DOCSLIB.ORG

Biological Assessment for the Forest Health Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biological Assessment for the Forest Health Project Biological Assessment for the Forest Health Project On the Ocala National Forest Lake, Marion, and Putnam Counties, Florida April 16, 2015 Prepared by: /s/ Jay Garcia Date: 4/16/2015 Jay Garcia Wildlife Biologist Ocala National Forest Reviewed by: /s/ Carrie Sekerak Date: 4/16/2015 Carrie Sekerak Supervisory Wildlife Biologist Ocala National Forest USDA Forest Service USDA Forest Service Ocala National Forest Ocala National Forest Seminole Ranger District Lake George Ranger District 40929 State Road 19 17147 East Highway 40 Umatilla, FL 32784 Silver Springs, FL 34488 (352) 669-3153 (352) 625-2520 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Biological Assessment documents the analysis and rationale for the determination of effects for a specific planned Forest Service (FS) activity on federally threatened, endangered, or sensitive (TES) wildlife species. The Biological Assessment serves to: ensure that FS actions do not contribute to loss of viability or trends towards Federal listing for all TES species; comply with requirements of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) that actions of Federal agencies not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or adversely modify critical habitat of listed species; and provide a process and standard by which to ensure that threatened, endangered, proposed, and sensitive species receive full consideration in the decision making process. Consult the Forest Service Manual, Section 2672.4 for a detailed discussion on objectives and standards for Biological Evaluations. This Biological Assessment (BA) considers the potential effects of the Forest Health Project on Threatened, Endangered, and Proposed (TEP) wildlife species. The best available science on TEP wildlife species was used to document this consideration of potential effects, including recent scientific literature, correspondence with knowledgeable individuals in scientific/land management professions, field surveys, and personal observation. Recent scientific literature used in the document is included in the references section. The wildlife and plant species addressed in this document were selected from the Federally Listed Species in Florida from the USFWS (Table 1). Although not federally listed, the Bald Eagle was included in the analysis to communicate compliance with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Section 7 contains four listed species that occur in or near the Ocala National Forest (ONF) but were excluded from analysis within the document because the project area does not contain suitable habitat or is outside the known range of the species. Table 1. Federally Listed Wildlife and Plant Species Included in Analysis Taxa Scientific Name Common Name Bird Aphelocoma coerulescens Florida Scrub-Jay Bird Picoides borealis Red-cockaded Woodpecker Bird Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald Eagle Reptile Drymarchon corais couperi Eastern Indigo Snake Reptile Neoseps reynoldsi Sand Skink Plant Bonamia grandiflora Florida Bonamia Plant Eriogonum longifolium var. gnaphalifolium Scrub Buckwheat Plant Polygala lewtonii Lewton’s Polygala Plant Clitoria fragrans Scrub Pigeon-wing 2 2.0 CONSULTATION HISTORY In accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, and pursuant to Section 7 of said act, formal consultation on the Biological Assessment for the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for National Forests in Florida was requested by the Regional Forester in a letter dated September 18, 1998 (USDA Forest Service 1999). On December 18, 1998, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a Biological Opinion on the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan. The Biological Opinion concurred with the Forest Service’s “not likely to affect” determination for 13 federally listed species, and provided terms and conditions for incidental take for five wildlife species that received a “may affect” determination. The Biological Opinion also stated that the “level of anticipated take [was] not likely to result in jeopardy to the species” for the Florida Scrub-Jay, Red-cockaded Woodpecker, Eastern Indigo Snake, Sand Skink, Flatwoods Salamander, and Flatwoods Salamander critical habitat (USDA Forest Service 1999). Issuance of the Biological Opinion concluded all formal consultation on the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan for National Forests in Florida. 3.0 PROPOSED ACTION The Ocala National Forest is proposing to implement the Forest Health Project (see Map 1). The project would thin overstocked pines on approximately 3,700 acres and remove off-site sand pines on approximately 4,500 acres. The proposed actions are described below and evaluated with regard to its potential effects on federally listed species. This project is located within Management Area 7.1 (Longleaf/Slash Pine, Adaptive Management, No RCW Management), Management Area 7.3 (Longleaf/Slash Pine, Adaptive Management, No RCW Management), and Management Area 8.2 (Sand Pine, Mixed Regeneration, Large Openings). Note that changes in the desired condition for MA 8.2 and two guidelines (8.2-5 and 8.2-7) have been implemented under LRMP Amendment #8. Also refer to the Amendment 8 Replacement Pages for the changes to the Desired Future Conditions (available at http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/florida/landmanagement/?cid=stelprdb5269794). The goals of the Forest Health Project are to improve forest health by improving groundcover conditions, reducing hazardous fuels, and removing off-site canopy species in favor of restoring longleaf pine or oak scrub habitats. Proposed Actions in Detail Thin overstocked pines. 3,696 acres of overstocked stands of slash and loblolly pines would be thinned. Areas may be thinned by removing every other row or every third row in plantation settings, or by crown tree thinning down to a basal area defined by the site index and the age and diameter of the pines on the site. After harvest, sites will be prescribe burned. Sites in need of groundcover restoration will be chopped post- harvest and then be prescribe burned. If southern pine beetle infestation were to occur within these overstocked stands prior to thinning, affected trees and a buffer strip 100’ around the affected area would be felled and removed via commercial harvest. Openings would likely be 2-10 acres in size. If an affected area is impractical to sell commercially due to volume or location, the timber would be felled and not sold. Harvest sand pine by clearcutting. Stands of sand pine would be harvested via clearcut. Post-harvest activities would vary based on the desired future condition for the site: Remove sand pine, plant longleaf pine. On 796 acres of longleaf sites where sand pine has encroached, 3 sites may be prepared with herbicides or mechanical treatment followed by prescribed burning. Longleaf pines will be planted. Hand release treatments may be needed to address continued sand pine seedling encroachment in the future. Remove sand pine, manage as scrub oak. 1,987 acres of scrub sites would be prescribe burned post- harvest, with mechanical treatments (i.e., roller-chopping) possible to facilitate the burn. These sites would be managed as scrub oak, with the scrub in these areas being regularly burned as a portion of a prescribed burn block. Remove sand pine, seed with sand pine. One 234-acre stand would be clear-cut and re-seeded with sand pine. The sand pine in this stand is not off-site, but will be near the other harvest activities in this project. Sites will be prepped for seeding by a roller-chopper and/or prescribed burning. Harvest sand pine by removal cut or remove sand pines by hack and squirt. 1,514 acres of forested stands with significant sand pine encroachment but with potentially unmerchantable volumes of sand pine present would be treated. Forest stands with an operable quantity of merchantable timber would be sold commercially. Stands with a less than operable quantity of merchantable timber would have the sand pine treated by individual stem injection with herbicide. Prescribed burning. Post-harvest prescribed burns are conducted to benefit various TES species by providing effects such as decreasing coarse woody debris and improving germination and resprouting of fire- adapted plant species. The effects of prescribed burning on TES species are also addressed in the Biological Evaluation of the Effects of Prescribed Burning on Proposed, Endangered, Threatened and Sensitive Wildlife Species (USDA 2006). Prescribed burning provides open areas for scrub-jays and mimics the natural effects on plant dynamics that historically came from wildfires. All proposed actions in the current project are consistent with and do not exceed the scope of activities described within the Revised LRMP and subsequent amendments. 4 Map 1. Proposed treatment areas. 5 3.3 Design Criteria Design criteria are included to minimize or eliminate potential negative effects of proposed actions. General measures are listed below as well as specific applicable criteria cited from the Forestwide Standards & Guidelines section of the LRMP. Project-specific criteria are generated for this project or suggest a stricter application of an existing Standard or Guideline. General Measures Incorporate Best Management Practices (State of Florida guidelines) to prevent any adverse effects to water or wetlands. Maximizing the potential for beneficial effects and minimizing the potential for adverse effects on Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive (TES) plant and animal species. Minimizing the potential for introduction and spread of non-native invasive species (NNIS) such as cogon grass, Japanese climbing
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Comprehensive River Management Plan
    September 2011 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WEKIVA WILD AND SCENIC RIVER SYSTEM Florida __________________________________________________________________________ The Wekiva Wild and Scenic River System was designated by an act of Congress on October 13, 2000 (Public Law 106-299). The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 USC 1247) requires that each designated river or river segment must have a comprehensive river management plan developed. The Wekiva system has no approved plan in place. This document examines two alternatives for managing the Wekiva River System. It also analyzes the impacts of implementing each of the alternatives. Alternative A consists of the existing river management and trends and serves as a basis for comparison in evaluating the other alternative. It does not imply that no river management would occur. The concept for river management under alternative B would be an integrated program of goals, objectives, and actions for protecting and enhancing each outstandingly remarkable value. A coordinated effort among the many public agencies and entities would be needed to implement this alternative. Alternative B is the National Park Service’s and the Wekiva River System Advisory Management Committee’s preferred alternative. Implementing the preferred alternative (B) would result in coordinated multiagency actions that aid in the conservation or improvement of scenic values, recreation opportunities, wildlife and habitat, historic and cultural resources, and water quality and quantity. This would result in several long- term beneficial impacts on these outstandingly remarkable values. This Environmental Assessment was distributed to various agencies and interested organizations and individuals for their review and comment in August 2010, and has been revised as appropriate to address comments received.
    [Show full text]
  • Rhexia January 20
    The Rhexia Paynes Prairie Chapter of the Florida Native Plant Society www.paynesprairie.fnpschapter January 2020 January General Meeting Overview of the SJRWMD with Jennifer Mitchell, Public Communications Coordinator Tuesday, January 21, 2019, 7:00 p.m. Plant ID Workshop at 6:30 p.m. Unitarian-Universalist Fellowship Hall, 4225 NW 34th Street, Gainesville, FL 32605 Jennifer Mitchell is Public Communica- grow, we must reduce per capita water usage tions Coordinator with the St. Johns River Wa- to ensure adequate water supply for people ter Management District. Her presentation will and nature. Learn more about how the district give an overview of the District including in- is working to protect and restore the district formation on water use and district lands. lands in your area. Established in 1972, the district is an envi- Jennifer is passionate about Florida’s in- ronmental regulatory agency of the state. In credible water resources and hopes to spark this presentation, learn what the district does interest in what you can do to help protect Flor- to accomplish its four missions of providing ida’s waterways. After earning her Ph.D. in water quality, water supply, flood protection, Forest Ecology from Auburn University, she and maintaining natural systems. Our district completed a post-doc at the University of Flor- properties are one facet of accomplishing ida in Soil and Water Science. Because she these missions. realizes that greater results will come from more In 2018, 980 million gallons of water were used a day community participation, she now works to spread the across the SJRWMD.
    [Show full text]
  • Seminole State Forest Soils Map
    EXHIBIT I Management Procedures for Archaeological and Historical Sites and Properties on State-Owned or Controlled Lands Management Procedures for Archaeological and Historical Sites and Properties on State-Owned or Controlled Properties (revised February 2007) These procedures apply to state agencies, local governments, and non-profits that manage state- owned properties. A. General Discussion Historic resources are both archaeological sites and historic structures. Per Chapter 267, Florida Statutes, ‘Historic property’ or ‘historic resource’ means any prehistoric district, site, building, object, or other real or personal property of historical, architectural, or archaeological value, and folklife resources. These properties or resources may include, but are not limited to, monuments, memorials, Indian habitations, ceremonial sites, abandoned settlements, sunken or abandoned ships, engineering works, treasure trove, artifacts, or other objects with intrinsic historical or archaeological value, or any part thereof, relating to the history, government, and culture of the state.” B. Agency Responsibilities Per State Policy relative to historic properties, state agencies of the executive branch must allow the Division of Historical Resources (Division) the opportunity to comment on any undertakings, whether these undertakings directly involve the state agency, i.e., land management responsibilities, or the state agency has indirect jurisdiction, i.e. permitting authority, grants, etc. No state funds should be expended on the undertaking until the Division has the opportunity to review and comment on the project, permit, grant, etc. State agencies shall preserve the historic resources which are owned or controlled by the agency. Regarding proposed demolition or substantial alterations of historic properties, consultation with the Division must occur, and alternatives to demolition must be considered.
    [Show full text]
  • PALM 31 3 Working.Indd
    Volume 31: Number 3 > 2014 The Quarterly Journal of the Florida Native Plant Society Palmetto Rare Plant Conservation at Bok Tower Gardens ● Yaupon Redeemed ● The Origin of Florida Scrub Plant Diversity Donna Bollenbach and Juliet Rynear A Collaboration of Passion, Purpose and Science Bok Tower Gardens Rare Plant Conservation Program “Today nearly 30 percent of the native fl ora in the United States is considered to be 1 of conservation concern. Without human intervention, many of these plants may be gone within our lifetime. Eighty percent of the at-risk species are closely related to plants with economic value somewhere in the world, and more than 50 percent are related to crop species...but it can be saved.” – Center for Plant Conservation Ask the average Florida citizen to name at least one endangered native animal in the state and they will likely mention the Florida manatee or the Florida panther. Ask the same person to name one endangered native plant and they give you a blank stare. Those of us working to conserve Florida’s unique plant species know this all 2 too well, and if the job isn’t diffi cult enough, a lack of funding and support for the conservation of land supporting imperiled plant communities makes it harder. Bok Tower Gardens Rare Plant Conservation Program is one of 39 botanical institutions throughout the United States that collaborate with the Center for Plant Conservation (CPC) to prevent the extinction of native plants in the United States. Created in 1984, CPC institutions house over 750 living specimens of the nation’s most endangered native plants, the largest living collection of rare plants in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Plant Insect Interactions Day 1 Thursday, May 9, 2013
    Florida Rare Plant Task Force – Rare Plant Insect Interactions Day 1 Thursday, May 9, 2013 8:00-8:30 registration 8:30-8:45 Welcome – David Price, President Bok Tower Gardens 8:45-9:00 Introduction to meeting SESSION I 9:00-9:50 Mark Deyrup, Archbold Biological Station, “Riddles of Rare Plants and Insects in Florida Scrub” (30 MINUTE PRESENTATIONS) 9:50-10:20 Alex Segarra, Merari Feliciano and Rosa A. Franqui, Dept. Crops & Agro-environmental Sciences College of Agriculture, University of Puerto Rico, “Metaphors from Noah's Ark and the lessons of receiving "non- native” insects on board.” 10:20-10:45 break 10:45-11:15 Brenda Molano-Flores, University of Illinois, “From the MidWest to the Florida Panhandle: rare plant/insect interactions” 11:15-11:45 Patti J. Anderson, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry, “Regulating Interactions: DPI, Rare Plants, and Insect Pests” 11:45-12:15 Lunch – catered 12:30 – 1:25 Tour of the gardens by Greg Kramer, Director of Horticulture, and of the Rare Plant Conservation Program by Glen Bupp, Rare Plant Curator SESSION II (30 minute presentations) 1:30-2:00 Pedro F Quintana-Ascencio, Elizabeth Stephens, and Matthew Tye, Department of Biology, University of Central Florida, “Experimental demography: HoW field experiments and population modeling can inform restoration and management of Florida Scrub” 2:00-2:30 John Geiger, Florida International University, “The endangered vine Ipomoea microdactyla (Convolvulaceae): Butterflies good, caterpillars bad, and fire best.” 2:30-3:00 break 3:00-3:30 Matthew Richardson, USDA-ARS, “Influence of habitat on pollinators and pollination success of Lakela’s Mint.” 3:30-4:00 Anne Cox, Ecolo-G, Inc, “Asimina tetramera, insect interactions, pollinators and predators” 4:30--5:00 Group Discussion: Insect – Rare Plant Issues 5:00-5:45 Social and poster session.
    [Show full text]
  • Storm L. Richards & Associates, Inc
    STORM L. RICHARDS & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS, FEASIBILITY STUDIES, & PERMITTING 1804 MAPLE AVENUE SANFORD, FLORIDA 32771-3358 Email: [email protected] (407) 323-9021 FAX: (803) 547-3093 DR. JEANNE FILLMAN-RICHARDS, President DR. STORM L. RICHARDS, Principal May 9, 2017 Mr. Will Reynolds NARR Construction Services 1916 Eloise Cove Drive Winter Haven, Florida 33884 RE: Threatened/Endangered Species Inventory for the 7753 & 7685 Conroy Windermere Road sites located at 7753 & 7685 Conroy Windermere Road, Orlando, Orange County, Florida 32835 Dear Mr. Reynolds: The subject proposed 7753 & 7685 Conroy Windermere Road sites are approximately 4.03 acres with a residence and 0.46 acres sites in Orlando, Orange County. The subject property consists of two (2) parcels. The subject sites are located on Conroy Windermere Road (see Appendix A— Maps of Site). This report represents the enumeration of protected species based on Florida’s Endangered Species, Threatened Species, and Species of Special Concern (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 29 January 2004). The list was derived by field investigation conducted in May 2017. The intent of this report will be to inventory and identify occurring threatened and endangered species on the site. Site Description The subject property consists of two parcels. The smaller of the two parcels, 7685 Conroy Windermere Road, is totally upland is 0.46 acres. The larger lot is 7753 Conroy Windermere Road and is 4.03 acres with a small wetland in the northern limits of the site that has been flagged, stationed and mapped (See Appendix A—Maps of Site). The wetland on lot 7753 will not be impacted.
    [Show full text]
  • Host Plants for Sarasota County Butterflies
    "Host Plants for Frequently Seen Sarasota Butterflies" Alphabetical Order by Common Name Swallowtail Giant Swallowtail Polydamas Swallowtail Blue Cassius Zebra & Gulf & Cloudless Orange-barred & Monarch Queen Peacock White Hairstreak Gray Tropical Checkered Skipper Long-Tailed Skipper Common Name Scientific/Species Name Black Beggarweeds Desmodium spp (tortuosum) Native 1 Broomweed Sida ulmifolia acuta Native 1 1 Butterfly Pea: Atlantic Pigeonwings Clitoria mariana Native 1 Butterfly Pea: Fragrant Pigeonwings clitoria fragrans Native 1 Butterfly Weed Aslcepsia tuberosa Native 1 Cat 1 Invasive - Calico Flower Aristolochia elegans Do NOT Plant 1 Candlestick Plant Senna alata Non-Native 1 Cape Leadwort or Plumbago Plumbago auriculata Non-Native 1 Cat 1 Invasive - Christmas Senna Senna Pedula Do NOT Plant Citrus spp Citrus spp. Non-Native 1 Corky Stemmed Passiflora suberosa Native 1 Cultivated Herbs 1 Downy Milkpea Galactia volubilis Native 1 1 Eastern Milkpea Galactia regularis Native 1 1 False Mallow Malvastrum corchorifolium Native 1 Gaping Dutchman's Pipe Aristolochia ringens Non-Native 1 Garden Beans 1 1 1 Giant Dutchman's Pipe Aristolochia gigantea Non-Native 1 Giant Milkweed Calotropis gigantea Non-Native 1 Hercules Club Zanthoxylum clava-herculis Native 1 Incense Passionvine Passiflora x 'Incense" Non-Native 1 Indian Hemp Sida rhombifolia Native 1 Matchweed/Fog Fruit Phyla nodiflora Native 1 Maypop passionvine passiflora incarnata Native 1 1 "Host Plants for Frequently Seen Sarasota Butterflies" Alphabetical Order by Common Name Swallowtail
    [Show full text]
  • Rare Vascular Plant Taxa Associated with the Longleaf Pine Ecosystems: Patterns in Taxonomy and Ecology
    Rare Vascular Plant Taxa Associated with the Longleaf Pine Ecosystems: Patterns in Taxonomy and Ecology Joan Walker U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Department of Forest Resources, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634 ABSTRACT Ecological, taxonomic and biogeographical characteristics are used to describe the group of 187 rare vascular plant taxa associated with longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) throughout its range. Taxonomic and growth form distributions mirror the patterns of common plus rare taxa in the flora. Most of the species have rather narrow habitat preferences, and narrow geo­ graphic ranges, but a few rare sp~cies with broad habitat tolerances and wider geographic ranges are identified. Ninety-six local endemics are associated with longleaf pine ecosystems. This incidence is as high as in other comparably-sized endemic-rich areas in North America. A distinct geographic trend in rare species composition is indicated. Species fall into 4 groups: Florida longleaf associates, south Atlantic coastal plain, east Gulf coastal plain, and west Gulf coastal plain species. Distributional factors that produce rarity must be considered in the development of conser­ vation strategies. Overall, conserving longleaf communities rangewide will protect .large ~ numbers of rare plant taxa in Southeastern United States. INTRODUCTION 1986), and inevitably the strategies required to con­ serve them will differ. Recently Hardin and White (1989) effectively focused conservationists' attentions on the high The purposes of this study are to (1) identify numbers of rare species associated with wiregrass the rare species associated with longleaf pine eco­ (Aristida stricta), a grass that dominates the ground systems rangewide; (2) characterize the rare spe­ layer of longleaf communities through a large part cies taxonomically and ecologically, in order to of its range, and over a broad range of longleaf identify patterns that may distinguish this group habitats.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Scrub Is a Plant Community Easily Recognized
    Florida Scrub Including Scrubby Flatwoods and Scrubby High Pine lorida scrub is a plant community easily recognized FNAI Global Rank: G2/G3 by the dominance of evergreen shrubs and frequent FNAI State Rank: S2 Fpatches of bare, white sand. With more than two Federally Listed Species in S. FL: 32 dozen threatened and endangered species dependent upon scrub, the entire community is itself endangered. Recovery State Listed Species in S. FL: 100 of the community and its associated plants and animals will depend upon land acquisition and effective land Florida scrub. Original photograph courtesy of The management. Nature Conservancy. Synonymy Florida scrub in its various phases has been called xeric scrub, sand scrub, big scrub, sand pine scrub, oak scrub, evergreen oak scrub, dune oak scrub, evergreen scrub forest, slash pine scrub, palmetto scrub, rosemary scrub, and rosemary bald. Florida scrubs may be classified as coastal or interior. Scrubs are often named by the dominant plant species, as in rosemary scrub, sand pine scrub, palmetto scrub, or oak scrub. Some authors have confused closed-canopy forests of sand pine trees with scrub. Scrubs that are very recent in origin, usually a result of mans activities, are called pioneer scrubs. Communities intermediate between scrub and pine flatwoods have been called dry or xeric flatwoods but now are referred to as scrubby flatwoods. Communities intermediate between scrub and high pine have been called southern ridge sandhills, hickory scrub, yellow sand scrub, turkey oak scrub, turkey oak barrens, and natural turkey oak barrens, but probably are best referred to as scrubby high pine.
    [Show full text]
  • Pigeon Wings Clitoria Fragrans Small
    Pigeon Wings Clitoria fragrans Small igeon wings is an erect perennial herb belonging to Federal Status: Threatened (April 27, 1993) the pea family. The distribution of the species is Critical Habitat: None Designated P limited mainly to the rapidly disappearing scrub Florida Status: Endangered habitat of the Lake Wales Ridge in Highlands and Polk Recovery Plan Status: Revision (May 18, 1999) counties. Loss of habitat to agriculture and residential development resulted in the listing of this species. Like Geographic Coverage: Rangewide most other imperiled scrub plants, habitat acquisition and implementation of proper land management techniques Figure 1. County distribution of pigeon wings. are needed to ensure the continued survival of the pigeon wings. This account represents a revision of the existing recovery plan for the pigeon wings (FWS 1996). Description The pigeon wings (Clitoria fragrans) is a 15 to 100 cm tall, long-lived perennial herb with an erect habit. The thick horizontal root, which may grow to more than 2 m long, bears one to several purplish, glaucous, wiry, very straight stems. The somewhat leathery leaves consist of three leaflets. Leaflets of the upper leaves are obtuse at the tip and narrower than those of lower leaves (58 FR 25746). Clitoria fragrans have chasmogamous (insect pollinating) and cleistogamous (self-pollinating) flowers. The chasmogamous flowers usually occur in pairs, each corolla consisting of one 3.5 to 4.5 cm-long (Fantz 1977) or 4.5 to 5 cm-long (Isely 1990) standard petal and a small white keel. The common name of this species refers to the petals of the chasmogamous flowers, which resemble wings (Fantz 1979).
    [Show full text]
  • The Diversity and Floral Hosts of Bees at the Archbold Biological Station, Florida (Hymenoptera: Apoidea)
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Center for Systematic Entomology, Gainesville, Insecta Mundi Florida March 2002 The diversity and floral hosts of bees at the Archbold Biological Station, Florida (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) Mark Deyrup Archbold Biological Station, Lake Placid, FL Jayanthi Edirisinghe Department of Zoology, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka Beth Norden National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/insectamundi Part of the Entomology Commons Deyrup, Mark; Edirisinghe, Jayanthi; and Norden, Beth, "The diversity and floral hosts of bees at the Archbold Biological Station, Florida (Hymenoptera: Apoidea)" (2002). Insecta Mundi. 544. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/insectamundi/544 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for Systematic Entomology, Gainesville, Florida at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Insecta Mundi by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. INSECTA MUNDI. Vol. 16. No. 1-3. March-Se~tember.2002 8 7 The diversity and floral hosts of bees at the Archbold Biological Station, Florida (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) Mark Deyrup Archbold Biological Station P.O. Box 2057 Lake Placid, FL 33862 Jayanthi Edirisinghe Department of Zoology, University of Peradeniya Peradeniya, Sri Lanka Beth Norden Department of Systematic Biology Entomology Section, MRC - 188 National Museum of Natural History Washington, D.C. 20560 Abstract. A list is provided of 113 species of bees and their 157 known floral hosts at the Archbold Biological Station(ABS), a 2105 ha site on the Lake Wales Ridge in Highlands County in south-central Florida.
    [Show full text]
  • Menges Sandhill 02-002.Indd
    Sandhill Restoration Studies and Experimental Introduction of Ziziphus celata at Lake Wales Ridge National Wildlife Refuge FINAL REPORT Eric S. Menges Carl W. Weekley Gretel L. Clarke 2008 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 620 South Meridian Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-1600 Sandhill Restoration Studies and Experimental Introduction of Ziziphus celata at Lake Wales Ridge National Wildlife Refuge Eric S. Menges Carl W. Weekley Gretel L. Clarke Archbold Biological Station P.O. Box 2057 Lake Placid, FL 33862 Submitted as final report for Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Project NG02-002 2008 This report is the result of a project supported by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s Nongame Wildlife Trust Fund. It has been reviewed for clarity, style, and typographical errors, but has not received peer review. Any opinions or recommendations in this report are those of the authors and do not represent policy of the Commission. Suggested citation: Menges, E. S., C. W. Weekley, and G. L. Clarke. 2008. Sandhill restoration studies and experimental introduction of Ziziphus celata at Lake Wales Ridge National Wildlife Refuge. Final report. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Tallahassee, Florida, USA. Available from <http://research.myfwc.com/publications/>. This Agency does not allow discrimination by race, color, nationality, sex, or handicap. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity or facility of this agency, write to Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 620 S. Meridian St., Tallahassee, FL 32399-1600, or to Office for Human Relations, USFWS, Dept. of Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240. Sandhill Restoration Studies and Experimental Introduction of Ziziphus celata at Lake Wales Ridge National Wildlife Refuge Eric S.
    [Show full text]