DOCSLIB.ORG

Quino Checkerspot Butterfly

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Item No. 16 STAFF SUMMARY FOR FEBRUARY 10, 2021 16. QUINO CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY Today’s Item Information ☐ Action ☒ Consider and potentially act on the petition, DFW’s 90-day evaluation report, and comments received to determine whether listing Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) as a threatened or endangered species under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) may be warranted. Summary of Previous/Future Actions • Receive petition Jun 29, 2020 • Transmitted petition to DFW Jul 8, 2020 • Publish notice of receipt of petition Jul 24, 2020 • Public receipt of petition and action Aug 19-20, 2020; Webinar/Teleconference on DFW’s request for a 30-day extension • Public receipt of DFW evaluation of Dec 9-10, 2020; Webinar/Teleconference petition • Today determine if listing may be Feb 10, 2021; Webinar/Teleconference warranted Background On Jun 29, 2020, FGC received a petition from the Center for Biological Diversity and the Endangered Species League to list Quino checkerspot butterfly as endangered under CESA (Exhibit 1). On Jul 8, 2020, FGC staff transmitted the petition to DFW for review. A notice of receipt of the petition was published in the California Regulatory Notice Register on Jul 24, 2020. California Fish and Game Code Section 2073.5 requires that DFW evaluate the petition and submit a written evaluation with a recommendation, which was received at FGC’s Dec 2020 meeting. The evaluation report (exhibits 2 and 3) delineates each of the categories of information required for a petition, evaluates the sufficiency of the available scientific information for each of the required components, and incorporates additional relevant information that DFW possessed or received during the review period. Based on the information contained in the petition and other relevant information, DFW has determined that there is sufficient information to indicate the petitioned action may be warranted. At today’s meeting, FGC will receive a presentation (Exhibit 4) on DFW’s petition evaluation and hold a public hearing to receive oral testimony. Today’s hearing takes place more than 30 days after the public release of the evaluation report as required by Fish and Game Code Section 2074. CESA and FGC’s regulations require that the petition contain specific scientific information related to the status of the species. CESA, and case law interpreting it, make clear that FGC must accept a petition when the petition contains sufficient information to lead a reasonable Author: Jenn Greaves 1 Item No. 16 STAFF SUMMARY FOR FEBRUARY 10, 2021 person to conclude that there is a substantial possibility the requested listing could occur; the requested listing is tied to the species’ status, that is, whether the species’ continued existence is in serious danger or is threatened by a number of factors, and does not relate to economic consequences that might result from listing. Consistent with Fish and Game Code Section 2074.2, FGC may make a decision at this meeting or continue the decision to a future meeting. If FGC determines listing may be warranted, DFW will undertake a one-year status review before FGC can make a final decision on listing, and Quino checkerspot butterfly will become a candidate species pursuant to Section 2074.2. Candidate species are protected under CESA during the remainder of the listing process, pursuant to Section 2085. Significant Public Comments Two development firms object to the petition and its proposal to list Quino checkerspot butterfly under CESA. The firms state that FGC lacks the jurisdiction to consider or approve the petition, based on the legal argument that Quino checkerspot butterfly falls outside the regulatory ambit of CESA. The firms also argue that neither the petition nor the DFW evaluation account for Quino checkerspot butterfly and Quino checkerspot butterfly resources on public lands held for conservation purposes (Exhibit 5). Recommendation FGC staff: Close the public hearing and administrative record and continue the decision to the April 2021 meeting. In the absence of a continuation, determine that the listing may be warranted. DFW: Accept the petition for further consideration under CESA. Exhibits 1. CESA petition, received Jun 29, 2020 2. DFW transmittal memo, received Dec 3, 2020 3. DFW 90-day evaluation report, received Dec 3, 2020 4. DFW presentation 5. Letters from Gatzke Dillon & Balance LLP, sent on behalf of Baldwin and Sons, and GDCI Proctor Valley LLC, received Jan 8, 2021 Motion/Direction Moved by __________ and seconded by __________ that the Commission, pursuant to Section 2074.2 of the California Fish and Game Code, closes the public hearing and administrative record and continues the meeting on the petition for the purpose of deliberation to the April 14-15, 2021 meeting. OR Moved by __________ and seconded by __________ that the Commission, pursuant to Section 2074.2 of the California Fish and Game Code, finds the petition to list Quino checkerspot butterfly as an endangered species under the California Endangered Species Act does provide sufficient information to indicate that the petitioned action may be warranted Author: Jenn Greaves 2 Item No. 16 STAFF SUMMARY FOR FEBRUARY 10, 2021 based on the information in the record before the Commission, and directs staff to issue a notice reflecting this finding and indicating that Quino checkerspot butterfly is a candidate for threatened or endangered species status. OR Moved by __________ and seconded by __________ that the Commission, pursuant to Section 2074.2 of the California Fish and Game Code, finds that the petition to list Quino checkerspot butterfly as an endangered species under the California Endangered Species Act does not provide sufficient information to indicate that the petitioned action may be warranted based on the information in the record before the Commission. Author: Jenn Greaves 3 PETITION TO LIST THE QUINO CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY (Euphydryas editha quino) AS ENDANGERED UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT Photo credit: Robert A. Hamilton, Hamilton Biological CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY And ENDANGERED HABITATS LEAGUE June 29, 2020 FGC – 670.1 (3/94) NOTICE OF PETITION TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FISH AND GAME COMISSION For action pursuant to Section 670.1, Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR) and sections 2072 and 2073 of the Fish and Game Code relating to listing and delisting endangered and threatened species of plants and animals. I. SPECIES BEING PETITIONED Common name: Quino checkerspot butterfly Scientific name: (Euphydryas editha quino) II. RECOMMENDED ACTION: List as endangered The Center for Biological Diversity and Endangered Habitats League submit this petition to list the Quino checkerspot butterfly as endangered throughout its range in California pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act (California Fish and Game Code §§ 2050 et seq.). This petition demonstrates that the Quino checkerspot butterfly clearly warrants listing based on the factors specified in the statute. III. AUTHOR OF PETITION Tara Cornelisse, PhD Center for Biological Diversity PO Box 11374 Portland, OR 97211-0374 503-283-5474 [email protected] I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, all statements made in this petition are true and complete. Signature: Date: June 29, 2020 The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 1.6 million members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places. The Endangered Habitats League is a Southern California nonprofit regional conservation organization dedicated to ecosystem protection and sustainable land use. ii Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................2 Natural History ...........................................................................................................................3 Taxonomy ...............................................................................................................................3 Description ..............................................................................................................................3 Habitat and Host Plants............................................................................................................4 Life Cycle and Behavior ..........................................................................................................6 Larval Diapause ...................................................................................................................7 Adult Dispersal ....................................................................................................................7 Metapopulation Dynamics .......................................................................................................8 Population Trend, Distribution, and Abundance ..........................................................................9 Historic Population Trend, Distribution, and Abundance ....................................................... 11 Current Population Trend, Distribution, and Abundance ........................................................ 13 Riverside County ..............................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • The Disastrous Impacts of Trump's Border Wall on Wildlife

    The Disastrous Impacts of Trump's Border Wall on Wildlife

    a Wall in the Wild The Disastrous Impacts of Trump’s Border Wall on Wildlife Noah Greenwald, Brian Segee, Tierra Curry and Curt Bradley Center for Biological Diversity, May 2017 Saving Life on Earth Executive Summary rump’s border wall will be a deathblow to already endangered animals on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border. This report examines the impacts of construction of that wall on threatened and endangered species along the entirety of the nearly 2,000 miles of the border between the United States and Mexico. TThe wall and concurrent border-enforcement activities are a serious human-rights disaster, but the wall will also have severe impacts on wildlife and the environment, leading to direct and indirect habitat destruction. A wall will block movement of many wildlife species, precluding genetic exchange, population rescue and movement of species in response to climate change. This may very well lead to the extinction of the jaguar, ocelot, cactus ferruginous pygmy owl and other species in the United States. To assess the impacts of the wall on imperiled species, we identified all species protected as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act, or under consideration for such protection by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“candidates”), that have ranges near or crossing the border. We also determined whether any of these species have designated “critical habitat” on the border in the United States. Finally, we reviewed available literature on the impacts of the existing border wall. We found that the border wall will have disastrous impacts on our most vulnerable wildlife, including: 93 threatened, endangered and candidate species would potentially be affected by construction of a wall and related infrastructure spanning the entirety of the border, including jaguars, Mexican gray wolves and Quino checkerspot butterflies.
  • Microhabitat Conditions Associated with the Distribution of Postdiapause Larvae of Euphydryas Editha Quino (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) Author(S): Kendall H

    Microhabitat Conditions Associated with the Distribution of Postdiapause Larvae of Euphydryas Editha Quino (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) Author(S): Kendall H

    RO-4-123 Microhabitat Conditions Associated with the Distribution of Postdiapause Larvae of Euphydryas editha quino (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) Author(s): Kendall H. Osborne and Richard A. Redak Source: Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 93(1):110-114. 2000. Published By: Entomological Society of America DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1603/0013-8746(2000)093[0110:MCAWTD]2.0.CO;2 URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1603/0013-8746%282000%29093%5B0110%3AMCAWTD %5D2.0.CO%3B2 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. CONSERVATION AND BIODIVERSITY Microhabitat Conditions Associated with the Distribution of Postdiapause Larvae of Euphydryas editha quino (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) 1 KENDALL H. OSBORNE AND RICHARD A. REDAK Department of Entomology, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521 Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 93(1): 110Ð114 (2000) ABSTRACT Microhabitats of postdiapause larvae of Euphydryas editha quino (Behr) were found to differ from random habitat points in percentage cover, grass, shade, shrub, and host plant (Plantago erecta E.
  • And Mission Blue Butterfly Populations Found at Milagra Ridge and the Mission Blue Butterfly Population at Marin Headlands Are Managed by the GGNRA

    And Mission Blue Butterfly Populations Found at Milagra Ridge and the Mission Blue Butterfly Population at Marin Headlands Are Managed by the GGNRA

    San Bruno Elfin Butterfly (Callophrys mossii bayensis) and Mission Blue Butterfly (Icaricia icarioides missionensis) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation Photo by Patrick Kobernus: Adult male mission blue butterfly. Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Field Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sacramento, California February 2010 5-YEAR REVIEW San Bruno Elfin Butterfly (Callophrys mossii bayensis) and Mission blue butterfly (Icaricia icarioides missionensis) I. GENERAL INFORMATION Purpose of 5-Year Reviews: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is required by section 4(c)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) to conduct a status review of each listed species at least once every 5 years. The purpose of a 5-year review is to evaluate whether or not the species’ status has changed since it was listed (or since the most recent 5-year review). Based on the 5-year review, we recommend whether the species should be removed from the list of endangered and threatened species, be changed in status from endangered to threatened, or be changed in status from threatened to endangered. Our original listing of a species as endangered or threatened is based on the existence of threats attributable to one or more of the five threat factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act, and we must consider these same five factors in any subsequent consideration of reclassification or delisting of a species. In the 5-year review, we consider the best available scientific and commercial data on the species, and focus on new information available since the species was listed or last reviewed.
  • Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey Report 2017

    Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey Report 2017

    Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Biological Monitoring Program 2017 Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) Survey Report 22 June 2018 2017 Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey Report TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................... 2 METHODS ............................................................................................................................ 3 PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................ 3 STUDY SITE SELECTION ..................................................................................................................... 3 SURVEY METHODS ............................................................................................................................ 6 TRAINING ........................................................................................................................................... 7 DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................ 7 RESULTS .............................................................................................................................. 8 SENTINEL SITE SURVEYS ..................................................................................................................
  • Arthropod Community Response to Nitrogen Deposition Eliza Hernández Research Mentor: Erin Questad, Ph.D

    Arthropod Community Response to Nitrogen Deposition Eliza Hernández Research Mentor: Erin Questad, Ph.D

    Arthropod community response to nitrogen deposition Eliza Hernández Research Mentor: Erin Questad, Ph.D. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona Abstract Insects play key ecological roles by providing services such as pollination and decomposition. Anthropogenic activity threatens the conservation of beneficial insects and is partly responsible for the observed decline in insect diversity. Nitrogen deposition, a human- accelerated process, poses a threat to insect diversity and thus, their valuable services. Increased N levels have been found to increase insect abundances yet decrease their species richness. The primary focus of this project was to determine the effects of N on the taxonomic richness, diversity, and evenness of insects and other arthropods in a managed grassland experiment at the South Coast Research & Extension Center in Irvine, California. I sampled from ten experimental grassland plots, five of which were treated with elevated levels of N and the other five were exposed to ambient levels of N. The plots contained grasses typical of Southern California grasslands, such as the California native grass, Stipa pulchra, and the invasive grass, Bromus hordeaceus. To sample soil and litter-dwelling arthropods throughout the growing season, each plot contained two pitfall traps. Arthropods were identified to the family taxonomic level. I expected to find greater arthropod richness, diversity, and evenness in the plots with ambient N compared to elevated N. However, this project indicates that fertilized plots host a greater richness of soil and litter-dwelling arthropod groups. Introduction Anthropogenic N deposition has more than doubled inputs of N to terrestrial ecosystems worldwide via the transformation of unreactive atmospheric N into biologically available forms on land (Vitousek et al., 1997).
  • A Management and Monitoring Plan for Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas Editha Quino) and Its Habitats in San Diego County

    A Management and Monitoring Plan for Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas Editha Quino) and Its Habitats in San Diego County

    A Management and Monitoring Plan for Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) and its Habitats in San Diego County Advisory Report to the County of San Diego Travis Longcore, Ph.D. The Urban Wildlands Group P.O. Box 24020 Los Angeles, CA 90024 Dennis D. Murphy, Ph.D. Department of Biology The University of Nevada, Reno Reno, NV 89557 Douglas H. Deutschman, Ph.D. Department of Biology San Diego State University San Diego, CA 92182 Richard Redak, Ph.D. Department of Entomology University of California, Riverside Riverside, CA 92521 Robert Fisher, Ph.D. USGS Western Ecological Research Center San Diego Field Station 5745 Kearny Villa Road, Suite M San Diego, CA 92123 December 30, 2003 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................................... I LIST OF FIGURES...........................................................................................................................................................II LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................................... III INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................................................1 LIFE HISTORY OF THE BUTTERFLY AND AN ENVIROGRAM .......................................................................3 HABITAT MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................................................8
  • Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas Editha Quino)

    Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas Editha Quino)

    Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation Painting by Alison Anderson after photo by Frank Ohrmund U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office Carlsbad, California August 13, 2009 2009 5-year Review for Euphydryas editha quino 5-YEAR REVIEW Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) I. GENERAL INFORMATION Purpose of 5-Year Review: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is required by section 4(c)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (Act) to conduct a review of each listed species at least once every 5 years. The purpose of a 5-year review is to evaluate whether or not the species’ status has changed since it was listed (or since the most recent 5-year review). Based on the 5-year review, we recommend whether the species should be removed from the list of endangered and threatened species, be changed in status from endangered to threatened, or be changed in status from threatened to endangered. Our original listing of a species as endangered or threatened is based on the existence of threats attributable to one or more of the five threat factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act, and we must consider these same five factors in any subsequent consideration of reclassification or delisting of a species. In the 5-year review, we consider the best available scientific and commercial data on the species, and focus on new information available since the species was listed or last reviewed. If we recommend a change in listing status based on the results of the 5-year review, we must propose to do so through a separate rule-making process defined in the Act that includes public review and comment.
  • Changing Distribution Patterns of an Endangered Butterfly: Linking Local Extinction Patterns and Variable Habitat Relationships ⇑ Kristine L

    Changing Distribution Patterns of an Endangered Butterfly: Linking Local Extinction Patterns and Variable Habitat Relationships ⇑ Kristine L

    Biological Conservation 152 (2012) 280–290 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon RO-4-125 Changing distribution patterns of an endangered butterfly: Linking local extinction patterns and variable habitat relationships ⇑ Kristine L. Preston a,d, , Richard A. Redak a,b, Michael F. Allen a,c, John T. Rotenberry a,c a Center for Conservation Biology, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA b Department of Entomology, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA c Department of Biology, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA d Nature Reserve of Orange County, 15600 Sand Canyon Avenue, Irvine, CA 92618, USA article info abstract Article history: Multiple processes are increasingly recognized as being responsible for species’ extinctions. We evaluated Received 11 September 2011 population extinctions between 1930 and 1998 for the endangered Quino checkerspot (Euphydryas editha Received in revised form 2 March 2012 quino) butterfly relative to agricultural history, human population growth, climate variability, topograph- Accepted 11 March 2012 ical diversity, and wildflower abundance. Overall agricultural land use was calculated for extinct and extant populations based upon cultivation and grazing intensities averaged across five time periods reflecting distinct agricultural practices from 1769 to present. Extinct populations were associated with Keywords: a history of more intensive agriculture and greater human population growth at time of extinction. A long Agricultural intensification history of intensive livestock grazing was the strongest agricultural predictor of extinction. Based upon Euphydryas editha quino Extinction historic vegetation maps, extinct butterfly populations were typically isolated from other known popu- Grazing lations by 1930, and in landscapes fragmented by cultivation and development.
  • Euphydryas Editha Quino) – Category SL

    Euphydryas Editha Quino) – Category SL

    Volume 2D: Goals and Objectives for Species Focus Management Species 2.0 Invertebrates 2.2 Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) – Category SL Management Units with Known Occurrences Quino checkerspot butterfly was historically one of the most widespread and abundant butterfly species in coastal southern California, distributed from Los Angeles County south into northern Baja California, Mexico, and east into the inland valleys south of the Tehachapi Mountains (Mattoni et al. 1997; USFWS 2003). The species began declining in the 1920s, with steep declines in the 1970s, and is now restricted to several localities in San Diego and Riverside Counties and northern Baja California. Quino checkerspot occur in open shrubland and native grassland that support larval host plants such as dwarf plantain (Plantago erecta) and white snapdragon (Antirrhinum coulterianum), and diverse nectar sources for adults. USFWS designated the following Recovery Units for Quino Checkerspot in San Diego County in 2003: South Riverside/North San Diego Recovery Unit, Southwest San Diego Recovery Unit, and Southeast San Diego Recovery Unit (USFWS 2003). The Southwest San Diego Recovery Unit and the South Riverside/North San Diego Recovery Unit occur within the MSPA. Each Recovery Unit contains identified occurrence complexes defined as estimated occupied areas based on habitat within 1 kilometer (0.6 mile) of recent [not defined] Quino checkerspot detections (USFWS 2003). Quino often display a metapopulation structure, so it is important to conserve temporarily unoccupied habitat for population resilience (USFWS 2009). Known locations of Quino checkerspot in San Diego County are best compiled in SANBIOS (2012) and are derived from surveys conducted by consultants, butterfly enthusiasts, and agency personnel.
  • (Euphydryas Editha Quino) DRAFT RECOVERY PLAN

    (Euphydryas Editha Quino) DRAFT RECOVERY PLAN

    QUINO CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY (Euphydryas editha quino) DRAFT RECOVERY PLAN (January 2001) Region 1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Portland, Oregon Approved: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Manager, California Nevada Operations Office, Region 1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX PRIMARY AUTHORS This recovery plan was prepared by: Alison Anderson Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service The primary scientific authors of this recovery plan were the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Recovery Team: Dr. Edith Allen, Team Chair Mark Dodero Dr. Camille Parmesan Dr. Travis Longcore Dr. Gordon Pratt Dr. Dennis Murphy Dr. Michael Singer i DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate actions required to recover and protect federally listed plant and animal species. We (the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) publish recovery plans, sometimes preparing them with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and other affected and interested parties. Recovery teams serve as independent advisors to the Fish and Wildlife Service. Draft plans are published for public review and submitted to scientific peer review before we adopt them. Objectives of the recovery plan will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not obligate other parties to undertake specific tasks and do not necessarily represent the view, official position, or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formation other than our own. They represent our official position only after they have been signed by the Director, Regional Director, or California/Nevada Operations Manager as approved.
  • Complex Effects of Nitrogen Pollution and Grazing on Nectar Resources of the Adult Bay Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas Editha Bayensis)

    Complex Effects of Nitrogen Pollution and Grazing on Nectar Resources of the Adult Bay Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas Editha Bayensis)

    San Jose State University SJSU ScholarWorks Master's Theses Master's Theses and Graduate Research Fall 2015 Complex effects of Nitrogen Pollution and Grazing on Nectar resources of the Adult Bay Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis) Nidhi Jain San Jose State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_theses Recommended Citation Jain, Nidhi, "Complex effects of Nitrogen Pollution and Grazing on Nectar resources of the Adult Bay Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis)" (2015). Master's Theses. 4640. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31979/etd.wydq-986f https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_theses/4640 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Master's Theses and Graduate Research at SJSU ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of SJSU ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COMPLEX EFFECTS OF NITROGEN POLLUTION AND GRAZING ON NECTAR RESOURCES OF THE ADULT BAY CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY (EUPHYDRYAS EDITHA BAYENSIS ) A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Environmental Studies San José State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science by Nidhi Jain December 2015 ©2015 Nidhi Jain ALL RIGHTS RESERVED The Designated Thesis Committee Approves the Thesis Titled COMPLEX EFFECTS OF NITROGEN POLLUTION AND GRAZING ON NECTAR RESOURCES OF THE ADULT BAY CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY (EUPHYDRYAS EDITHA BAYENSIS ) by Nidhi Jain APPROVED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES SAN JOSÉ STATE UNIVERSITY December 2015 Dr. Rachel O’Malley Department of Environmental Studies Dr. Lynne Trulio Department of Environmental Studies Dr.
  • Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey Report 2016

    Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey Report 2016

    Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Biological Monitoring Program 2016 Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) Survey Report 16 June 2017 2016 Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey Report TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 4 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................... 6 METHODS ............................................................................................................................ 6 PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................ 6 STUDY SITE SELECTION ..................................................................................................................... 6 SURVEY METHODS ............................................................................................................................ 8 TRAINING ......................................................................................................................................... 10 DATA ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................................. 10 RESULTS ......................................................................................................................... 10 SENTINEL SITE VISITS .....................................................................................................................