DOCSLIB.ORG

Best Management Practices for Pollinators on Western Rangelands

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Best Management Practices for Pollinators on Western Rangelands Best Management Practices for Pollinators on Western Rangelands (Completed July 2018) BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR POLLINATORS ON WESTERN RANGELANDS Gui (Completed July 2018) Stephanie McKnight Candace Fallon Emma Pelton Rich Hateld Aimée Code Jennifer Hopwood Sarina Jepsen Scott Homan Black The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation www.xerces.org The Xerces® Society for Invertebrate Conservation is a nonprot organization that protects wildlife through the conservation of invertebrates and their habitat. Established in 1971, the Society is at the forefront of invertebrate protection, harnessing the knowledge of scientists and the enthusiasm of citizens to implement conservation programs worldwide. The Society uses advocacy, education, and applied research to promote invertebrate conservation. The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation 628 NE Broadway, Suite 200, Portland, OR 97232 Tel (855) 232-6639 Fax (503) 233-6794 www.xerces.org Regional oces from coast to coast. The Xerces Society is an equal opportunity employer and provider. Xerces® is a trademark registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Oce © 2018 by The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation Primary Authors and Contributors The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation: Stephanie McKnight, Candace Fallon, Emma Pelton, Rich Hateld, Aimée Code, Jennifer Hopwood, Sarina Jepsen, and Scott Homan Black. Acknowledgments Funding for this project was provided by the US Forest Service as well as the Ceres Trust, CS Fund, The Dudley Foundation, Endangered Species Chocolate, LLC., J. Crew, Justin's, Madhava Natural Sweeteners, The New-Land Foundation, Inc., Turner Foundation, Inc., White Pine Fund, Whole Systems Foundation, and the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation members. The authors wish to thank everyone who contributed to the development of these recommendations: the twelve interviewees, forty-three survey respondents, and additional researchers and practitioners with whom we had informal conversations. Xerces Society sta members Sarah Hoyle, Jessa Kay Cruz, Angela Laws, Ray Moranz, and Mace Vaughan contributed to the development and review of specic sections. Content for the case studies was developed with contributions from Dr. Sandra DeBano, Oregon State University Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, and Mary Rowland, US Forest Service Pacic Northwest Research Station—La Grande Forestry & Range Sciences Laboratory (Case Study 7), and Laura Navarette, US Forest Service (Case Study 10). William Carromero, Tyler Johnson, Carol Spurrier, Allen Rowley, Mary Rowland of the US Forest Service, and Dr. Sandra DeBano provided input and/or review of the nal document. Editing: Matthew Shepherd, The Xerces Society Layout: Michele Blackburn, The Xerces Society Printing: Print Results, Portland, OR In accordance with Federal law and US Department of Agriculture policy, this institution is prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) To le a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Oce of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Recommended Citation The Xerces Society. 2018. Best Management Practices for Pollinators on Western Rangelands. 126+vii pp. Portland, OR: The Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation. (Available online at https://xerces.org/best-management-practices-for-pollinators-on-western-rangelands). Photographs & Artwork We are grateful to the many photographers and designers for allowing us to use their wonderful photographs and artwork. The copyright for all photographs, icons, and designs is retained by the Xerces Society or the creators. None of the photographs or artwork may be reproduced without permission. For a complete list of photographers and designers, please see the Photo Credits section on page 126. If you wish to contact a photographer or designer, please contact the Xerces Society at the address above. Cover Photograph Sagebrush steppe habitat in the Santa Rosa Mountains within the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest provides a pollinator haven on rangeland in central Nevada. by Emma Pelton.. Contents Executive Summary vi Introduction 1 Report Development 2 Meet the Pollinators 4 Bees 4 Butteries and Moths 8 Other Invertebrate Pollinators 11 Birds, Bats, and other Vertebrate Pollinators 12 Threats to Pollinators and Population Declines 13 Best Management Practices for Pollinators on Western Rangelands 15 What is Good Pollinator Habitat? 15 General Considerations in Management and Restoration Projects 17 Grazing 22 Mowing and Haying 33 Prescribed Fire and Wildre 37 Restoration 44 Invasive Nonnative Plants 67 Pesticides (Herbicides, Insecticides, Fungicides) 70 Managed Pollinators 78 Recreation 83 Managing Pollinator Habitat Under Climate Change 84 Monitoring 88 Monitoring Floral Resources and Pollinator Populations 88 Literature Cited 93 Appendix A. Bumble Bee Phenology and Distribution 108 Appendix B. At-risk Pollinators in the West 112 Appendix C. Additional Resources 124 Good pollinator habitat provides multiple kinds of blooming owers which oer pollen and nectar to bees and butteries. Executive Summary Rangelands comprise the majority of public lands in the western United States and support some of the highest diversity of bee species, as well as many butteries, moths, and other pollinators. However, many of these pollinator species are declining and at-risk. Incorporating pollinators into rangeland management is essential to help recover pollinator populations as well as maintain healthy rangelands for plants, wildlife, livestock, and the people who rely on them. e Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation partnered with the US Forest Service to identify best management practices (BMPs) for pollinators on western rangelands as recommendations for land managers. ese BMPs were informed by a literature review, surveys, and interviews with pollinator experts and land managers in 2016–2018. Together, they represent the state of the knowledge about managing western rangelands for pollinators. While there is still much to learn, these BMPs provide actionable, practical recommendations that enables land managers to help conserve pollinators on public lands in the West. An overview of major pollinator groups (bees, butteries and moths, other invertebrates, and vertebrates), their status, and threats provide a primer on these animals and their needs. Good pollinator habitat provides food, shelter, and nest sites, is connected to other habitat patches, is safe from pesticides and high levels of pathogens. Overall, management and restoration which aims to incorporate pollinators should focus on incorporating heterogeneity into the landscape, considering interactions among management and environmental uctuations, and using an adaptive management framework. Management practices addressed in the BMPs include grazing, mowing, prescribed re, and pesticide use. Incorporating pollinators into restoration projects including post-wildre seeding and the sourcing and establishment of native plants are addressed, as are invasive nonnative and noxious plant management, managed pollinators, recreation, and climate change impacts. Each topic begins with summary of the known eects of each land use/ management practice on pollinators and their habitat, followed by recommendations on how to incorporate pollinator conservation into management decisions. Monitoring pollinator populations wraps up the document. All of the information is summarized for use by practitioners in the eld, but may also be useful for decision makers. Rangeland habitat in Nevada. Long-tongued bee nectaring on penstemon. Introduction “Pollinators are a key component of a healthy rangeland ecosystem.” — Black et al. (2011) Rangelands comprise the majority of public lands in the western United States, spanning a huge diversity of ecological regions, habitat types, and elevations—from grasslands to sagebrush steppe to pinyon– juniper woodlands to mountain meadows (Shiet 1994). Native pollinators are an important but oen overlooked group of animals that both rely upon and help maintain rangeland ecosystems. ere are just over 3,600 species of native bees in the United States and Canada alone, with the highest diversity of native bees on western rangelands (see Figure 1). Bees, as well as butteries, moths, and other pollinators are a key component of global and local biodiversity, but pollinators are in trouble. It is estimated that 40% of invertebrate pollinator species may be at risk of extinction worldwide due to stressors including habitat loss, pesticides, disease, and eects of climate change (IPBES 2016). A lack of pollinators can have major ecological and economic impacts on rangelands (Potts et al. 2010a, 2010b). Pollinators provide pollination services for owering plants which are fundamental components of rangeland ecosystems; approximately 85% of owering plant species are pollinated by animals (Ollerton et al. 2011) including threatened and endangered species (Tubbesing et al. 2014). ese ecological services make pollinators keystone species in terrestrial ecosystems: pollination produces the seeds and fruits which feed everything from songbirds to grizzly bears (Ollerton et al. 2011). Pollinators are also vital for agriculture with 35% of global crop production relying on insect pollination (Klein
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Conceptual Design Documentation
    Appendix A: Conceptual Design Documentation APPENDIX A Conceptual Design Documentation June 2019 A-1 APPENDIX A: CONCEPTUAL DESIGN DOCUMENTATION The environmental analyses in the NEPA and CEQA documents for the proposed improvements at Oceano County Airport (the Airport) are based on conceptual designs prepared to provide a realistic basis for assessing their environmental consequences. 1. Widen runway from 50 to 60 feet 2. Widen Taxiways A, A-1, A-2, A-3, and A-4 from 20 to 25 feet 3. Relocate segmented circle and wind cone 4. Installation of taxiway edge lighting 5. Installation of hold position signage 6. Installation of a new electrical vault and connections 7. Installation of a pollution control facility (wash rack) CIVIL ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS The purpose of this conceptual design effort is to identify the amount of impervious surface, grading (cut and fill) and drainage implications of the projects identified above. The conceptual design calculations detailed in the following figures indicate that Projects 1 and 2, widening the runways and taxiways would increase the total amount of impervious surface on the Airport by 32,016 square feet, or 0.73 acres; a 6.6 percent increase in the Airport’s impervious surface area. Drainage patterns would remain the same as both the runway and taxiways would continue to sheet flow from their centerlines to the edge of pavement and then into open, grassed areas. The existing drainage system is able to accommodate the modest increase in stormwater runoff that would occur, particularly as soil conditions on the Airport are conducive to infiltration. Figure A-1 shows the locations of the seven projects incorporated in the Proposed Action.
    [Show full text]
  • The Social Parasite Bumblebee Bombus Hyperboreus Schönherr, 1809 Usurp Nest of Bombus Balteatus Dahlbom, 1832 (Hymenoptera, Apidae) in Norway
    © Norwegian Journal of Entomology. 5 June 2009 The social parasite bumblebee Bombus hyperboreus Schönherr, 1809 usurp nest of Bombus balteatus Dahlbom, 1832 (Hymenoptera, Apidae) in Norway JAN OVE GJERSHAUG Gjershaug, J. O. 2009. The social parasite bumblebee Bombus hyperboreus Schönherr, 1809 usurp nest of Bombus balteatus Dahlbom, 1832 (Hymenoptera: , Apidae) in Norway. Norw. J. Entomol. 56, 28– 31. This paper presents the first documented case of nest parasitisme (usurpation) of the bumblebee Bombus balteatus Dahlbom, 1832 by the social parasite bumblebee Bombus hyperboreus Schönherr, 1809. One nest of B. balteatus was found and excavated in Hessdalen in Sør-Trøndelag, Norway in July 2003. The nest contained sexuals of Bombus hyperboreus together with workers of B. balteatus. Key words: bumblebees, Bombus hyperboreus, Bombus balteatus, social parasitism, usurpation Jan Ove Gjershaug, Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Tungasletta 2, NO-7485 Trondheim, Norway. E-mail: [email protected] Introduction (Goulson 2003). Bombus hyperboreus (subgenus Alpinobombus Skorikov, 1914) resembles the Social parasitism is well known in bumblebees. Psithyrus bumblebees in having an obligate Late emerging queens sometimes take over dependency on social bumblebees, but differs (usurps) an established nest of others of their own from them in having pollen baskets and in doing species or related species. The usurper attacks pollen collecting. and kill the queen, and enslaves the killed queens daughters (Alford 1975). Usurpation is said to From arctic North America, B. hyperboreus occur only within species of the same subgenus frequently usurps B. polaris Curtis, 1835 (=B. (Hobbs 1965). Thus for example Bombus terrestris arcticus Kirby, 1821) (Milliron & Oliver 1966, (Linnaeus, 1758) will often attempt to usurp its Richards 1973).
    [Show full text]
  • Courtship and Oviposition Patterns of Two Agathymus (Megathymidae)
    Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 39(3). 1985. 171-176 COURTSHIP AND OVIPOSITION PATTERNS OF TWO AGATHYMUS (MEGATHYMIDAE) DON B. STALLINGS AND VIOLA N. T. STALLINGS P.O. Box 106, 616 W. Central, Caldwell, Kansas 67022 AND J. R. TURNER AND BEULAH R. TURNER 2 South Boyd, Caldwell, Kansas 67022 ABSTRACT. Males of Agathymus estelleae take courtship sentry positions near ten­ eral virgin females long before the females are ready to mate. Males of Agathymus mariae are territorial and pursue virgin females that approach their territories. Ovipo­ sition patterns of the two species are very similar. Females alight on or near the plants to oviposit and do not drop ova in flight. Few detailed observations of the courtship and oviposition of the skipper butterflies in natural environments have been published. For the family Megathymidae Freeman (1951), Roever (1965) (and see Toliver, 1968) described mating and oviposition of some Southwestern U.S. Agathymus, and over a hundred years ago (1876) Riley published an excellent paper on the life history of Megathymus yuccae (Bois­ duval & LeConte) which included data on oviposition of the female; otherwise, only the scantiest comments have been made. C. L. Rem­ ington (pers. comm.) and others tell us that there is a significant pos­ sibility that the Hesperioidea are less closely related to the true but­ terflies (Papilionoidea) than to certain other Lepidoptera and even that the Megathymidae may not be phylogenetically linked to the Hesper­ iidae. For several years we have been making on-the-scene studies of these two aspects of megathymid behavior, both for their interest in understanding the whole ecology of these insects and for their possible reflection on higher relationships.
    [Show full text]
  • A Sealy AFFAIR in Las VEGAS
    Number 6 NE'NS 15 Nov., 1973 of the LEPIDOPTERISTS' SOCIETY (15 Jan., 1974) Editorial Committee of the NEWS •...• EDITOR: Ron Leuschner, 1900 John St., Manhattan Beach, CA. 90266, USA ASSOC. EDITOR: Dr. Paul A. Opler,Div. of Entomology, 201 Wellman Hall, Univ.. of California, Berkeley, CA. 94720, USA Jo Brewer John Heath K. W. Philip J. Donald Eff G. Hesselbarth F. W. Preston Thomas C. Emmel Robert L. Langston G. W. Rawson Lloyd M. Martin H. A. Freeman F. Bryant Mather Mike Van Buskirk L. Paul Grey M. C. Nielsen E.C. Welling M. A SeALY AFFAIR IN lAS VEGAS For centuries artists haye depicted butterflies in scenes Although the newspaper account (plus a subsequent story intended to evoke a mood of gaiety, frivolity, beauty, or tran­ on 14 November) said that the butterflies were to be released quility. Modern artists and craftsmen have, as we know, at a wedding (filmed by aBBC-TVcrew as, no doubt, a "typi­ progressed to the point where actual specimens (sometimes cal" American wedding), I have learned that the insects were with those revolting paper bodies) are used to make works of actually used to help celebrate the eighth anniversary of art and jewelry, are laminated into mats and bowls, or are Caesars Palace itself. And it turned out that only one-tenth displayed in a wide variety of boxes and frames and used for of the desired quantity of specimens was eventually released. decoration, often with spectacular results. To get the butterflies for the festive occasion, Sid Gathrid, And it seems that the Rhopalocera are becoming more Executive Director of Advertising and Public Relations at popular all the time as subjects.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Butterflies and Moths of Pinal County, Arizona, 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]
  • Floral Resource Competition Between Honey Bees and Wild Bees: Is There Clear Evidence and Can We Guide Management and Conservation?
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325627761 Floral Resource Competition Between Honey Bees and Wild Bees: Is There Clear Evidence and Can We Guide Management and Conservation? Article in Environmental Entomology · June 2018 DOI: 10.1093/ee/nvy077 CITATIONS READS 12 603 4 authors, including: Victoria Wojcik Pollinator Partnership 11 PUBLICATIONS 72 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE All content following this page was uploaded by Victoria Wojcik on 19 June 2018. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Environmental Entomology, XX(X), 2018, 1–12 doi: 10.1093/ee/nvy077 Pollinator Ecology and Management Review Floral Resource Competition Between Honey Bees and Wild Bees: Is There Clear Evidence and Can We Guide Management and Conservation? Victoria A. Wojcik,1 Lora A. Morandin, Laurie Davies Adams, and Kelly E. Rourke Pollinator Partnership, 423 Washington Street, 5th floor, San Francisco, CA 94111, and 1Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected] Subject Editor: Gloria DeGrandi-Hoffman Received 31 October 2017; Editorial decision 2 May 2018 Abstract Supporting managed honey bees by pasturing in natural landscapes has come under review due to concerns that honey bees could negatively impact the survival of wild bees through competition for floral resources. Critique and assessment of the existing body of published literature against our criteria focussing on studies that can support best management resulted in 19 experimental papers. Indirect measures of competition examining foraging patterns and behavior yielded equivocal results. Direct measures of reproduction and growth were investigated in only seven studies, with six indicating negative impacts to wild bees from the presence of managed honey bees.
    [Show full text]
  • MOTHS and BUTTERFLIES LEPIDOPTERA DISTRIBUTION DATA SOURCES (LEPIDOPTERA) * Detailed Distributional Information Has Been J.D
    MOTHS AND BUTTERFLIES LEPIDOPTERA DISTRIBUTION DATA SOURCES (LEPIDOPTERA) * Detailed distributional information has been J.D. Lafontaine published for only a few groups of Lepidoptera in western Biological Resources Program, Agriculture and Agri-food Canada. Scott (1986) gives good distribution maps for Canada butterflies in North America but these are generalized shade Central Experimental Farm Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C6 maps that give no detail within the Montane Cordillera Ecozone. A series of memoirs on the Inchworms (family and Geometridae) of Canada by McGuffin (1967, 1972, 1977, 1981, 1987) and Bolte (1990) cover about 3/4 of the Canadian J.T. Troubridge fauna and include dot maps for most species. A long term project on the “Forest Lepidoptera of Canada” resulted in a Pacific Agri-Food Research Centre (Agassiz) four volume series on Lepidoptera that feed on trees in Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Canada and these also give dot maps for most species Box 1000, Agassiz, B.C. V0M 1A0 (McGugan, 1958; Prentice, 1962, 1963, 1965). Dot maps for three groups of Cutworm Moths (Family Noctuidae): the subfamily Plusiinae (Lafontaine and Poole, 1991), the subfamilies Cuculliinae and Psaphidinae (Poole, 1995), and ABSTRACT the tribe Noctuini (subfamily Noctuinae) (Lafontaine, 1998) have also been published. Most fascicles in The Moths of The Montane Cordillera Ecozone of British Columbia America North of Mexico series (e.g. Ferguson, 1971-72, and southwestern Alberta supports a diverse fauna with over 1978; Franclemont, 1973; Hodges, 1971, 1986; Lafontaine, 2,000 species of butterflies and moths (Order Lepidoptera) 1987; Munroe, 1972-74, 1976; Neunzig, 1986, 1990, 1997) recorded to date.
    [Show full text]
  • Bumble Bee Surveys in the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area of Oregon and Washington
    Bumble Bee Surveys in the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area of Oregon and Washington Final report from the Xerces Society to the U.S. Forest Service and Interagency Special Status/Sensitive Species Program (ISSSSP) Agreement L13AC00102, Modification 5 Bombus vosnesenskii on Balsamorhiza sagittata. Photo by Rich Hatfield, the Xerces Society. By Rich Hatfield, Sarina Jepsen, and Scott Black, the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation September 2017 1 Table of Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3 Methods ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 Site Selection ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Site Descriptions (west to east) ................................................................................................................ 7 T14ES27 (USFS) ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Cape Horn (USFS) .................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Yukon Butterflies a Guide to Yukon Butterflies
    Wildlife Viewing Yukon butterflies A guide to Yukon butterflies Where to find them Currently, about 91 species of butterflies, representing five families, are known from Yukon, but scientists expect to discover more. Finding butterflies in Yukon is easy. Just look in any natural, open area on a warm, sunny day. Two excellent butterfly viewing spots are Keno Hill and the Blackstone Uplands. Pick up Yukon’s Wildlife Viewing Guide to find these and other wildlife viewing hotspots. Visitors follow an old mining road Viewing tips to explore the alpine on top of Keno Hill. This booklet will help you view and identify some of the more common butterflies, and a few distinctive but less common species. Additional species are mentioned but not illustrated. In some cases, © Government of Yukon 2019 you will need a detailed book, such as , ISBN 978-1-55362-862-2 The Butterflies of Canada to identify the exact species that you have seen. All photos by Crispin Guppy except as follows: In the Alpine (p.ii) Some Yukon butterflies, by Ryan Agar; Cerisy’s Sphynx moth (p.2) by Sara Nielsen; Anicia such as the large swallowtails, Checkerspot (p.2) by Bruce Bennett; swallowtails (p.3) by Bruce are bright to advertise their Bennett; Freija Fritillary (p.12) by Sonja Stange; Gallium Sphinx presence to mates. Others are caterpillar (p.19) by William Kleeden (www.yukonexplorer.com); coloured in dull earth tones Butterfly hike at Keno (p.21) by Peter Long; Alpine Interpretive that allow them to hide from bird Centre (p.22) by Bruce Bennett.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Wildlife Notebook
    ARIZONA WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ARIZONA WILDLIFE NOTEBOOK GARRY ROGERS Praise for Arizona Wildlife Notebook “Arizona Wildlife Notebook” by Garry Rogers is a comprehensive checklist of wildlife species existing in the State of Arizona. This notebook provides a brief description for each of eleven (11) groups of wildlife, conservation status of all extant species within that group in Arizona, alphabetical listing of species by common name, scientific names, and room for notes. “The Notebook is a statewide checklist, intended for use by wildlife watchers all over the state. As various individuals keep track of their personal observations of wildlife in their specific locality, the result will be a more selective checklist specific to that locale. Such information would be vitally useful to the State Wildlife Conservation Department, as well as to other local agencies and private wildlife watching groups. “This is a very well-documented snapshot of the status of wildlife species – from bugs to bats – in the State of Arizona. Much of it should be relevant to neighboring states, as well, with a bit of fine-tuning to accommodate additions and deletions to the list. “As a retired Wildlife Biologist, I have to say Rogers’ book is perhaps the simplest to understand, yet most comprehensive in terms of factual information, that I have ever had occasion to peruse. This book should become the default checklist for Arizona’s various state, federal and local conservation agencies, and the basis for developing accurate local inventories by private enthusiasts as well as public agencies. "Arizona Wildlife Notebook" provides a superb starting point for neighboring states who may wish to emulate Garry Rogers’ excellent handiwork.
    [Show full text]
  • Blue River Native Fish Restoration Project
    Draft Environmental Assessment Blue River Native Fish Restoration Project Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests Greenlee and Apache Counties, Arizona U. S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Phoenix Area Office July 2010 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Draft Environmental Assessment Blue River Native Fish Restoration Project Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests Greenlee and Apache Counties, Arizona U. S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Phoenix Area Office July 2010 Draft Environmental Assessment Blue River Native Fish Restoration TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................ iv CHAPTER 1 – PURPOSE AND NEED .................................................................................. 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1 1.2 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................... 2 1.3 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION .......................................................................
    [Show full text]