The Essex Field Club
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
The Essex Field Club
THE ESSEX FIELD CLUB DEPARTMENT OF LIFE SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF EAST LONDON ROMFORD ROAD, STRATFORD, LONDON, E15 4LZ NEWSLETTER NO. 16 February 1996 FROM THE PRESIDENT How would you describe the aims and activities of the present day Essex Field Club? When the Club first came into being it might not have been that inappropriate to regard its activities as encompassing ‘hunting, shooting and fishing’, the collection of dead voucher specimens of everything living in Essex being one of the Club’s primary objectives. Today however, our members would regard themselves as anything but, members of an organization that might be misconstrued as indulging in ‘field sports’ . Our Club is surely primarily a natural history society, with a present-day emphasis an recording, conservatian and natural history education. Your Council had a special meeting on the 31 January to look at the present and potential future role of the EFC in Essex, debating just how we could give the Club a new attractive image that would give us a steadily increasing membership, and how best we might interrelate to such organisations as the Essex Wildlife Trust, English Nature, the National Biological Records Centre and the local county natural history societies. Particularly in view of our proposed partnership in a new museum on Epping Forest. As a result of this meeting Council will be proposing at the next AGM that the Club should change its name to the ESSEX NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY, and redefine its objectives, and rules, in line with its modern image. We propose subtitling the new name with ‘formerly the Essex Field Club’ for a few years, and retention of our ‘speckled wood on blackberry leaf logo’ , to give us continuity. -
Environmental Weeds of Coastal Plains and Heathy Forests Bioregions of Victoria Heading in Band
Advisory list of environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria Heading in band b Advisory list of environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria Heading in band Advisory list of environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria Contents Introduction 1 Purpose of the list 1 Limitations 1 Relationship to statutory lists 1 Composition of the list and assessment of taxa 2 Categories of environmental weeds 5 Arrangement of the list 5 Column 1: Botanical Name 5 Column 2: Common Name 5 Column 3: Ranking Score 5 Column 4: Listed in the CALP Act 1994 5 Column 5: Victorian Alert Weed 5 Column 6: National Alert Weed 5 Column 7: Weed of National Significance 5 Statistics 5 Further information & feedback 6 Your involvement 6 Links 6 Weed identification texts 6 Citation 6 Acknowledgments 6 Bibliography 6 Census reference 6 Appendix 1 Environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria listed alphabetically within risk categories. 7 Appendix 2 Environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria listed by botanical name. 19 Appendix 3 Environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria listed by common name. 31 Advisory list of environmental weeds of coastal plains and heathy forests bioregions of Victoria i Published by the Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and Environment Melbourne, March2008 © The State of Victoria Department of Sustainability and Environment 2009 This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. -
Ferns As a Shade Crop in Forest Farming
FERNS AS A FOREST FARMING CROP: EFFECTS OF LIGHT LEVELS ON GROWTH AND FROND QUALITY OF SELECTED SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL IN MISSOURI A Thesis presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School University of Missouri - Columbia In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science by JOHN D. KLUTHE Dr. H. E. ‘Gene’ Garrett, Thesis Supervisor May 2006 The undersigned, appointed by the Dean of the Graduate School, have examined the thesis entitled FERNS AS A FOREST FARMING CROP: EFFECTS OF LIGHT LEVELS ON GROWTH AND FROND QUALITY OF SELECTED SPECIES WITH POTENTIAL IN MISSOURI Presented by John D. Kluthe a candidate for the degree of Masters of Science and hereby certify that in their opinion it is worthy of acceptance. _______________________________________H.Garrett _______________________________________W.Kurtz _______________________________________M.Ellersieck _______________________________________C.Starbuck ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I thank H. E. ‘Gene’ Garrett, Director of the University of Missouri Center for Agroforestry who has patiently guided me to completion of this Master’s thesis. Thanks to my other advisors who have also been very helpful; William B. Kurtz, University of Missouri – Professor of Forestry and Director of Undergraduate Studies in the School of Natural Resources; Christopher Starbuck, University of Missouri – Associate Professor of Horticulture. Furthermore, thanks to Mark Ellersieck, University of Missouri – Professor of Statistics; and Michele Warmund, University of Missouri – Professor of Plant Sciences. Dr. Ellersieck was very helpful analyzing the statistics while Dr. Warmund assisted with defining color with the use of a spectrophotometer. Many thanks to Bom kwan Chun who gladly helped with this study’s chores at HARC. -
Plants That Weren't Tough Enough
University of Alaska Fairbanks School of Natural Resources and Extension Georgeson Botanical Notes No. 82 (1996) - Revised 2014 Plants that Weren’t Tough Enough by Pat Holloway and Pat Wagner Any researcher working in the Far North is well aware of the beneficial attributes of snow as an insulating blanket for both plants and small animals. We learned in graphic detail just how important snow is in Alaska this past winter. The total accumu- lation of snow through January 1996 was only 6 inches (15.2 cm). During that time the minimum winter air temperature at the Garden reached -43oF (-42oC) in December and -48oF (-44oC) in January. Thirty-three percent of the experimental plants in the Garden were killed by this low snowfall. Damage could have been caused by extreme desiccation, frost heaving or an inability to tolerate low temperature extremes. Whatever the cause, the plants are dead, and we will have lots of room next season for new experiments. Some of the plants were heartbreaking losses such as the lilies, tulips, columbines and grape hyacinths. Some grape hyacinths finally emerged in mid summer, but it was quite obvious the damage was severe. Other plants such as tansy, we won’t miss at all because of its invasive nature. Nearly all of the plants that were growing well prior to last winter will be tested again at a later date. One thing is for certain, all the plants listed below will now come with a warning - needs snow cover to survive! Even more remarkable than this list is the one showing the plants that endured this severe winter. -
Fall 2001 HARDY FERN FOUNDATION QUARTERLY Marlin Rickard to Lecture
THE HARDY FERN FOUNDATION P.O. Box 166 Medina, WA 98039-0166 (206) 870-5363 Web site: www.hardvfems.org The Hardy Fern Foundation was founded in 1989 to establish a comprehen¬ sive collection of the world’s hardy ferns for display, testing, evaluation, public education and introduction to the gardening and horticultural community. Many rare and unusual species, hybrids and varieties are being propagated from spores and tested in selected environments for their different degrees of hardiness and ornamental garden value. The primary fern display and test garden is located at, and in conjunction with, The Rhododendron Species Botanical Garden at the Weyerhaeuser Corpo¬ rate Headquarters, in Federal Way, Washington. Satellite fem gardens are at the Stephen Austin Arboretum, Nacogdoches, Texas, Birmingham Botanical Gardens, Birmingham, Alabama, California State University at Sacramento, Sacramento, California, Coastal Maine Botanical Garden, Boothbay, Maine, Dallas Arboretum, Dallas, Texas, Denver Botanic Gardens. Denver, Colorado, Georgeson Botanical Garden, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska, Harry P. Leu Garden, Orlando, Florida, Inniswood Metro Gardens, Columbus, Ohio, Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden, Richmond, Virginia, New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, New York, and Strybing Arboretum, San Francisco, California. The fem display gardens are at Bainbridge Island Library, Bainbridge Island, WA, Lakewold, Tacoma, Washington, Les Jardins de Metis, Quebec, Canada, University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado, and Whitehall Historic Home and Garden, Louisville, KY. Hardy Fem Foundation members participate in a spore exchange, receive a quarterly newsletter and have first access to ferns as they are ready for distribution. Cover Design by Willanna Bradner HARDY FERN FOUNDATION QUARTERLY THE HARDY FERN FOUNDATION Quarterly Volume 11 • No. -
DISSERTATION Copy 2
Impacts%of%semi7natural%grazing%on% vegetation%biodiversity:%A%study%of%Knepp% Castle%Estate’s%re7wilding%project% Charlotte)L)Bottone) Geography)MA)(Hons)) 2016) Word%count:%11,636% !1 Declaration)of)originality)) 'I%hereby%declare%that%this%dissertation%has%been%composed%by%me%and%is%based%on%my%own% work’% Signature:_________________________% !2 Acknowledgements) Firstly,%I%would%like%to%thank%my%dissertation%supervisor,%Eva%Panagiotakopulu,%for%going%above% and%beyond.% I%would%also%like%to%thank%Charlie%Burrell%and%Penny%Green%at%Knepp%for%allowing%me%to%carry% out%this%research%and%answering%any%questions%that%I%had.%% I%am%thankful%for%all%the%help%and%advice%Michael%Sutcliffe%and%my%family%gave%me.% Finally%thanks%to%my%fellow%geographers,%the%friends%I%have%made%here%at%Edinburgh%have% provided%endless%moral%support%and%comradery.% !3 Abstract)) Re7wilding%is%a%revolutionary%approach%to%conservation,%one%that%aims%to%restore%natural% processes%and%keystone%species%to%play%a%more%prominent%role%in%the%landscape.%In%addition,% re7wilding%allows%society%to%reconnect%with%nature.%Knepp%Castles%Estate’s%re7wilding%project%is% a%unique%experiment%which%endeavours%to%re7introduce%large%grazing%herbivores%into%the% landscape%in%the%hope%that%this%will%eventually%enable%natural%processes%to%take%place%and% improve%Sloral%and%faunal%biodiversity.%This%study%aims%to%assess%the%impacts%of%the%semi7 natural%grazing%at%Knepp,%as%well%as%the%ways%in%which%it%has%affected%the%vegetation% biodiversity.%This%was%achieved%by%carrying%out%vegetation%surveys%and%applying%the%data%to% -
Anthomyiidae Recording Scheme Newsletter No. 12
Anthomyiidae Recording Scheme Newsletter No 12 Spring 2020 By the time you read this in print, the collecting season for Anthomyiidae could once again be well under way. The previous Newsletter a year ago (see Bulletin No 86) highlighted three genera, Egle, Chiastocheta and Leucophora which are particularly suitable for targeted recording in the spring, so please look back at that issue if you are not already familiar with them. If you have good relations with local bee recorders, you might encourage them to look out for and catch Leucophora females lurking near the burrows of solitary bees. Noting the bee species on any such records would give added value. This issue reviews the continuing growth of the Recording Scheme database as well as where to find data on Anthomyiidae from other sources. Another good genus for targeted recording later in the season is Chirosia with its twelve species currently recorded in Britain, all of whose larvae attack ferns. As with Pegomya leaf-miners discussed in Newsletter No 11, the feeding signs of some species are popular amongst recorders, but the association with particular species is not as clear-cut as previously suppose, as discussed in the final item. Current State of Recording Database The number of records credited to the Anthomyiidae Recording Scheme on the NBN Atlas was 17,374 in early December 2019. This is a 153% increase on the 6846 which were initially uploaded to IRECORD in autumn 2017. However, the number of Anthomyiidae records on the NBN Atlas amounted to 30,643, a factor 1.76 greater. -
Plant List Spring Summer Autumn Spring Summer Autumn
Plant list Spring Summer Autumn Spring Summer Autumn Angelica Wild Bitter-vetch Angelica sylvestris x x Lathyrus linifolius x x Arrowgrass Marsh Blinks Triglochin palustre x x Montia fontana x Asphodel Bog Bluebell Narthecium ossifragum x Hyacinthoides non-scripta x x Bedstraw Heath Bracken Galium saxatile x Pteridium aquilinum x x Bedstraw Marsh Bramble Galium palustre x Rubus fruticosus x x Bird’s foot trefoil Common Bristly Oxtongue Lotus corniculatus x Helminthotheca echioides x Bird’s foot trefoil Greater Buckler-fern Broad Lotus pedunculatus x x x Dryopteris dilatata x x Bistort Alpine Buttercup Bulbous Persicaria vivipara x Ranunculus bulbosus Bitter-cress Wavy Buttercup Creeping Cardamine flexuosa x x x Ranunculus repens x x x Spring Summer Autumn Spring Summer Autumn Buttercup Meadow Club-rush Bristle Ranunculus acris x x x Isolepis setacea x x Butterfly-orchid Greater Cock’s Foot Platanthera chlorantha x Dactylis glomerata x Butterwort Common Corn Spurrey Pinguicula vularis x Spergula arvensis x Canary Grass Reed Cornflower Phalaris arundinacea x x Centaurea cyanus x Cat’s Ear Cotton-grass Common Hypochaeris radicata x x Eriophorum angustifolium x x Challock Cotton-grass Hare’s-tail Sinapis arvensis x Eriophorum vaginatum x Chickweed Common Cow Parsley Stellaria media x Anthriscus sylvestris x Cleavers Crested Dog’s Tail Galium aparine x Cynosurus cristatus x x Clover White Cuckooflower Trifolium repens x x Cardamine pratensis x x Clover Red Cudweed Marsh Trifolium pratense x x Gnaphalium uliginosum x x Clover Zigzag Daisy Trifolium -
Diptera : Anthomyiidae)
Title JAPANESE RECORDS OF ANTHOMYIID FILES (DIPTERA : ANTHOMYIIDAE) Author(s) Suwa, Masaaki Insecta matsumurana. New series : journal of the Faculty of Agriculture Hokkaido University, series entomology, 55, Citation 203-244 Issue Date 1999-03 Doc URL http://hdl.handle.net/2115/9895 Type bulletin (article) File Information 55_p203-244.pdf Instructions for use Hokkaido University Collection of Scholarly and Academic Papers : HUSCAP INSECTA MATSUMURANA NEW SERIES 55: 203-244 MARCH 1999 JAPANESE RECORDS OF ANTIIOMYIID FLIES (DIPTERA: ANTIIOMYIIDAE) By MAsAAKI SUWA Abstract SUWA, M. 1999. Japanese records of anthomyiid flies (Diptera: Anthomyiidae). Ins. matsum. n. s. 55: 203-244. Up to the present 216 species of Anthomyiidae belonging to 29 genera have been recorded from Japan. Of them 42 species (19.4 %) are resticted to Japan in their known distribution. For future discussion on the biogeography, all the known species of the family from Japan are enumerated together with their localities including newly added ones if present. Each species is given the reference which recorded the species for the first time in Japan. New host records or additional information on their biology is given for some species. Author saddress. Systematic Entomology, Faculty ofAgriculture, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, 060-8589 Japan. Contents. Introduction - Japanese records of Anthomyiidae - Acknowledgements - References. Supported by the Special Grant-in-Aid for Promotion of Education and Science in Hokkaido University provided by the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture, Japan. 203 IN1RoDucnoN Some anthomyiid species, e.g., Delia platura, Delia antiqua, Pegomya cunicularia and Strobilomyia laricicola, are serious pests to agricultural crops or to coniferous trees, and there have been a lot of reports in applied field on these injurious insects in Japan. -
Cambridgeshire & Essex Butterfly Conservation
Butterfly Conservation Regional Action Plan For Anglia (Cambridgeshire, Essex, Suffolk & Norfolk) This action plan was produced in response to the Action for Butterflies project funded by WWF, EN, SNH and CCW This regional project has been supported by Action for Biodiversity Cambridgeshire and Essex Branch Suffolk branch BC Norfolk branch BC Acknowledgements The Cambridgeshire and Essex branch, Norfolk branch and Suffolk branch constitute Butterfly Conservation’s Anglia region. This regional plan has been compiled from individual branch plans which are initially drawn up from 1997-1999. As the majority of the information included in this action plan has been directly lifted from these original plans, credit for this material should go to the authors of these reports. They were John Dawson (Cambridgeshire & Essex Plan, 1997), James Mann and Tony Prichard (Suffolk Plan, 1998), and Jane Harris (Norfolk Plan, 1999). County butterfly updates have largely been provided by Iris Newbery and Dr Val Perrin (Cambridgeshire and Essex), Roland Rogers and Brian Mcllwrath (Norfolk) and Richard Stewart (Suffolk). Some of the moth information included in the plan has been provided by Dr Paul Waring, David Green and Mark Parsons (BC Moth Conservation Officers) with additional county moth data obtained from John Dawson (Cambridgeshire), Brian Goodey and Robin Field (Essex), Barry Dickerson (Huntingdon Moth and Butterfly Group), Michael Hall and Ken Saul (Norfolk Moth Survey) and Tony Prichard (Suffolk Moth Group). Some of the micro-moth information included in the plan was kindly provided by A. M. Emmet. Other individuals targeted with specific requests include Graham Bailey (BC Cambs. & Essex), Ruth Edwards, Dr Chris Gibson (EN), Dr Andrew Pullin (Birmingham University), Estella Roberts (BC, Assistant Conservation Officer, Wareham), Matthew Shardlow (RSPB) and Ken Ulrich (BC Cambs. -
Harlow District Council Local Wildlife Site Review
HARLOW DISTRICT COUNCIL LOCAL WILDLIFE SITE REVIEW 2010 FINAL March 2011 EECOS Abbotts Hall Farm, Great Wigborough, Colchester, Essex, CO5 7RZ 01621 862986, [email protected] Company Registered No. 2853947 VAT Registered No. 945 7459 77 IMPORTANT NOTES Nomenclature The terms "Site of Importance for Nature Conservation" (SINC), “Wildlife Sites” and “County Wildlife Site” (CoWS) used in previous reports are here replaced by the currently generally accepted term of “Local Wildlife Site” (LoWS). The term should be viewed in a national context, with “Local” referring to county level significance. Rationale It is hoped that this identification of Local Wildlife Sites is not seen as a hindrance to the livelihood of those landowners affected, or an attempt to blindly influence the management of such sites. It is an attempt to describe the wildlife resource we have in the county as a whole, which has been preserved thus far as a result of the management by landowners. The Essex Wildlife Trust and the Local and Unitary Authorities of Essex hope to be able to help landowners retain and enhance this biodiversity for the future. In recent years, the existence of a Local Wildlife Site on a farm has been seen as an advantage when applying for grant-aid from agri-environment schemes, with such grants favouring areas with a proven nature conservation interest. Public Access Identification as a Local Wildlife Site within this report does not confer any right of public access to the site, above and beyond any Public Rights of Way that may exist. The vast majority of the Sites in the county are in private ownership and this should be respected at all times. -
Butterfly Surveys, Knepp Castle Estate, 2012
Butterfly Surveys, Knepp Castle Estate, 2012 Transect Survey, Northern & Middle Blocks (with reference to surveys July 2005 – 2011) Introduction Butterflies have been the subject of annual surveys, usually in July, for a total of eight years (2005-12 inclusive), as part of the overall monitoring programme to assess the effects of the naturalistic grazing regime first implemented in 2001 and since expanded over much of the Knepp Castle Estate. These surveys of the Northern and Middle Blocks were initially conducted by Rich Howarth of the Sussex Wildlife Trust, but in 2012 the task of monitoring butterflies over the wider Wildland project area was taken on by Neil Hulme, Conservation Adviser for the Sussex Branch of Butterfly Conservation. The methodology previously employed by Richworth has been maintained for the Northern and Middle Blocks; namely the standard UKBMS Transect technique, the details of which have been described in earlier reports. The key feature to note is the subdivision of the Transect route into 26 recording ‘parcels’. This year the Transect was walked over two days, as the additional time spent ensuring replication of the exact route precluded completion within an acceptable timeframe. It was also walked later in the year than ideal (10th and 12th August), due to the backlog of other survey work resulting from such poor summer weather. However, the cool, wet summer actually set the butterfly calendar back by two weeks relative to the 21st Century average, so results are remarkably consistent with 2005 – 2011 data. A single July date will be reinstated in 2013. The precise route of previous walks could not be followed in three places, due to both logistical and environmental factors.