DOCSLIB.ORG

Comprehensive Conservation Plan Benton Lake National Wildlife

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Glossary accessible—Pertaining to physical access to areas breeding habitat—Environment used by migratory and activities for people of different abilities, es- birds or other animals during the breeding sea- pecially those with physical impairments. son. A.D.—Anno Domini, “in the year of the Lord.” canopy—Layer of foliage, generally the uppermost adaptive resource management (ARM)—The rigorous layer, in a vegetative stand; mid-level or under- application of management, research, and moni- story vegetation in multilayered stands. Canopy toring to gain information and experience neces- closure (also canopy cover) is an estimate of the sary to assess and change management activities. amount of overhead vegetative cover. It is a process that uses feedback from research, CCP—See comprehensive conservation plan. monitoring, and evaluation of management ac- CFR—See Code of Federal Regulations. tions to support or change objectives and strate- CO2—Carbon dioxide. gies at all planning levels. It is also a process in Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)—Codification of which the Service carries out policy decisions the general and permanent rules published in the within a framework of scientifically driven ex- Federal Register by the Executive departments periments to test predictions and assumptions and agencies of the Federal Government. Each inherent in management plans. Analysis of re- volume of the CFR is updated once each calendar sults helps managers decide whether current year. management should continue as is or whether it compact—Montana House bill 717–Bill to Ratify should be modified to achieve desired conditions. Water Rights Compact. alternative—Reasonable way to solve an identi- compatibility determination—See compatible use. fied problem or satisfy the stated need (40 CFR compatible use—Wildlife-dependent recreational 1500.2); one of several different means of accom- use or any other use of a refuge or district that, plishing refuge and district purposes and goals in the sound professional judgment of the Direc- and contributing to the National Wildlife Refuge tor of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, will System mission (“Draft Fish and Wildlife Service not materially interfere with or detract from the Manual” 602 FW 1.5). fulfillment of the mission of the National Wildlife amphibian—Class of cold-blooded vertebrates that Refuge System or the purposes of the refuge or includes frogs, toads, and salamanders. district (“Draft Fish and Wildlife Service Man- annual—Plant that flowers and dies within 1 year of ual” 603 FW 3.6). A compatibility determination germination. supports the selection of compatible uses and baseline—Set of critical observations, data, or infor- identified stipulations or limits necessary to make mation used for comparison or a control. sure there is compatibility. bioaccumulation—The accumulation within living comprehensive conservation plan (CCP)—Document organisms of toxic substances occurring in the that describes the desired future conditions of environment. the refuge or district and provides long-range biological control—Organisms or viruses used to guidance and management direction for the ref- control invasive plants or other pests. uge manager to accomplish the purposes of the biological diversity, biodiversity—Variety of life and refuge or district, contribute to the mission of the its processes including the variety of living or- National Wildlife Refuge System, and meet other ganisms, the genetic differences among them, relevant mandates (“Draft Fish and Wildlife Ser- and the communities and ecosystems in which vice Manual” 602 FW 1.5). they occur (“Fish and Wildlife Service Manual” concern—See issue. 052 FW 1.12B). The National Wildlife Refuge cool-season grasses—Grasses that begin growth System’s focus is on indigenous species, biotic earlier in the season and often become dormant communities, and ecological processes. in summer; grasses that germinate at lower tem- biotic—Pertaining to life or living organisms; peratures. Examples of cool-season grasses in the caused, produced by, or comprising living organ- refuge complex are western wheatgrass, needle isms. and thread, and green needlegrass. 152 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Benton Lake National Wildlife Refuge Complex, Montana conservation—Management of natural resources to nity, together with its environment, functioning prevent loss or waste; actions may include pres- as a unit. For administrative purposes, the U.S. ervation, restoration, and enhancement. Fish and Wildlife Service has designated 53 eco- conservation easement—Perpetual agreement en- systems covering the United States and its pos- tered into by a landowner and the Service by sessions. These ecosystems generally correspond which a landowner gives up or sells one or more with watershed boundaries and their sizes and of the rights on their property for conserva- ecological complexity vary. tion purposes, with terms set by the Service. ecotype—Subspecies or race that is especially In return for a single lump-sum payment, the adapted to a particular set of environmental con- landowner agrees not to drain, burn, level, or fill ditions. habitats covered by the easement. Conservation emergent—Plant rooted in shallow water and having easements generally prohibit the cultivation of most of the vegetative growth above water such grassland and wetland habitats while still permit- as cattail and hardstem bulrush. ting the landowner traditional grazing uses. A endangered species, Federal—Plant or animal spe- single-habitat conservation easement is often cies listed under the Endangered Species Act of referred to as either a wetland easement or a 1973, as amended, that is in danger of extinction grassland easement. throughout all or a significant part of its range. coordination area—Wildlife management area made endangered species, State—Plant or animal species available to a State by a “cooperative agreement in danger of becoming extinct or extirpated in a between the United States Fish and Wildlife Ser- particular State within the near future if factors vice and the State fish and game agency pursuant contributing to its decline continue; species with to section 4 of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination a population at a critically low level or having Act (16 U.S.C. 664); or (B) by long-term leases habitat that has been degraded or depleted to a or agreements pursuant to the Bankhead–Jones significant degree. Farm Tenant Act (50 Stat. 525; 7 U.S.C. 1010 et environmental assessment (EA)—Concise public docu- seq.).” States manage coordination areas, but ment, prepared in compliance with the National they are part of the National Wildlife Refuge Environmental Policy Act, that briefly discusses System. CCPs are not required for coordination the purpose and need for an action and alterna- areas. tives to such action and that provides sufficient cover, cover type, canopy cover—Present vegetation evidence and analysis of effects to determine of an area; also see canopy. whether to prepare an environmental impact cultural resources—Remains of sites, structures, or statement or finding of no significant impact (40 objects used by people in the past. CFR 1508.9). dense nesting cover (DNC)—Composition of grasses evapoconcentration—Concentration of chemical con- and forbs that allows for a dense stand of vegeta- stituents in a liquid due to evaporative processes. tion that protects nesting birds from the view of extinction—Complete disappearance of a species predators, usually consisting of one to two spe- from the earth; no longer existing. cies of wheatgrass, alfalfa, and sweetclover. extirpation—Extinction of a population; eradication district—See wetland management district. of a species within a specified area. district purpose—See purpose of the refuge. °F—Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit. disturbance—Significant alteration of habitat struc- fauna—Vertebrate and invertebrate animals in an ture or composition from natural causes such as area. wildfire or human-caused activities and develop- Federal trust resource—Resource managed by one ment such as timber harvest and road building. entity for another who holds the ownership. The DNC—See dense nesting cover. Service holds in trust many natural resources for drawdown—A manipulated water level in an im- the people of the United States of America be- poundment that allows for the natural drying-out cause of Federal acts and treaties; examples are cycle of a wetland. species listed under the Endangered Species Act, duck, dabbling—Duck that mainly feeds on veg- migratory birds protected by international trea- etable matter by upending on the water surface ties, and native plant or wildlife species found on or by grazing and only rarely dives. a national wildlife refuge. duck, diving—Duck that mainly feeds by diving Federal trust species—Species where the Federal through the water. Government has primary jurisdiction including EA—See environmental assessment. federally endangered or threatened species, mi- ecosystem—Dynamic and interrelating complex of gratory birds, anadromous fish, and certain ma- plant and animal communities and their associ- rine mammals. ated nonliving environment; a biological commu- GLOSSARY 153 fee title—Acquisition of most or all of the rights to a hemimarsh—Emergent phase of a seasonal or semi- tract of land. permanent wetland where the ratio of open-wa- Federal land—Public land owned by the Federal ter area to emergent vegetation cover is about Government including lands such as national 50:50 and vegetation
Recommended publications
  • The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks Bioblitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event

    The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks Bioblitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event

    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks BioBlitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event Natural Resource Report NPS/GOGA/NRR—2016/1147 ON THIS PAGE Photograph of BioBlitz participants conducting data entry into iNaturalist. Photograph courtesy of the National Park Service. ON THE COVER Photograph of BioBlitz participants collecting aquatic species data in the Presidio of San Francisco. Photograph courtesy of National Park Service. The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks BioBlitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event Natural Resource Report NPS/GOGA/NRR—2016/1147 Elizabeth Edson1, Michelle O’Herron1, Alison Forrestel2, Daniel George3 1Golden Gate Parks Conservancy Building 201 Fort Mason San Francisco, CA 94129 2National Park Service. Golden Gate National Recreation Area Fort Cronkhite, Bldg. 1061 Sausalito, CA 94965 3National Park Service. San Francisco Bay Area Network Inventory & Monitoring Program Manager Fort Cronkhite, Bldg. 1063 Sausalito, CA 94965 March 2016 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service.
  • Haystack Development

    Haystack Development

    August 2, 2017 HAYSTACK DEVELOPMENT Moonlight Basin Overall Development Plan Wildlife Summary Report HAYSTACK DEVELOPMENT Wildlife Summary Report TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 EXISTING WILDLIFE AND HABITAT ..................................................................................... 4 2.1 HABITAT ........................................................................................................................................ 4 2.2 FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIES ......................................................................................................... 6 2.2.1 Grizzly Bear .......................................................................................................................... 6 2.2.2 Canada Lynx ......................................................................................................................... 7 2.2.3 Wolverine ............................................................................................................................ 10 2.3 OTHER SPECIES OF REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE ............................................................................ 10 2.3.1 Species of Greatest Conservation Need .............................................................................. 10 2.3.2 Migratory Birds ................................................................................................................... 13 2.3.3 Big Game Species
  • List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017

    List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017

    Washington Natural Heritage Program List of Animal Species with Ranks October 2017 The following list of animals known from Washington is complete for resident and transient vertebrates and several groups of invertebrates, including odonates, branchipods, tiger beetles, butterflies, gastropods, freshwater bivalves and bumble bees. Some species from other groups are included, especially where there are conservation concerns. Among these are the Palouse giant earthworm, a few moths and some of our mayflies and grasshoppers. Currently 857 vertebrate and 1,100 invertebrate taxa are included. Conservation status, in the form of range-wide, national and state ranks are assigned to each taxon. Information on species range and distribution, number of individuals, population trends and threats is collected into a ranking form, analyzed, and used to assign ranks. Ranks are updated periodically, as new information is collected. We welcome new information for any species on our list. Common Name Scientific Name Class Global Rank State Rank State Status Federal Status Northwestern Salamander Ambystoma gracile Amphibia G5 S5 Long-toed Salamander Ambystoma macrodactylum Amphibia G5 S5 Tiger Salamander Ambystoma tigrinum Amphibia G5 S3 Ensatina Ensatina eschscholtzii Amphibia G5 S5 Dunn's Salamander Plethodon dunni Amphibia G4 S3 C Larch Mountain Salamander Plethodon larselli Amphibia G3 S3 S Van Dyke's Salamander Plethodon vandykei Amphibia G3 S3 C Western Red-backed Salamander Plethodon vehiculum Amphibia G5 S5 Rough-skinned Newt Taricha granulosa
  • Caspar Creek Macroinvertebrate Assemblage Responses to Forest Management

    Caspar Creek Macroinvertebrate Assemblage Responses to Forest Management

    Caspar Creek macroinvertebrate assemblage responses to forest management and hydrologic disturbance Robert J. Danehy1 and Ivan Arismendi2 1 Catchment Aquatic Ecology, 5335 Saratoga St., Eugene, OR 97405 2 Oregon State University, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, 104 Nash Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA. Citation: Danehy, R.J. and I. Arismendi. 2018. Caspar Creek macroinvertebrate assemblage responses to forest management and hydrologic disturbance. Unpublished Report prepared for the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, contract # 8CA03674. Sacramento, CA. 18 p. Title: Caspar Creek macroinvertebrate assemblage responses to forest management and hydrologic disturbance Danehy1 R.J. and I. Arismendi 2 Abstract: We analyzed data sets from the Caspar Creek Watershed study, with a 55-year comprehensive record of hydrologic regime in two sub-watersheds with different logging treatments, and three separate instream biologic studies conducted since 1990. Long-term data sets of instream biota are rare, and we used them to investigate sediment regime response to forest harvest and extremes in flow regime. Increases in sediment transport after logging were observed in the North Fork during second experiment at Caspar Creek in the 1990’s. Our analysis found turbidities were higher after logging across the range of flows including high magnitude/short duration as well as low magnitude/long duration events. However, few sediment impacts to macroinvertebrate assemblages were observed above and below tributaries with upstream harvest. Specifically, there were no differences in presence/absence of sediment sensitive taxa before and after logging. Moreover, North and South Forks sensitive taxa distributions were similar. With the South Fork, we compared 2016 and 2017 macroinvertebrate assemblages collected in July and May respectively.
  • &WILDLIFE Tlmber/FISH/WILDLIFE ECOREGION BIOASSESSMENT

    &WILDLIFE Tlmber/FISH/WILDLIFE ECOREGION BIOASSESSMENT

    53 TFW-WQl l-92-001 &WILDLIFE TlMBER/FISH/WILDLIFE ECOREGION BIOASSESSMENT PILOT PROJECT July 1992 Ecology Publica.tion No. 92-63 prinred on recycled paper The Department of Ecology is an Equal Opportunity and Ajinnative Action employer and shall not discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, age, religion, or disability as defined by applicable state and/orfederal regulations or statutes. If you have special accommodation needs, please contact the Environmental Investigations and Laboratory Services Program, Wutershed Assessments Section, Barbara Tovrea at (206) 407-6696 (voice). Ecology’s telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) number at Ecology Headquarters is (206) 407-6006. For additional copies of this publication, please contact: Department of Ecology Publications Disttibutions Ofice at P. 0. Box 47600 Olympia, Washington 98504-7600 (206) 407-7472 Refer to Publication Number 92-6.3 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY &WILDLIFE TIMBER/FISH/WILDLIFE ECOREGION BIOASSESSMENT PILOT PROJECT by Robert W. Plotnikoff Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Investigations and Laboratory Services Program Watershed Assessments Section Olympia, Washington 98504-7710 July 1.992 TABLE OF C:ONTENTS LISTOFTABLES . ..iii LIST OF FIGURES . ” . I ,, I . iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................... vi ABSTRACT ........................................... .v ii INTRODUCTION Biological Assessment ................................... 1 Integration of Monitoring
  • Report Clark Fork River Biomonitoring Macroinvertebrate Community

    Report Clark Fork River Biomonitoring Macroinvertebrate Community

    Report Clark Fork River Biomonitoring: Macroinvertebrate Community Assessments for 2019 Prepared by: David Stagliano Montana Biological Survey/Stag Benthics Prepared for: Boise, Idaho Submitted to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 8 June 2020 Executive Summary The upper Clark Fork River (CFR) Basin in western at Kohrs Bend (Station 10) to 85 percent at SBC Montana contains four contiguous Superfund below Warm Springs (Station 4.5) and the operable units that have been undergoing various Blackfoot River site (Station 14) (Figure ES-1). remediation activities for decades. Since 1986, Both SBC sites (stations 2.5 and 4.5) were rated as annual benthic macroinvertebrate-based (BMI) slightly impaired. Slight biological impairment monitoring has been performed at 13 CFR stream from nutrients was evident at two CFR stations reaches with ongoing or future remedial actions near Deer Lodge (8.5 and 9.0) and near Missoula (McGuire Consulting 1986-2017; Montana (Station 15.5), but the former sites have improved Biological Survey/Stag Benthics 2017-Present). markedly since 2017. The lower Blackfoot River Monitoring extended from Silver Bow Creek (SBC) (Station 14) was ranked slightly impaired again in sites upstream of the Warm Springs Ponds, 2019, likely due to metal related stressors. downstream through the upper CFR, bracketing During 2019, environmental conditions in SBC at the former Milltown Dam site to below the Opportunity (Station 2.5) improved after CFR-Bitterroot River confluence. In addition to experiencing declines in integrity scores in 2018. providing current assessments of ecological Likewise, SBC below the Warm Springs Ponds conditions, these sampling events extend the (Station 4.5) remained slightly impaired but BMI long-term data set for evaluating water quality integrity improved over 2017 scores.
  • Appendix A: Common and Scientific Names for Fish and Wildlife Species Found in Idaho

    Appendix A: Common and Scientific Names for Fish and Wildlife Species Found in Idaho

    APPENDIX A: COMMON AND SCIENTIFIC NAMES FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SPECIES FOUND IN IDAHO. How to Read the Lists. Within these lists, species are listed phylogenetically by class. In cases where phylogeny is incompletely understood, taxonomic units are arranged alphabetically. Listed below are definitions for interpreting NatureServe conservation status ranks (GRanks and SRanks). These ranks reflect an assessment of the condition of the species rangewide (GRank) and statewide (SRank). Rangewide ranks are assigned by NatureServe and statewide ranks are assigned by the Idaho Conservation Data Center. GX or SX Presumed extinct or extirpated: not located despite intensive searches and virtually no likelihood of rediscovery. GH or SH Possibly extinct or extirpated (historical): historically occurred, but may be rediscovered. Its presence may not have been verified in the past 20–40 years. A species could become SH without such a 20–40 year delay if the only known occurrences in the state were destroyed or if it had been extensively and unsuccessfully looked for. The SH rank is reserved for species for which some effort has been made to relocate occurrences, rather than simply using this status for all elements not known from verified extant occurrences. G1 or S1 Critically imperiled: at high risk because of extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer occurrences), rapidly declining numbers, or other factors that make it particularly vulnerable to rangewide extinction or extirpation. G2 or S2 Imperiled: at risk because of restricted range, few populations (often 20 or fewer), rapidly declining numbers, or other factors that make it vulnerable to rangewide extinction or extirpation. G3 or S3 Vulnerable: at moderate risk because of restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors that make it vulnerable to rangewide extinction or extirpation.
  • Table of Contents 2

    Table of Contents 2

    Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists (SAFIT) List of Freshwater Macroinvertebrate Taxa from California and Adjacent States including Standard Taxonomic Effort Levels 1 March 2011 Austin Brady Richards and D. Christopher Rogers Table of Contents 2 1.0 Introduction 4 1.1 Acknowledgments 5 2.0 Standard Taxonomic Effort 5 2.1 Rules for Developing a Standard Taxonomic Effort Document 5 2.2 Changes from the Previous Version 6 2.3 The SAFIT Standard Taxonomic List 6 3.0 Methods and Materials 7 3.1 Habitat information 7 3.2 Geographic Scope 7 3.3 Abbreviations used in the STE List 8 3.4 Life Stage Terminology 8 4.0 Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species 8 5.0 Literature Cited 9 Appendix I. The SAFIT Standard Taxonomic Effort List 10 Phylum Silicea 11 Phylum Cnidaria 12 Phylum Platyhelminthes 14 Phylum Nemertea 15 Phylum Nemata 16 Phylum Nematomorpha 17 Phylum Entoprocta 18 Phylum Ectoprocta 19 Phylum Mollusca 20 Phylum Annelida 32 Class Hirudinea Class Branchiobdella Class Polychaeta Class Oligochaeta Phylum Arthropoda Subphylum Chelicerata, Subclass Acari 35 Subphylum Crustacea 47 Subphylum Hexapoda Class Collembola 69 Class Insecta Order Ephemeroptera 71 Order Odonata 95 Order Plecoptera 112 Order Hemiptera 126 Order Megaloptera 139 Order Neuroptera 141 Order Trichoptera 143 Order Lepidoptera 165 2 Order Coleoptera 167 Order Diptera 219 3 1.0 Introduction The Southwest Association of Freshwater Invertebrate Taxonomists (SAFIT) is charged through its charter to develop standardized levels for the taxonomic identification of aquatic macroinvertebrates in support of bioassessment. This document defines the standard levels of taxonomic effort (STE) for bioassessment data compatible with the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioassessment protocols (Ode, 2007) or similar procedures.
  • (Trichoptera: Limnephilidae) in Western North America By

    (Trichoptera: Limnephilidae) in Western North America By

    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Robert W. Wisseman for the degree of Master ofScience in Entomology presented on August 6, 1987 Title: Biology and Distribution of the Dicosmoecinae (Trichoptera: Limnsphilidae) in Western North America Redacted for privacy Abstract approved: N. H. Anderson Literature and museum records have been reviewed to provide a summary on the distribution, habitat associations and biology of six western North American Dicosmoecinae genera and the single eastern North American genus, Ironoquia. Results of this survey are presented and discussed for Allocosmoecus,Amphicosmoecus and Ecclisomvia. Field studies were conducted in western Oregon on the life-histories of four species, Dicosmoecusatripes, D. failvipes, Onocosmoecus unicolor andEcclisocosmoecus scvlla. Although there are similarities between generain the general habitat requirements, the differences or variability is such that we cannot generalize to a "typical" dicosmoecine life-history strategy. A common thread for the subfamily is the association with cool, montane streams. However, within this stream category habitat associations range from semi-aquatic, through first-order specialists, to river inhabitants. In feeding habits most species are omnivorous, but they range from being primarilydetritivorous to algal grazers. The seasonal occurrence of the various life stages and voltinism patterns are also variable. Larvae show inter- and intraspecificsegregation in the utilization of food resources and microhabitatsin streams. Larval life-history patterns appear to be closely linked to seasonal regimes in stream discharge. A functional role for the various types of case architecture seen between and within species is examined. Manipulation of case architecture appears to enable efficient utilization of a changing seasonal pattern of microhabitats and food resources.
  • Summary Report

    Summary Report

    Summary Report NCWCD Benthic Macroinvertebrate Biomonitoring Program 2015 Prepared for: Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Berthoud, Colorado Prepared by: David E. Rees Timberline Aquatics, Inc. 4219 Table Mountain Place, Suite A Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 17 August 2016 Summary Report NCWCD Benthic Macroinvertebrate Biomonitoring Program 2015 Prepared for: Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District Berthoud, Colorado Prepared by: David E. Rees Timberline Aquatics, Inc. 4219 Table Mountain Place, Suite A Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 17 August 2016 Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 2 Study Area .......................................................................................................................... 3 Methods............................................................................................................................... 7 Alternative Analysis Tools (aMIS) ................................................................................. 8 Other Analysis Tools .................................................................................................... 10 CDPHE Tools (MMI) ................................................................................................... 11 Biotype 2 Metrics .....................................................................................................
  • In Baltic Amber 85

    In Baltic Amber 85

    Overview and descriptions of fossil stoneflies (Plecoptera) in Baltic amber 85 Entomologie heute 22 (2010): 85-97 Overview and Descriptions of Fossil Stoneflies (Plecoptera) in Baltic Amber Übersicht und Beschreibungen von fossilen Steinfliegen (Plecoptera) im Baltischen Bernstein CELESTINE CARUSO & WILFRIED WICHARD Summary: Three new fossil species of stoneflies (Plecoptera: Nemouridae and Leuctridae) from Eocene Baltic amber are being described: Zealeuctra cornuta n. sp., Lednia zilli n. sp., and Podmosta attenuata n. sp.. Extant species of these three genera are found in Eastern Asia and in the Nearctic region. It is very probably that the genera must have been widely spread across the northern hemisphere in the Cretaceous period, before Europe was an archipelago in Eocene. The current state of knowledge about the seventeen Plecoptera species of Baltic amber is shortly presented. Due to discovered homonymies, the following nomenclatural corrections are proposed: Leuctra fusca Pictet, 1856 in Leuctra electrofusca Caruso & Wichard, 2010 and Nemoura affinis Berendt, 1856 in Nemoura electroaffinis Caruso & Wichard, 2010. Keywords: Fossil insects, fossil Plecoptera, Eocene, paleobiogeography Zusammenfassung: In dieser Arbeit werden drei neue fossile Steinfliegen-Arten (Plecoptera: Nemouridae und Leuctridae) des Baltischen Bernsteins beschrieben: Zealeuctra cornuta n. sp., Lednia zilli n. sp., Podmosta attenuata n. sp.. Rezente Arten der drei Gattungen sind in Ostasien und in der nearktischen Region nachgewiesen. Sehr wahrscheinlich breiteten sich die Gattungen in der Krei- dezeit über die nördliche Hemisphäre aus, noch bevor Europa im Eozän ein Archipel war. Der gegenwärtige Kenntnisstand über die siebzehn Plecoptera Arten des Baltischen Bernsteins wird kurz dargelegt. Wegen bestehender Homonymien werden folgende nomenklatorische Korrekturen vorgenommen: Leuctra fusca Pictet, 1856 in Leuctra electrofusca Caruso & Wichard, 2010 und Nemoura affinis Berendt, 1856 in Nemoura electroaffinis Caruso & Wichard, 2010.
  • 2010 Animal Species of Concern

    2010 Animal Species of Concern

    MONTANA NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM Animal Species of Concern Species List Last Updated 08/05/2010 219 Species of Concern 86 Potential Species of Concern All Records (no filtering) A program of the University of Montana and Natural Resource Information Systems, Montana State Library Introduction The Montana Natural Heritage Program (MTNHP) serves as the state's information source for animals, plants, and plant communities with a focus on species and communities that are rare, threatened, and/or have declining trends and as a result are at risk or potentially at risk of extirpation in Montana. This report on Montana Animal Species of Concern is produced jointly by the Montana Natural Heritage Program (MTNHP) and Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (MFWP). Montana Animal Species of Concern are native Montana animals that are considered to be "at risk" due to declining population trends, threats to their habitats, and/or restricted distribution. Also included in this report are Potential Animal Species of Concern -- animals for which current, often limited, information suggests potential vulnerability or for which additional data are needed before an accurate status assessment can be made. Over the last 200 years, 5 species with historic breeding ranges in Montana have been extirpated from the state; Woodland Caribou (Rangifer tarandus), Greater Prairie-Chicken (Tympanuchus cupido), Passenger Pigeon (Ectopistes migratorius), Pilose Crayfish (Pacifastacus gambelii), and Rocky Mountain Locust (Melanoplus spretus). Designation as a Montana Animal Species of Concern or Potential Animal Species of Concern is not a statutory or regulatory classification. Instead, these designations provide a basis for resource managers and decision-makers to make proactive decisions regarding species conservation and data collection priorities in order to avoid additional extirpations.