate Center Drive Hadley, MA 01035-9589 September, 2006 Submitted by: Olin Allen, Biologist Brianna Barkus, Outreach Coordinator Karen Bennett, Program Manager Cover Photos by: Chris Bennett, Chuck Fullmer, Mike Trumabauer, DE Div. of Fish & Wildlife Delaware Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control 89 Kings Highway Dover DE 19901 Delaware Wildlife Action Plan Acknowledgements This project was funded, in part, through grants from the Delaware Division of Fish & Wildlife with funding from the Division of Federal Assistance, United States Fish & Wildlife Service under the State Wildlife Grants Program; and the Delaware Coastal Programs with funding from the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under award number NA17OZ2329. We gratefully acknowledge the participation of the following individuals: Jen Adkins Sally Kepfer NV Raman Chris Bennett Gary Kreamer Ken Reynolds Melinda Carl Annie Larson Ellen Roca John Clark Wayne Lehman Bob Rufe Rick Cole Jeff Lerner Tom Saladyga Robert Coxe Rob Line Craig Shirey Janet Dennis Andy Manus Maria Taylor Ellen Dickey Pete Martin Jeff Tinsman Nick DiPasquale Cathy Martin Shelley Tovell-DiBona Sara Donovall Bill McAvoy Maria Trabka Marcia Fox Rick McCorkle Mike Valenti Rob Gano Stew Michels Terry Villanueva Kitt Heckscher Roy Miller Kevina Vulinec Terry Higgins Greg Moore Spencer Waller Rob Hossler Greg Murphy Dawn Webb Jake Jacobini Holly Niederriter Jim White Annie Jacobs Basaran Ozden Bill Whitman Kathleen Jamison Marnie Pepper Tom Whittendale Bill Jones Susan Peterson Steve Williams Kevin Kalasz Mike Polo Jean Woods We wish to extend a special note of appreciation to Bill McAvoy for his patience and persistence with the habitat mapping component of the Plan. Bill generously shared his knowledge, expertise and familiarity with Delaware’s landscape, and we are grateful for the energy he contributed to creating many of the habitat layers found in this Plan. 9/27/2006 Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife i Delaware Wildlife Action Plan Executive Summary Despite its small size Delaware harbors a diversity of wildlife and habitats within its borders from the Atlantic Ocean coastline to the Piedmont border with Pennsylvania. More than 1,000 species of wildlife have been documented in the state, and more than 125 different types of habitat have been identified including coastal marine waters and brackish marshes, tidal and non-tidal freshwater streams and wetlands, and upland forests and meadows. This document, the Delaware Wildlife Action Plan (“Plan”), represents the state’s first attempt to develop a comprehensive strategy for conserving the full array of native wildlife and habitats – common and uncommon – as vital components of the state’s natural resources. It is intended not only to be comprehensive in terms of the species, habitats, issues and actions it addresses, but also comprehensive in terms of those responsible for implementation. Though the Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife (“DFW”) will play a lead role in its continued development and in coordinating implementation, the Plan is intended for all who are actively engaged in conservation efforts. Together with conservation partners, we aim to keep species common, and to prevent species from being listed as endangered. The Plan was developed with the participation of key conservation partners and public input was solicited primarily through a website. The Plan identifies more than 450 Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) and 50 different types of habitat. Because this is a comprehensive plan for all wildlife, large blocks of forest and wetland habitats that support many common species are also identified. Maps depicting habitat for a full array of wildlife (“Key Habitats”) are presented to show areas of the state where conservation efforts can be focused. These maps are also intended to help guide more site-specific conservation planning efforts. A successful site-specific community-based planning effort was conducted in partnership with The Nature Conservancy as a subset of the state’s wildlife strategy development. Recognizing all possible issues that affect species and habitats of conservation concern, whether we fully understand their impacts, is an important step in building a comprehensive plan. Nearly 90 different conservation issues affecting species or habitats of conservation concern were identified, representing 16 different categories of issues. To address this extensive list of issues and impacts on SGCN and Key Habitats, more than 230 different conservation actions were developed. This extensive list of issues and actions were prioritized by reviewing several natural resource plans developed for Delaware over the years. As a result, a clear picture of priorities emerged; among themes represented were habitat loss and degradation, as well as institutional capacity of DFW as the lead agency for the Plan. Implementation of the Plan will be guided by a steering committee that meets regularly and is comprised of key partners including representatives from other state agencies, conservation organizations, and stakeholder and user groups. The Plan will be updated continuously by DFW as soon as new information becomes available about species, habitats, issues or actions, and the first formal review will take place two years after approval, with subsequent reviews every five years. A database is under development to track updates of Plan components in order to facilitate the review process, and an interactive version of the Plan will be posted on the DNREC website and made widely available on CD following the Plan’s acceptance. ii Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife 9/27/2006 Delaware Wildlife Action Plan Table of Contents Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................... i Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ ii Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. v 1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................1-1 1.1. Purpose, Goal and Guiding Principles .......................................................................... 1-1 1.1.1. Purpose ................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1.2. Goal and Guiding Principles for Conservation Actions ........................................ 1-1 1.2. Road Map to the Eight Elements ................................................................................... 1-4 1.3. Public Involvement, Partnerships and Coordination ..................................................... 1-5 2. Planning Context .................................................................................................................. 2-1 3. Species of Greatest Conservation Need ............................................................................... 3-1 3.1. Selection Criteria ........................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2. Abundance and Distribution .......................................................................................... 3-3 4. Key Wildlife Habitats ..........................................................................................................4-1 4.1. Ecological Framework .................................................................................................. 4-1 4.2. Location and Relative Condition................................................................................... 4-1 4.2.1. Habitat Mapping .................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2.2. Relative Condition ................................................................................................. 4-2 5. Determining Conservation Issues and Actions .................................................................... 5-1 5.1. Issues .............................................................................................................................5-2 5.1.1. Issues Impacting Key Habitats and SGCN ............................................................ 5-3 5.1.2. Issues Affecting Institutional Capacity ................................................................ 5-13 5.2. Actions ........................................................................................................................5-15 6. Conservation Issues and Actions ......................................................................................... 6-1 6.1. Key Wildlife Habitats: Descriptions and Conservation Issues and Actions
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Insects of Western North America 4. Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2
    Insects of Western North America 4. Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2. Dragonflies (Odonata), Stoneflies (Plecoptera) and selected Moths (Lepidoptera) Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2. Dragonflies (Odonata), Stoneflies (Plecoptera) and selected Moths (Lepidoptera) by Boris C. Kondratieff, Paul A. Opler, Matthew C. Garhart, and Jason P. Schmidt C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 March 15, 2004 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Cover illustration (top to bottom): Widow Skimmer (Libellula luctuosa) [photo ©Robert Behrstock], Stonefly (Perlesta species) [photo © David H. Funk, White- lined Sphinx (Hyles lineata) [photo © Matthew C. Garhart] 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, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 Copyrighted 2004 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………………….…1 INTRODUCTION…………………………………………..…………………………………………….…3 OBJECTIVE………………………………………………………………………………………….………5 Site Descriptions………………………………………….. METHODS AND MATERIALS…………………………………………………………………………….5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………..…...11 Dragonflies………………………………………………………………………………….……..11
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera Sphingidae:) of the Caatinga of Northeast Brazil: a Case Study in the State of Rio Grande Do Norte
    212212 JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 59(4), 2005, 212–218 THE HIGHLY SEASONAL HAWKMOTH FAUNA (LEPIDOPTERA SPHINGIDAE:) OF THE CAATINGA OF NORTHEAST BRAZIL: A CASE STUDY IN THE STATE OF RIO GRANDE DO NORTE JOSÉ ARAÚJO DUARTE JÚNIOR Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Biológicas, Departamento de Sistemática e Ecologia, Universidade Federal da Paraíba, 58059-900, João Pessoa, Paraíba, Brasil. E-mail: [email protected] AND CLEMENS SCHLINDWEIN Departamento de Botânica, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Av. Prof. Moraes Rego, s/n, Cidade Universitária, 50670-901, Recife, Pernambuco, Brasil. E-mail:[email protected] ABSTRACT: The caatinga, a thorn-shrub succulent savannah, is located in Northeastern Brazil and characterized by a short and irregular rainy season and a severe dry season. Insects are only abundant during the rainy months, displaying a strong seasonal pat- tern. Here we present data from a yearlong Sphingidae survey undertaken in the reserve Estação Ecológica do Seridó, located in the state of Rio Grande do Norte. Hawkmoths were collected once a month during two subsequent new moon nights, between 18.00h and 05.00h, attracted with a 160-watt mercury vapor light. A total of 593 specimens belonging to 20 species and 14 genera were col- lected. Neogene dynaeus, Callionima grisescens, and Hyles euphorbiarum were the most abundant species, together comprising up to 82.2% of the total number of specimens collected. These frequent species are residents of the caatinga of Rio Grande do Norte. The rare Sphingidae in this study, Pseudosphinx tetrio, Isognathus australis, and Cocytius antaeus, are migratory species for the caatinga.
    [Show full text]
  • Hawk Moths of North America Is Richly Illustrated with Larval Images and Contains an Abundance of Life History Information
    08 caterpillars EUSA/pp244-273 3/9/05 6:37 PM Page 244 244 TULIP-TREE MOTH CECROPIA MOTH 245 Callosamia angulifera Hyalophora cecropia RECOGNITION Frosted green with shiny yellow, orange, and blue knobs over top and sides of body. RECOGNITION Much like preceding but paler or Dorsal knobs on T2, T3, and A1 somewhat globular and waxier in color with pale stripe running below set with black spinules. Paired knobs on A2–A7 more spiracles on A1–A10 and black dots on abdomen cylindrical, yellow; knob over A8 unpaired and rounded. lacking contrasting pale rings. Yellow abdominal Larva to 10cm. Caterpillars of larch-feeding Columbia tubercle over A8 short, less than twice as high as broad. Silkmoth (Hyalophora columbia) have yellow-white to Larva to 6cm. Sweetbay Silkmoth (Callosamia securifera) yellow-pink instead of bright yellow knobs over dorsum similar in appearance but a specialist on sweet bay. Its of abdomen and knobs along sides tend to be more white than blue (as in Cecropia) and are yellow abdominal tubercle over A8 is nearly three times as set in black bases (see page 246). long as wide and the red knobs over thorax are cylindrical (see page 246). OCCURRENCE Urban and suburban yards and lots, orchards, fencerows, woodlands, OCCURRENCE Woodlands and forests from Michigan, southern Ontario, and and forests from Canada south to Florida and central Texas. One generation with mature Massachusetts to northern Florida and Mississippi. One principal generation northward; caterpillars from late June through August over most of range. two broods in South with mature caterpillars from early June onward.
    [Show full text]
  • Invaders of Pollination Networks in the Galápagos
    Downloaded from rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org on March 14, 2013 Invaders of pollination networks in the Gala´pagos Islands: emergence of novel communities rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org Anna Traveset1, Ruben Heleno1,2,3, Susana Chamorro1,3, Pablo Vargas4, Conley K. McMullen5, Rocı´o Castro-Urgal1, Manuel Nogales6, Henri W. Herrera3 and Jens M. Olesen7 1Laboratorio Internacional de Cambio Global (LINC-Global), Institut Mediterrani d’Estudis Avanc¸ats (CSIC-UIB), Research Miquel Marque´s 21, 07190 Esporles, Mallorca, Balearic Islands, Spain 2Centre for Functional Ecology, Department of Life Sciences, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal 3 Cite this article: Traveset A, Heleno R, Charles Darwin Foundation, Puerto Ayora, Santa Cruz, Gala´pagos, Ecuador 4Real Jardı´n Bota´nico (CSIC-RJB), Madrid, Spain Chamorro S, Vargas P, McMullen CK, 5Department of Biology, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USA Castro-Urgal R, Nogales M, Herrera HW, Olesen 6Instituto de Productos Naturales y Agrobiologı´a (CSIC-IPNA), Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain JM. 2013 Invaders of pollination networks in 7Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark the Gala´pagos Islands: emergence of novel communities. Proc R Soc B 280: 20123040. The unique biodiversity of most oceanic archipelagos is currently threatened by the introduction of alien species that can displace native biota, disrupt http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.3040 native ecological interactions, and profoundly affect community structure and stability. We investigated the threat of aliens on pollination networks in the species-rich lowlands of five Gala´pagos Islands. Twenty per cent of all species (60 plants and 220 pollinators) in the pooled network were aliens, Received: 20 December 2012 being involved in 38 per cent of the interactions.
    [Show full text]
  • ! 2013 Elena Tartaglia ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
    !"#$%&" '()*+",+-.+/(0+" 122"3456,7"3'7'38'9" HAWKMOTH – FLOWER INTERACTIONS IN THE URBAN LANDSCAPE: SPHINGIDAE ECOLOGY, WITH A FOCUS ON THE GENUS HEMARIS By ELENA S. TARTAGLIA A Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School-New Brunswick Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Program in Ecology and Evolution written under the direction of Dr. Steven N. Handel and approved by ________________________________________! ________________________________________ ________________________________________ ________________________________________ New Brunswick, New Jersey May 2013 ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Hawkmoth-Flower Interactions in the Urban Landscape: Sphingidae Ecology, With a Focus on the Genus Hemaris by ELENA S. TARTAGLIA Dissertation Director: Steven N. Handel ! In this dissertation I examined the ecology of moths of the family Sphingidae in New Jersey and elucidated some previously unknown aspects of their behavior as floral visitors. In Chapter 2, I investigated differences in moth abundance and diversity between urban and suburban habitat types. Suburban sites have higher moth abundance and diversity than urban sites. I compared nighttime light intensities across all sites to correlate increased nighttime light intensity with moth abundance and diversity. Urban sites had significantly higher nighttime light intensity, a factor that has been shown to negatively affect the behavior of moths. I analyzed moths’ diets based on pollen grains swabbed from the moths’ bodies. These data were inconclusive due to insufficient sample sizes. In Chapter 3, I examined similar questions regarding diurnal Sphingidae of the genus Hemaris and found that suburban sites had higher moth abundances and diversities than urban sites.
    [Show full text]
  • A Global Perspective on Firefly Extinction Threats
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339213788 A Global Perspective on Firefly Extinction Threats Article in BioScience · February 2020 DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biz157 CITATION READS 1 231 6 authors, including: Sara M Lewis Avalon Celeste Stevahn Owens Tufts University Tufts University 112 PUBLICATIONS 4,372 CITATIONS 10 PUBLICATIONS 48 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Candace E. Fallon Sarina Jepsen The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation 7 PUBLICATIONS 20 CITATIONS 36 PUBLICATIONS 283 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Usage of necrophagous beetles (Coleoptera) in forensic entomology: determination and developmental models View project Utilizing beetle larvae of family Silphidae in forensic practice View project All content following this page was uploaded by Sara M Lewis on 12 February 2020. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Forum A Global Perspective on Firefly Extinction Threats SARA M. LEWIS , CHOONG HAY WONG, AVALON C.S. OWENS , CANDACE FALLON, SARINA JEPSEN, ANCHANA THANCHAROEN, CHIAHSIUNG WU, RAPHAEL DE COCK, MARTIN NOVÁK, TANIA LÓPEZ-PALAFOX, VERONICA KHOO, AND J. MICHAEL REED Insect declines and their drivers have attracted considerable recent attention. Fireflies and glowworms are iconic insects whose conspicuous bioluminescent courtship displays carry unique cultural significance, giving them economic value as ecotourist attractions. Despite evidence of declines, a comprehensive review of the conservation status and threats facing the approximately 2000 firefly species worldwide is lacking. We conducted a survey of experts from diverse geographic regions to identify the most prominent perceived threats to firefly population and species persistence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Entomologist's Record and Journal of Variation
    M DC, — _ CO ^. E CO iliSNrNVINOSHilWS' S3ldVyan~LIBRARlES*"SMITHS0N!AN~lNSTITUTl0N N' oCO z to Z (/>*Z COZ ^RIES SMITHSONIAN_INSTITUTlON NOIiniIiSNI_NVINOSHllWS S3ldVaan_L: iiiSNi'^NviNOSHiiNS S3iavyan libraries Smithsonian institution N( — > Z r- 2 r" Z 2to LI ^R I ES^'SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTlON'"NOIini!iSNI~NVINOSHilVMS' S3 I b VM 8 11 w </» z z z n g ^^ liiiSNi NviNOSHims S3iyvyan libraries Smithsonian institution N' 2><^ =: to =: t/J t/i </> Z _J Z -I ARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIiniliSNI NVINOSHilWS SSIdVyan L — — </> — to >'. ± CO uiiSNi NViNosHiiws S3iyvaan libraries Smithsonian institution n CO <fi Z "ZL ~,f. 2 .V ^ oCO 0r Vo^^c>/ - -^^r- - 2 ^ > ^^^^— i ^ > CO z to * z to * z ARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIinillSNl NVINOSHllWS S3iaVdan L to 2 ^ '^ ^ z "^ O v.- - NiOmst^liS^> Q Z * -J Z I ID DAD I re CH^ITUCnMIAM IMOTtTIITinM / c. — t" — (/) \ Z fj. Nl NVINOSHIIINS S3 I M Vd I 8 H L B R AR I ES, SMITHSONlAN~INSTITUTION NOIlfl :S^SMITHS0NIAN_ INSTITUTION N0liniliSNI__NIVIN0SHillMs'^S3 I 8 VM 8 nf LI B R, ^Jl"!NVINOSHimS^S3iavyan"'LIBRARIES^SMITHS0NIAN~'lNSTITUTI0N^NOIin L '~^' ^ [I ^ d 2 OJ .^ . ° /<SS^ CD /<dSi^ 2 .^^^. ro /l^2l^!^ 2 /<^ > ^'^^ ^ ..... ^ - m x^^osvAVix ^' m S SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION — NOIlfliliSNrNVINOSHimS^SS iyvyan~LIBR/ S "^ ^ ^ c/> z 2 O _ Xto Iz JI_NVIN0SH1I1/MS^S3 I a Vd a n^LI B RAR I ES'^SMITHSONIAN JNSTITUTION "^NOlin Z -I 2 _j 2 _j S SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOIinillSNI NVINOSHilWS S3iyVaan LI BR/ 2: r- — 2 r- z NVINOSHiltNS ^1 S3 I MVy I 8 n~L B R AR I Es'^SMITHSONIAN'iNSTITUTIOn'^ NOlin ^^^>^ CO z w • z i ^^ > ^ s smithsonian_institution NoiiniiiSNi to NviNosHiiws'^ss I dVH a n^Li br; <n / .* -5^ \^A DO « ^\t PUBLISHED BI-MONTHLY ENTOMOLOGIST'S RECORD AND Journal of Variation Edited by P.A.
    [Show full text]
  • DE Wildlife Action Plan
    DelawareDelaware WildlifeWildlife ActionAction PlanPlan Keeping Today’s Wildlife from Becoming Tomorrow’s Memory Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control Division of Fish and Wildlife 89 King Highway Dover, Delaware 19901 [email protected] Delaware Wildlife Action Plan 2007 - 2017 Submitted to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 300 Westgate Center Drive Hadley, MA 01035-9589 September, 2006 Submitted by: Olin Allen, Biologist Brianna Barkus, Outreach Coordinator Karen Bennett, Program Manager Cover Photos by: Chris Bennett, Chuck Fullmer, Mike Trumabauer, DE Div. of Fish & Wildlife Delaware Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control 89 Kings Highway Dover DE 19901 Delaware Wildlife Action Plan Acknowledgements This project was funded, in part, through grants from the Delaware Division of Fish & Wildlife with funding from the Division of Federal Assistance, United States Fish & Wildlife Service under the State Wildlife Grants Program; and the Delaware Coastal Programs with funding from the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under award number NA17OZ2329. We gratefully acknowledge the participation of the following individuals: Jen Adkins Sally Kepfer NV Raman Chris Bennett Gary Kreamer Ken Reynolds Melinda Carl Annie Larson Ellen Roca John Clark Wayne Lehman Bob Rufe Rick Cole Jeff Lerner Tom Saladyga Robert Coxe Rob Line Craig Shirey Janet
    [Show full text]
  • Delaware's Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need
    CHAPTER 1 DELAWARE’S WILDLIFE SPECIES OF GREATEST CONSERVATION NEED CHAPTER 1: Delaware’s Wildlife Species of Greatest Conservation Need Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 7 Regional Context ........................................................................................................................................... 7 Delaware’s Animal Biodiversity .................................................................................................................... 10 State of Knowledge of Delaware’s Species ................................................................................................... 10 Delaware’s Wildlife and SGCN - presented by Taxonomic Group .................................................................. 11 Delaware’s 2015 SGCN Status Rank Tier Definitions................................................................................. 12 TIER 1 .................................................................................................................................................... 13 TIER 2 .................................................................................................................................................... 13 TIER 3 .................................................................................................................................................... 13 Mammals ....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Testing a Popular Indicator Taxon at Local Scales
    Biological Conservation 103 (2002) 361–370 www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon Does butterfly diversity predict moth diversity? Testing a popular indicator taxon at local scales Taylor H. Ricketts*, Gretchen C. Daily, Paul R. Ehrlich Department of Biological Sciences, Gilbert Hall, 371 Serra Mall, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-5020, USA Received 23 July 2000; received in revised form 2 May 2001; accepted 10 June 2001 Abstract Indicator taxa are often proposed as efficient ways of identifying conservation priorities, but the correlation between putative indicators and other taxa has not been adequately tested. We examined whether a popular indicator taxon, the butterflies, could provide a useful surrogate measure of diversity in a closely related but relatively poorly known group, the moths, at a local scale relevant to many conservation decisions (100–101 km2). We sampled butterflies and moths at 19 sites representing the three major terrestrial habitats in sub-alpine Colorado: meadows, aspen forests, and conifer forests. We found no correlation between moth and butterfly diversity across the 19 sites, using any of five different diversity measures. Correlations across only meadow sites (to test for correlation within a single, species-rich habitat) were also not significant. Butterflies were restricted largely to meadows, where their host plants occur and thermal environment is favorable. In contrast, all three habitats contained substantial moth diversity, and several moth species were restricted to each habitat. These findings suggest that (1) butterflies are unlikely to be useful indica- tors of moth diversity at a local scale; (2) phylogenetic relatedness is not a reliable criterion for selecting appropriate indicator taxa; and (3) a habitat-based approach would more effectively conserve moth diversity in this landscape and may be preferable in many situations where indicator taxa relationships are untested.
    [Show full text]
  • Butterflies of North America
    Insects of Western North America 7. Survey of Selected Arthropod Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma. 4. Hexapoda: Selected Coleoptera and Diptera with cumulative list of Arthropoda and additional taxa Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1177 2 Insects of Western North America. 7. Survey of Selected Arthropod Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma. 4. Hexapoda: Selected Coleoptera and Diptera with cumulative list of Arthropoda and additional taxa by Boris C. Kondratieff, Luke Myers, and Whitney S. Cranshaw C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 August 22, 2011 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity. Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1177 3 Cover Photo Credits: Whitney S. Cranshaw. Females of the blow fly Cochliomyia macellaria (Fab.) laying eggs on an animal carcass on Fort Sill, Oklahoma. 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, Colorado, 80523-1177. Copyrighted 2011 4 Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................7 SUMMARY AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
    [Show full text]
  • An Annotated Checklist of the Lepidoptera of the Beaver Island Archipelago, Lake Michigan
    The Great Lakes Entomologist Volume 24 Number 2 - Summer 1991 Number 2 - Summer Article 5 1991 June 1991 An Annotated Checklist of the Lepidoptera of the Beaver Island Archipelago, Lake Michigan. Dennis Profant Central Michigan University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Profant, Dennis 1991. "An Annotated Checklist of the Lepidoptera of the Beaver Island Archipelago, Lake Michigan.," The Great Lakes Entomologist, vol 24 (2) Available at: https://scholar.valpo.edu/tgle/vol24/iss2/5 This Peer-Review Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Biology at ValpoScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Great Lakes Entomologist by an authorized administrator of ValpoScholar. For more information, please contact a ValpoScholar staff member at [email protected]. Profant: An Annotated Checklist of the Lepidoptera of the Beaver Island Ar 1991 THE GREAT LAKES ENTOMOLOGIST 85 AN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF THE LEPIDOPTERA OF THE BEAVER ISLAND ARCHIPELAGO, LAKE MICHIGAN. Dennis Profantl ABSTRACT A survey of Lepidoptera was conducted in 1987 and 1988 on Beaver Island, Lake Michigan. When combined with a 1930 survey of the Beaver Island Archipelago, 757 species from 41 families have now been recorded from these islands. Only one study has been published on the Lepidoptera of Beaver Island and the surrounding islands of Garden, High, Hog, Whiskey, Squaw, Trout, Gull, and Hat (Moore 1930). The present study has produced a more complete inventory of lepi­ dopteran species on Beaver Island. Collecting was done in a variety of habitats using several different light sources.
    [Show full text]