DOCSLIB.ORG

A Conservation Blueprint

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Conservation Blueprint A Conservation Blueprint: An Assessment and Recommendations from the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County Review Draft February 2011 What we do Our goal is to protect and care for the spectacular beauty and natural resources that make Santa Cruz County special. We protect working lands, like farms and timberland, and natural lands with high conservation value – thus protecting water supplies, wildlife habitats, and open space. How we do it We believe that a relatively small investment now can save what we love forever. We protect land through a variety of means. Sometimes we buy the land from willing landowners. Sometimes we reach preservation agreements with landowners. Always, we serve as good stewards of the land under our care. We work with a wide variety of conservation partners to accomplish our goals. What we’ve done The Land Trust was founded in 1978 and has directly protected 3,200 acres of land and worked with others to protect another 10,000 acres. We have protected redwood forests, rare Sandhills habitat, wetlands at the heart of the Watsonville Sloughs, and 1,400 acres of farmland in the Pajaro Valley. Who funds our work Our work is funded by donations from individuals, as well as foundation and government grants which multiply the impact of individual gifts. During the past three years individual donations were matched $23 to $1 by grant funding. Our Board The Land Trust is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit under the Internal Revenue Service Code (tax ID # 94-2431856) and is governed by a Board of Trustees that includes farmers, landowners, business people, conservationists, and community volunteers. BOARD OF TRUSTEES STAFF Cindy Rubin, President Terry Corwin, Executive Director Robert Stephens, Vice Stephen Slade, Deputy Director President Matt Freeman, Director of Conservation Lloyd Williams, Secretary Lisa Larson, Finance Director Katherine Beiers Lynn Overtree, Stewardship Manager Val Cole Dan Medeiros, Acquisitions Manager Harriet Deck Andre Lafleur, Major Gifts Officer Cathleen Eckhardt Calah Pasley, Membership and Events Manager Will Garroutte Jeffrey Helmer, Land Steward Bill Gielow Carolyn Johnson, Senior Administrative John Gilchrist Assistant Bernie Goldner Tim Tourkakis, Morgan Preserve Caretaker Ron Hirsch Barry Baker, Stewardship Assistant Larry I. Perlin Rogelio Ponce, Jr Jim Rider Melody Sharp Sue Sheuerman The Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, established in 2000, seeks to advance environmental conservation and cutting-edge scientific research around the world and improve the quality of life in the San Francisco Bay Area. For more information, visit www.moore.org. A Conservation Blueprint: An Assessment and Recommendations from the Land Trust of Santa Cruz County Draft: February 17, 2011 Land Trust of Santa Cruz County 617 Water Street Santa Cruz, CA 95060 (831) 429-6116 [email protected] www.landtrustsantacruz.org This project is funded, in part, by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. DRAFT Conservation Blueprint: Contents Assessment and Recommendations Table of Contents List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. vii List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ viii Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................... ix Foreword ........................................................................................................................................ xii Part I. Overview and Setting ..................................................................................................... 13 1. Overview .................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Santa Cruz County’s Threatened Resources: a Call to Action ............................................................. 1 1.2 A Vision for Santa Cruz County’s Resource-Rich Legacy ..................................................................... 3 1.3 Blueprint Purpose ............................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 Blueprint Role and Relationship to Adopted Plans and Policies ......................................................... 5 1.5 Blueprint Development Process ......................................................................................................... 5 1.6 Blueprint Organization ........................................................................................................................ 6 2. Regional Setting and Challenges ............................................................................................. 8 2.1 Conservation Challenges ................................................................................................................... 12 2.1.1 Population Trends and Future Growth Challenges .................................................................... 12 2.1.2 Resource Conservation and Viability Challenges ....................................................................... 17 2.1.3 Climate Change .......................................................................................................................... 17 2.2 Regulatory and Policy Framework .................................................................................................... 18 Part II. Conservation Approach ................................................................................................. 19 3. Conservation Goals ................................................................................................................ 20 4. Integrated Conservation Approach ....................................................................................... 21 4.1 Priority Multi-Benefit Conservation Areas ........................................................................................ 21 4.1.1 Upper San Lorenzo ..................................................................................................................... 22 4.1.2 North Coast Watersheds ............................................................................................................ 28 4.1.3 Sandhills ..................................................................................................................................... 28 4.1.4 Upper Corralitos ......................................................................................................................... 29 4.1.5 Larkin Valley ............................................................................................................................... 29 4.1.6 Interlaken ................................................................................................................................... 30 4.1.7 Watsonville Sloughs / Lower Pajaro River ................................................................................. 30 4.1.8 Pajaro Hills ................................................................................................................................. 30 Land Trust of Santa Cruz County iii February 2011 DRAFT Conservation Blueprint: Contents Assessment and Recommendations 4.1.9 Riparian and Riverine Systems ................................................................................................... 31 4.2 Prioritizing Conservation Work in Multiple-Benefit Areas................................................................ 31 4.3 Conservation Tools ............................................................................................................................ 33 4.4 Ecosystem Services: Benefits and Innovative Models ...................................................................... 35 4.5 Critical Next Steps ............................................................................................................................. 36 4.5.1 Biodiversity ................................................................................................................................ 37 4.5.2 Water Resources ........................................................................................................................ 37 4.5.3 Working Lands ........................................................................................................................... 38 4.5.4 Recreation and Healthy Communities ....................................................................................... 39 Part III. Conservation Assessment ............................................................................................ 40 5. Biodiversity Assessment ........................................................................................................ 41 5.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 41 5.1.1 Biodiversity Planning Goals and Objectives ............................................................................... 43 5.1.2 Biodiversity Planning Steps and Approaches ............................................................................. 43 5.2 Key Findings ...................................................................................................................................... 44 5.2.1 Important Biological Systems ...................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Butterflies and Moths of Ada County, Idaho, United States
    Heliothis ononis Flax Bollworm Moth Coptotriche aenea Blackberry Leafminer Argyresthia canadensis Apyrrothrix araxes Dull Firetip Phocides pigmalion Mangrove Skipper Phocides belus Belus Skipper Phocides palemon Guava Skipper Phocides urania Urania skipper Proteides mercurius Mercurial Skipper Epargyreus zestos Zestos Skipper Epargyreus clarus Silver-spotted Skipper Epargyreus spanna Hispaniolan Silverdrop Epargyreus exadeus Broken Silverdrop Polygonus leo Hammock Skipper Polygonus savigny Manuel's Skipper Chioides albofasciatus White-striped Longtail Chioides zilpa Zilpa Longtail Chioides ixion Hispaniolan Longtail Aguna asander Gold-spotted Aguna Aguna claxon Emerald Aguna Aguna metophis Tailed Aguna Typhedanus undulatus Mottled Longtail Typhedanus ampyx Gold-tufted Skipper Polythrix octomaculata Eight-spotted Longtail Polythrix mexicanus Mexican Longtail Polythrix asine Asine Longtail Polythrix caunus (Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) Zestusa dorus Short-tailed Skipper Codatractus carlos Carlos' Mottled-Skipper Codatractus alcaeus White-crescent Longtail Codatractus yucatanus Yucatan Mottled-Skipper Codatractus arizonensis Arizona Skipper Codatractus valeriana Valeriana Skipper Urbanus proteus Long-tailed Skipper Urbanus viterboana Bluish Longtail Urbanus belli Double-striped Longtail Urbanus pronus Pronus Longtail Urbanus esmeraldus Esmeralda Longtail Urbanus evona Turquoise Longtail Urbanus dorantes Dorantes Longtail Urbanus teleus Teleus Longtail Urbanus tanna Tanna Longtail Urbanus simplicius Plain Longtail Urbanus procne Brown Longtail
    [Show full text]
  • Surveys for Dun Skipper (Euphyes Vestris) in the Harrison Lake Area, British Columbia, July 2009
    Surveys for Dun Skipper (Euphyes vestris) in the Harrison Lake Area, British Columbia, July 2009 Report Citation: Parkinson, L., S.A. Blanchette, J. Heron. 2009. Surveys for Dun Skipper (Euphyes vestris) in the Harrison Lake Area, British Columbia, July 2009. B.C. Ministry of Environment, Ecosystems Branch, Wildlife Science Section, Vancouver, B.C. 51 pp. Cover illustration: Euphyes vestris, taken 2007, lower Fraser Valley, photo by Denis Knopp. Photographs may be used without permission for non-monetary and educational purposes, with credit to this report and photographer as the source. The cover photograph is credited to Denis Knopp. Contact Information for report: Jennifer Heron, Invertebrate Specialist, B.C. Ministry of Environment, Ecosystems Branch, Wildlife Science Section, 316 – 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, V6T 1Z1. Phone: 604-222-6759. Email: [email protected] Acknowledgements Fieldwork was conducted by Laura Parkinson and Sophie-Anne Blanchette, B.C. Conservation Corps Invertebrate Species at Risk Crew. Jennifer Heron (B.C. Ministry of Environment) provided maps, planning and guidance for this project. The B.C. Invertebrate Species at Risk Inventory project was administered by the British Columbia Conservation Foundation (Joanne Neilson). Funding was provided by the B.C. Ministry of Environment through the B.C. Conservation Corp program (Ben Finkelstein, Manager and Bianka Sawicz, Program Coordinator), the B.C. Ministry of Environment Wildlife Science Section (Alec Dale, Manager) and Conservation Framework Funding (James Quayle, Manager). Joanne Neilson (B.C. Conservation Foundation) was a tremendous support to this project. This project links with concurrent invertebrate stewardship projects funded by the federal Habitat Stewardship Program for species at risk.
    [Show full text]
  • San Lorenzo Urban River Plan
    San Lorenzo Urban River Plan A Plan for the San Lorenzo River, Branciforte Creek and Jessie Street Marsh Prepared by: City of Santa Cruz San Lorenzo Urban River Plan Task Force with assistance from Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program of the National Park Service Adopted June 24, 2003 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 3 Executive Summary 5 Chapter 19 Purpose, Context and Goals 1.1 Purpose of the San Lorenzo Urban River Plan 9 1.2 Goals and Benefits of the Plan 10 1.3 The Planning Area and River Reach Descriptions 10 1.4 Relationship to Existing City Plans 13 1.5 Plan Organization 13 Chapter 2 15 Plan Setting and Background 2.1 Physical Setting 15 2.2 Social Setting: Development of the City of Santa Cruz 17 2.3 The History of Flooding in Santa Cruz 18 2.4 Current Planning and the San Lorenzo Urban River Plan Task Force 19 Chapter 3 21 Riverwide Concepts and Programs 3.1 The San Lorenzo Riverway 21 3.2 Defining the Riverway: System-wide Recommendations 22 Chapter 4 23 Reach Specific Recommendations 4.1 Design Improvements 25 4.2 Site Specific Recommendations in River Reaches 29 Estuarine Reach 29 Transitional Reach 39 Riverine Reach 49 Chapter 5 55 Branciforte Creek 5.1 Area Description and Current Conditions 55 5.2 Reach Specific Recommendations for Branciforte Creek 58 Chapter 6 61 Significant Riverfront Areas 6.1 Front Street Riverfront Area 61 6.2 Salz Tannery to 64 Sycamore Grove Riverfront Area 6.3 Beach Flats Riverfront Area 71 Chapter 7 73 Plan Implementation 7.1 San Lorenzo River Committee 73 Recommendations 74 7.2 Project Phasing and Projected Costs 75 7.3 Funding Opportunities 75 Chapter 8 79 References Appendix A Lower San Lorenzo River and Lagoon Enhancement Plan Appendix B Jessie Street Marsh Management Plan PB SAN LORENZO URBAN RIVER PLAN The San Lorenzo Urban River Plan could Acknowledgements not have been developed without the dedication of the San Lorenzo Urban River Plan Task Force, City staff and the community.
    [Show full text]
  • Central Coast
    Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Consultation History......................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Proposed Action ............................................................................................................... 2 1.4 Action Area ..................................................................................................................... 32 2. ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: BIOLOGICAL OPINION AND INCIDENTAL TAKE STATEMENT ......................................................................................................... 34 2.1 Analytical Approach ....................................................................................................... 34 2.2 Life History and Range-wide Status of the Species and Critical Habitat ...................... 35 2.3 Environmental Baseline .................................................................................................. 48 2.4 Effects of the Action ........................................................................................................ 62 2.5 Cumulative Effects .......................................................................................................... 76 2.6 Integration and Synthesis ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Site Assessemnt (PDF)
    Site Assessment Report Scotts Valley Hotel SCOTTS VALLEY, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CALIFORNIA December 29, 2014 Prepared by: On behalf of: Johnson Marigot Consulting, LLC City Ventures, LLC Cameron Johnson Mr. Jason Bernstein 88 North Hill Drive, Suite C 444 Spear Street, Suite 200 Brisbane, California 94005 San Francisco, California 94105 1 Table Of Contents SECTION 1: Environmental Setting ................................................................................... 4 A. Project Location ........................................................................................................................... 4 B. Surrounding Land Use ................................................................................................................ 4 C. Study Area Topography and Hydrology ............................................................................... 4 D. Study Area Soil .............................................................................................................................. 5 E. Vegetation Types .......................................................................................................................... 5 SECTION 2: Methods ............................................................................................................... 7 A. Site Visit .......................................................................................................................................... 7 B. Study Limits ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Edible Seeds and Grains of California Tribes
    National Plant Data Team August 2012 Edible Seeds and Grains of California Tribes and the Klamath Tribe of Oregon in the Phoebe Apperson Hearst Museum of Anthropology Collections, University of California, Berkeley August 2012 Cover photos: Left: Maidu woman harvesting tarweed seeds. Courtesy, The Field Museum, CSA1835 Right: Thick patch of elegant madia (Madia elegans) in a blue oak woodland in the Sierra foothills The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its pro- grams and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sex- ual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250–9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Acknowledgments This report was authored by M. Kat Anderson, ethnoecologist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and Jim Effenberger, Don Joley, and Deborah J. Lionakis Meyer, senior seed bota- nists, California Department of Food and Agriculture Plant Pest Diagnostics Center. Special thanks to the Phoebe Apperson Hearst Museum staff, especially Joan Knudsen, Natasha Johnson, Ira Jacknis, and Thusa Chu for approving the project, helping to locate catalogue cards, and lending us seed samples from their collections.
    [Show full text]
  • Annoyance to Sheep by Dipteran Flies, Haematopota Nathani And
    Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 2020; 8(6): 402-406 E-ISSN: 2320-7078 P-ISSN: 2349-6800 Annoyance to sheep by dipteran flies, www.entomoljournal.com JEZS 2020; 8(6): 402-406 Haematopota nathani and Stenopogon ambryon in © 2020 JEZS Received: 02-08-2020 the pasture area of Kodai hills, Tamil Nadu, India Accepted: 09-09-2020 Govindasamy Nagarajan Southern Regional Research Govindasamy Nagarajan Centre, ICAR- Central Sheep and Wool Research Institute, Abstract Mannavanur, Kodaikanal, Tamil The present study was carried out to identify the flies creating annoyance to sheep in the grazing area of Nadu, India SRRC, Mannavanur. Two different kinds of flies were caught from the pasture area by graziers during April 2020. With the help of Dept. of Agricultural Entomology, Centre for Plant Protection studies, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India, it was identified that Haematopota nathani (Cleg fly) and Stenopogon ambryon (Robber fly) were the two dipteran flies causing annoyance and painful bite in sheep and graziers. H. nathani is the holotype found in Kodaikanal, Tamil Nadu, India and the identification of S. ambryon at SRRC, Mannavanur is the first report. Due to the annoyance of these two flies, the problems such as inadequate grass feeding, allergic reactions and weight loss to some extent were observed among sheep. It is recommended that the usage of the ideal trap methods to catch these Cleg flies and Robber flies, Bush cleaning in the grazing area of SRRC, Mannavanur, the studies on the vector potential of H. nathani in the transmission of the infectious diseases such as Bovine Viral Diarrhoea, Anthrax and Brucellosis in sheep and the effects of the salivary secretions of S.
    [Show full text]
  • Diptera: Asilidae) from Tehran Province and Vicinity, Iran
    Journal of Biological Control, 24 (1): 42–46, 2010 Research Article A contribution to the knowledge of robber flies (Diptera: Asilidae) from Tehran province and vicinity, Iran NAJMEH SAMIN1*, HAMID SAKENIN2, SOHRAB IMANI1 and MAHMOOD SHOJAI1 1Department of Entomology, Islamic Azad University, Tehran Science & Research Branch, Tehran, Iran 2College of Agriculture, Islamic Azad University, Ghaemshahr Branch, Mazandaran, Iran *Corresponding author E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] ABSTRACT: Robber flies (Diptera: Asilidae) are one of the important groups of predators in controlling numerous insect groups. A total of 30 asilid species representing 22 genera are listed in this paper from Tehran province. Of these, Neoitamus senectus Richter, Stenopogon rufipilus ruficauda Engel and Rhadinus ungulinus Loew are new records for the fauna of Iran. Additionally, prey records and distributional data are provided for asilid species. KEY WORDS: Asilidae, fauna, prey, Tehran province, Iran (Article chronicle – Received: 23.11.2009; Sent for revision: 25.12.2009; Accepted: 05.01.2010) INTRODUCTION meal, which is generally consumed upon returning to a perch (Lavigne, 2003; Ghahari et al., 2007b). Robber flies (Insecta: Diptera: Asilidae) are an abundant and diverse family known for their predatory There are 1634 species of Asilidae recorded from behavior. As their common name implies, robber flies have the Palearctic region (Geller Grimm, 2005). The Iranian voracious appetites and feed on a vast array of other fauna has been studied recently very well and a total of arthropods, which may help to maintain a healthy balance 8 papers have been published from Iran so far (Oldroyd, among insect populations in various habitats (Joern and 1958; Abbassian-Lintzen, R.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Program for Public Information
    CONSENT CALENDAR Agenda Item # 4 AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY Meeting Date: July 13, 2021 Subject: 2021 Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Program for Public Information Prepared by: Steve Golden, Senior Planner Reviewed by: Jon Biggs, Community Development Director Approved by: Brad Kilger, Interim City Manager Attachment: 1. Resolution 2. 2021 Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional PPI (Five-Year Plan) Initiated by: Staff Previous Council Consideration: None Fiscal Impact: None Environmental Review: Not applicable Policy Question(s) for Council Consideration: • None Summary: • The City currently has a Community Rating System Classification of 8, which allows property owners in the Special Flood Hazard Areas to receive a 10% discount on flood insurance premiums through the National Flood Insurance Program for all new or renewed policies by residents and businesses. • The Program for Public Information is a program under the Community Rating System (CRS) which contributes to achieving the Class 8 rating. The Federal Emergency Management Agency requires the elected body of each community to approve the Program for Public Information in order to receive credit for having a plan pursuant to the CRS guidelines. Staff Recommendation: Approve the 2021 Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Program for Public Information Reviewed By: Interim City Manager City Attorney Acting Finance Director BK JH JM Subject: Approve the 2021 Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Program for Public Information (Five-Year Plan) Purpose Approve the 2021 Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Program for Public Information so the City is eligible to receive credit under the National Flood Insurance Program’s Community Rating System program. Background On April 14, 2015, Valley Water’s Board adopted the original 2015 Santa Clara County Multi- Jurisdictional Program for Public Information (PPI) Five Year Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Waterfall Hikes
    Waterfall Hikes of the Peninsula and South Bay HIKE LOCATIONS PROTECTED LAND COUNTY, STATE, AND NATIONAL PARKS, REGIONAL PRESERVES, AND POSTPROTECTED LAND Berry Creek Falls Big Basin Redwoods State Park 1 MILEAGE 9.5 MILE LOOP ELEVATION 3,200 FT SEASON ALL YEAR ROUTE FROM THE PARK HEADQUARTERS, FOLLOW THE SUNSET TRAIL TO THE BERRY CREEK FALLS TRAIL AND SKYLINE TO SEA TRAIL Big Basin is home to some of the biggest trees and waterfalls in the Santa Cruz Mountains. In the late spring, listen carefully for endangered marbled murrelets nesting near this waterfall. Trail Map Back to Map Gnissah 2011 POST protects and cares for open space, farms, and parkland in and around Silicon Valley. www.openspacetrust.org Tiptoe Falls Pescadero Creek County Park 2 MILEAGE 1.2 MILES ROUND TRIP ELEVATION 500 FT SEASON WINTER, SPRING ROUTE FROM THE PARK HEADQUARTERS, FOLLOW PORTOLA STATE PARK ROAD TO TIPTOE FALLS TRAIL. RETRACE YOUR STEPS This short and relatively easy trail to Tiptoe Falls makes this hike enjoy- able for the whole family. You’ll find this waterfall on Fall Creek - a short, steep tributary of Pescadero Creek. Trail Map Visit Preserve Back to Map Aleksandar Milovojevic 2011 POST protects and cares for open space, farms, and parkland in and around Silicon Valley. www.openspacetrust.org Kings Creek Falls Castle Rock State Park 3 MILEAGE 3 MILE LOOP ELEVATION 1,110 FT SEASON WINTER, SPRING ROUTE FROM SKYLINE BLVD, FOLLOW THE SARATOGA GAP TRAIL TO THE INTERCONNECTOR TRAIL AND RIDGE TRAIL The tranquility found at Kings Creek Falls is just one of the many treasures found at Castle Rock State Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of Texas Lepidoptera Knudson & Bordelon, Jan 2018 Texas Lepidoptera Survey
    1 Checklist of Texas Lepidoptera Knudson & Bordelon, Jan 2018 Texas Lepidoptera Survey ERIOCRANIOIDEA TISCHERIOIDEA ERIOCRANIIDAE TISCHERIIDAE Dyseriocrania griseocapitella (Wlsm.) Eriocraniella mediabulla Davis Coptotriche citripennella (Clem.) Eriocraniella platyptera Davis Coptotriche concolor (Zell.) Coptotriche purinosella (Cham.) Coptotriche clemensella (Cham). Coptotriche sulphurea (F&B) NEPTICULOIDEA Coptotriche zelleriella (Clem.) Tischeria quercitella Clem. NEPTICULIDAE Coptotriche malifoliella (Clem.) Coptotriche crataegifoliae (Braun) Ectoedemia platanella (Clem.) Coptotriche roseticola (F&B) Ectoedemia rubifoliella (Clem.) Coptotriche aenea (F&B) Ectoedemia ulmella (Braun) Asterotriche solidaginifoliella (Clem.) Ectoedemia obrutella (Zell.) Asterotriche heliopsisella (Cham.) Ectoedemia grandisella (Cham.) Asterotriche ambrosiaeella (Cham.) Nepticula macrocarpae Free. Asterotriche helianthi (F&B) Stigmella scintillans (Braun) Asterotriche heteroterae (F&B) Stigmella rhoifoliella (Braun) Asterotriche longeciliata (F&B) Stigmella rhamnicola (Braun) Asterotriche omissa (Braun) Stigmella villosella (Clem.) Asterotriche pulvella (Cham.) Stigmella apicialbella (Cham.) Stigmella populetorum (F&B) Stigmella saginella (Clem.) INCURVARIOIDEA Stigmella nigriverticella (Cham.) Stigmella flavipedella (Braun) PRODOXIDAE Stigmella ostryaefoliella (Clem.) Stigmella myricafoliella (Busck) Tegeticula yuccasella (Riley) Stigmella juglandifoliella (Clem.) Tegeticula baccatella Pellmyr Stigmella unifasciella (Cham.) Tegeticula carnerosanella Pellmyr
    [Show full text]
  • ASILIDAE 48 (Assassin Flies Or Robber Flies)
    SURICATA 5 (2017) 1097 ASILIDAE 48 (Assassin Flies or Robber Flies) Jason G.H. Londt and Torsten Dikow Fig. 48.1. Female of Promachus sp. with hymenopteran prey (Zambia) (photograph © R. Felix). Diagnosis 164, 184), extending medially; face with mystax (Fig. 1), usu- ally macrosetose (Fig. 46), but sometimes only composed of Small- to very large-sized flies (body length: 4–65 mm; wing setae near lower facial margin (Fig. 200); antenna positioned 1 length: 4–40 mm) (Figs 101, 185), that are predatory, capturing in dorsal ∕2 of head (Fig. 46); fore- and mid coxa positioned insects on the wing, and to a lesser extent, resting insects or close together; legs virtually originating at same level to cap- spiders. ture and hold prey (Fig. 46); metakatepisternum usually small (Fig. 46), except in Laphriinae (Fig. 162), not visible between Asilidae can be diagnosed as follows: labellum of proboscis mid and hind coxa. fused to prementum at least ventrally; hypopharynx heavily sclerotised, with dorsal seta-like spicules; labrum short, at most Head dichoptic in both sexes; face usually protruding to 1 ∕2 as long as labium; cibarium trapezoidal; vertex usually de- some extent, forming facial swelling (Fig. 1), but in several pressed (Figs 72, 73); postpronotal lobes fused to scutum (Figs taxa entirely plane (Fig. 200); face with mystacal macrosetae Kirk-Spriggs, A.H. & Sinclair, B.J. (eds). 2017. Manual of Afrotropical Diptera. Volume 2. Nematocerous Diptera and lower Brachycera. Suricata 5. South African National Biodiversity Institute, Pretoria; pp. 1097–1182. 1098 SURICATA 5 (2017) forming mystax (Fig. 1), which varies in extent from only cover- depressed (Figs 72, 80); all 3 ocelli circular, placed on single 1 ing lower facial margin (Fig.
    [Show full text]