sign in sign up
<<
Home , Agapostemon angelicus, Bee, Deer

Bee Fauna of Flat National Wildlife Refuge Canyon County, Idaho

Prepared by:

Joseph Engler, Wildlife Biologist (retired), U.S. and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon

Erin Stockenberg, Region 1 Inventory & Monitoring Data Manager, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon

Jason Romine, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Burbank,

Annette de Knijf, Refuge Manager, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Nampa, Idaho

Disclaimer: ‘‘The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.’’

1 16 February 2018

Introduction The Pacific Region (Region 1) of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) initiated a inventory program to document the bee fauna at National Wildlife Refuges (NWR) in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho from 2010-2016. Sixteen NWRs and one Bureau of Land Management site was sampled during this time frame. Refuges inventoried include: Deer Flat NWR, Minidoka NWR, Kootenai NWR in Idaho; Little Pend Oreille NWR, Turnbull NWR, Hanford National Monument, McNary NWR, Conboy Lake NWR, Pierce NWR, Steigerwald Lake NWR, Ridgefield NWR, Julia Butler Hansen Refuge for Columbia White-tailed Deer, Lewis and Clark NWR, Willapa NWR, and Protection Island NWR in Washington; and Malheur NWR in Oregon. Appendix 1 and 2 show the location of each NWR and the corresponding Bailey’s Province and Ecoregion Section inventoried from 2010-2016. In addition, the Bureau of Land Management’s Oregon Trail Interpretive Center was included as part of this inventory effort.

Deer Flat NWR (herein referred to as the Refuge) was sampled during the 2011 and 2012 seasons. This refuge-specific report is one of a series that provides the results of this bee inventory effort in the Pacific Northwest.

Study Site The Refuge is located in Canyon County, west of the City of Nampa, Idaho (Map 1 and Title Page) and within the Snake River Basin. The Refuge is situated within the Intermountain Semi-Desert Province (Bailey 1995). Inventory transects are further characterized in this report as Mixed Evergreen-Deciduous Shrubland (Visitor Center transect) and Deciduous Open Canopy (Shop Transect) within the Landfire subclass schema (Landfire 2008). Map 2 shows the habitat classification for the refuge and surrounding area. The refuge is characterized by the 10,528-acre man-made Lake Lowell which stores water for agricultural use. Water is diverted from the Boise River through the 40-mile New York Canal to fill the lake. The “native” habitat surrounding the lake is shrub-steppe dominated by sagebrush (Artemisia spp) including bitterbrush (Purshia tridentate), fourwing saltbush (Atriplex canescens), gray/green rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus spp.), greasewood (Sarcobatus vermiculatus), spiny horsebrush (Tetradymia spinosa), and spiny hopsage (Grayia spinosa). The understory consists of native bunch grasses and including bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata), Indian ricegrass (Achnatherum hymenoides), squirreltail bottlebrush (Elymus elymoides), steppe bluebunch, Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis), Great Basin wildrye (Leymus cinereus), and Sandberg’s bluegrass (Poa secunda). However, due to the long history of ranching, farming and residential development in the area, noxious and have supplanted the native species. These invasive include cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum), Canada (Cirsium arvense) and Scotch thistles (Onopordum acanthium), rush skeletonweed (Chondrilla juncea), perennial pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium), purple loosestrife (), puncturevine (Tribulus terrestris), tamarisk (Tamarix spp.), and Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia).

2 16 February 2018

Map 1. Location of Deer Flat NWR and Bee Inventory Transects

Most of the surrounding private lands consist of high intensity farming with little natural lands interspersed for 10-30 miles in all directions, thus impeding dispersal of some wildlife including . An artificial corridor was created with the construction of the irrigation infrastructure associated with the New York Canal, the Lake Lowell Reservoir, and its inflows and outflows. It is likely that certain wildlife species, including , would travel along this corridor. Major crops include , pasture/hay, corn, pasture/grass, winter wheat, dry beans, herbs, sugar beets, onions, and potatoes. The Soil Survey of Canyon Area, Idaho (Priest et al. 1972) describes the soils surrounding Lake Lowell as primarily consisting of a mix of Vickery and Marsing soils with lesser areas of Scism, Purdam, Power-Purdam, and Bram soils. Some of the areas on the Refuge lands immediately surrounding Lake Lowell are mapped as Marsh and the lake itself, of course, is mapped as Water. With the exception of the Bram soils, which are somewhat poorly drained, the soils mapped on the Lake Lowell Unit are well drained.

Riparian habitat was created with the completion of the New York Canal flowing into the Refuge. Over time, lush vegetation and established creating a relatively thin ribbon of riparian forest around Lake Lowell, and especially in the southeast corner of the Refuge where the canal enters the lake. The riparian forests on the Refuge are dominated by invasive and non- native plants with little representation of species native to riparian habitats in the region (e.g., ). Upper canopy is characterized by cottonwood with an understory dominated by Russian

3 16 February 2018

olive, false indigo bush, and some tamarisk, with a small native component of willows (e.g., (Salix exigua), peachleaf willow (Salix amygdaloides)], wild (Rosa acicularis), golden currant (Ribes aureum), elderberry (Sambucus spp.), and skunkbush sumac (Rhus trilobata). The herbaceous layer is dominated by invasive species such as reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), Canada thistle, perennial pepperweed, and purple loosestrife.

In the past, the Refuge has used a cooperative to farm between 100 and 300 acres, leaving about 25% of the crop in the ground to provide for wildlife as the Refuge’s share. Alfalfa, winter wheat, barley, corn, and dry beans have been grown. Farming has not occurred on the Refuge since 2016, as the cooperative farmer did not feel he could make a profit while adhering to new guidelines regarding GMOs, herbicides, and . Management is currently examining how best to use those farm fields in the future.

This portion of Idaho has an arid climate with winter temperatures averaging 30° and summer temperatures averaging 75°; temperatures range from a record high of 109° to a record low of minus 26°. Precipitation falls mainly as snow with annual precipitation averaging 11 inches. Transects were located near the visitor center and maintenance shop and are designated as 18 and 19 on Map 1 and Map 2. The visitor center transect is located just off the Observation Hill Trail system approximately 154 yards from the visitor center. Habitat at this location is shrub-steppe dominated by cheatgrass understory. Visitors enjoy hiking this trail, but exact numbers for how many people use this trail is not available. The shop transect is located immediately northwest of the maintenance shop in a lawn area that receives regular watering and mowing. Although clover and other weedy species grow in the lawn, it provides resources for pollinators. Cottonwoods (Populus spp.), black walnut (Juglans nigra), and pines (Pinus spp.) were planted to provide shade. Although the maintenance shop is located in an area closed to the public, staff and volunteer activity occur here. The shop transect is approximately 90 yards from the lake’s edge; whereas, the visitor center transect is approximately 170 yards from the lake’s edge. Methods Baseline sampling was conducted at the Refuge using two-bee bowl ( pan trap) transects. Transects were set near Refuge headquarters/visitor center and the maintenance shop (Map 1 and Table 1) to facilitate sample collection.

The sampling protocol uses a thirty-bowl (3.25 ounce Solo cup) transect which is deployed early in the season and run periodically through the autumn. This protocol was recommended by Sam Droege (US Geological Survey) and is further described in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Protocol Framework for the Inventory and Monitoring of Bees (Droege et al. 2016). The primary bee activity season in the Pacific Northwest occurs from early April through October; however, some bee activity may occur almost -round, especially west of the Cascade Mountains. Based on expert opinion, some bee species may complete their adult free- flying phase in three weeks or less, and thus traps were deployed approximately every two weeks during this time frame to maximize the number of species encountered. Exact start and end dates were dependent on available staffing.

4 16 February 2018

Table 1: Transect Locations for Deer Flat NWR

Transect Name Map # Latitude (dd) Longitude (dd) Elevation (ft) MSL Office 18 43.5620 -116.6680 2,581 Shop 19 43.5528 -116.6414 2,555

Map 2: Habitat Classification Map, Deer Flat NWR

At the Refuge, the thirty-bowl scheme was divided into two fifteen-bowl transects to attain better coverage of available habitats. Each transect consisted of fifteen bee bowls which were painted in three colors – fluorescent blue, fluorescent , and white. Bowls were placed in roughly a straight with five meters between bowls, each bowl alternating in color. Bowls are filled about ¾ full with soapy water to capture bees. Each transect was deployed during daylight hours on a single target day or remained out overnight for approximately 24 hours, contents were then collected and the bowls removed from the site. Transects were run approximately every two weeks at the same locations but some variability existed between sites and trapping episodes.

5 16 February 2018

For transects, trap-hours were calculated for each sample on a daily basis when deployed. A sample consisted of all functional bowls (15 or fewer) in a transect. Trap-hours were defined as the total number of hours the transect was operating (capable of catching bees). If some bowls were not functional (missing, spilled, or otherwise incapable of catching bees, trap-hours were reduced accordingly. Trap-hours were also reduced for night time hours based on sunrise and sunset schedules through the season. It was assumed that few if any bees were active during the night, however, this assumption remains speculative as some bee species are known to be crepuscular and a few nocturnal

Samples were collected by pouring each bowl into a fine mesh brine shrimp aquarium net and rinsing with water to remove the soap residue; all soap solutions were retained and reused. All fifteen bowls in a transect were combined to create a single, composite sample for the bi-weekly period. Samples were placed in whirl-pak bags and 70% alcohol (either isopropyl or ethyl) was added to completely cover specimens. Samples were then sent to the USFWS’s Branch of Refuge (BRB), Vancouver, WA for processing and preliminary identification to and species. BRB’s processing included washing, drying, pinning, positioning, and labeling each specimen. Specimens that were not identified by BRB to species or required verification were sent to species experts for final determinations. Identifications were conducted by Joseph Engler (USFWS BRB), Dr. Robbin Thorp (University of California-Davis), and the USDA ARS Bee Biology and Systematics Laboratory (BBSL) in Logan, Utah.

Results Sampling occurred from 24 May 2011 to 11 August 2011 and 2 April 2012 to 5 October 2012 with both transects being deployed simultaneously. Six sampling events occurred in 2011 but this number was doubled in 2012 to provide a more representative sample of the breadth of the Refuge bee fauna (Table 2). Transects were opened a total of 186 hours in 2011 and 285 hours in 2012. Trapping events ranged from 2 to 22 hours. The average trapping event was 12.1 hours across the two seasons. Table 2 summarizes the trapping effort.

A total of 23 genera and 36 bee species were identified during the sampling period, though not all bee species have been identified to date. Although the number of genera and species identified were similar between the two transects, there was a considerable difference in the number of bees collected from the Visitor Center transect when compared to the Shop transect (Table 3, Table 4). This disparity was due to relatively low numbers of the common halictids (sweat bees) at the shop transect, notably angelicus/texanus, (Dialictus), and Halictus tripartitus. Conversely, bees (Apis) were commonly captured at the Shop.

Table 5 provides a complete list of bee species identified on the Refuge and the number of specimens captured by gender. In general, fewer males are captured for most genera due to their shorter flight season.

6 16 February 2018

Table 2. Bee Sampling Summary for Deer Flat NWR, 2011-2012

Transect Name # Samples Collected & Trap-Hours 2011 Trap- 2012 Trap- Hours Hours Visitor Center 6 94 12 151 Shop 6 92 12 134 Totals 12 186 24 285

Table 3. Summary of Bee Identifications for Deer Flat NWR, 2011-2012

Refuge # Genera # Species # Bees with # Bees Identified Identified preliminary Collected identification pending (1) Visitor Center 18 25 12 3334 Shop 16 24 12 788 Total Unique for Refuge 23 36 24 4122 1 does not include Lasioglossum lato which includes 4 difficult to identify subgenera (Dialictus, Evylaeus, Hemihalictus, Sphecodogastra); few specimens are expected to be identified beyond the genus/subgenus level.

Table 4. Number of Bee Species Captured by Genus at Deer Flat NWR, 2011-2012

Family Name Genus Name # of Species Captured by Genus Shop Shop Visitor Visitor Total Center Center 2011 2012 2011 2012 Andrena 1 1 Andrenidae Calliopsis 1 1 Apis 1 1 1 1 1 Apidae Bombus 1 1 Apidae 1 1 1 Apidae (1)3 1 (1) 1 Apidae Epeolus 1 (1) 1 Apidae Eucera 1 1 Apidae Melissodes 1 3 3 Apidae 1 1 1 Apidae Triepeolus 1 1 1 1 Colletidae 1 (1) (1) Agapostemon 3 3 2 3 4

7 16 February 2018

Halictidae Halictus 2 3 3 2 3 Halictidae Lasioglossum 1 1 1 (Lasioglossum) Halictidae Lasioglossum (1) (Dialictus) 1,2 Halictidae Lasioglossum 1 1 1 1 1 (Evylaeus) 1,2 Halictidae Lasioglossum (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) sensu lato 1,2 Halictidae Sphecodes 1 (1) (1) (1) 1 1 Megachilidae Coelioxys (1) (1) Megachilidae Dianthidium 2 2 Megachilidae Hoplitis 1 1 1 Megachilidae 3 (1) 1 3 Megachilidae Osmia 2 3 1 2 6 1 Identification of this genus/subgenus to a species level is difficult; species # may not be reflective of the actual # of species captured.

2 Taxonomic classifications of these subgenera are uncertain. Only identified species are included for subgenera Dialictus and Evylaeus, which may significantly underestimate the number of species present. Lasioglossum sensu lato includes subgenera Dialictus, Evylaeus, Sphecodogastra, and Hemihalictus.

3 a (1) indicates that this genus was collected but no specimens have currently been identified to species

Table 5. Bee Species List for Deer Flat National Wildlife Refuge, 2011-2012

# Females # Males Genus SpecificEpithet Captured Captured Agapostemon angelicus / texanus a 661 45 Agapostemon femoratus 112 Agapostemon melliventris 1 Agapostemon virescens 32 Andrena candida 1 1 Apis mellifera 125 Bombus huntii 1 Calliopsis puellae 1 Ceratina acantha 3 6 Colletes phaceliae 1 Diadasia australis 1 Diadasia spp. 5 Dianthidium curvatum 4 Dianthidium pudicum 5 1

8 16 February 2018

Epeolus americanus 3 1 Eucera actuosa 1 Halictus ligatus 57 8 Halictus rubicundus 7 Halictus tripartitus 445 Hoplitis producta 2 1 Hylaeus spp. 3 Lasioglossum kincaidii 54 6 Lasioglossum sisymbrii 2 Lasioglossum (Dialictus) spp. 2387 45 Lasioglossum (Evylaeus) spp. 27 Megachile onobrychidis 11 2 1 3 5 Megachile spp. 3 1 Melissodes agilis 5 1 Melissodes pallidisignata 1 Melissodes saponellus 1 Melissodes spp. 3 1 Osmia brevis 1 1 Osmia calla 1 Osmia ednae 1 Osmia nemoris 3 Osmia regulina 1 Osmia trevoris 1 6 5 Sphecodes spp. 4 1 Triepeolus helianthi 1 a Female Agapostemon angelicus and A. texanus cannot be reliably distinguished to species.

Discussion The Refuge appears to have a reduced bee fauna compared to other refuges within the Intermountain Semi-Desert Province. Although the number of genera captured is similar to other refuges in this province, the number of identified species is approximately one-half to one-third of those sites. Direct comparison with these other refuges cannot be made due to differences in collection methodology and sampling effort while also considering the fact there are remaining unidentified species. That said, the Refuge’s isolation proximate to a highly urban and agriculturally developed area and the high preponderance of non-native species would suggest that this reduced diversity is likely true.

9 16 February 2018

Of the refuges inventoried throughout the Pacific Northwest using bee bowls, the Refuge had the highest capture rate of non-native honey bees, which is presumably due to the intensive agriculture in the area.

Sampling in 2011-2012 occurred along the northeast side of Lake Lowell, in closest proximity to Nampa, and in relatively monotypic and altered /shrub habitat. Additional future sampling along the southwest portion of the lake where riparian habitat is common and surrounding lands are primarily agricultural is recommended to likely encounter additional bee species for the Refuge.

Acknowledgments We thank Paul Backus, Addison Mohler, and Sabrina Seidel for setting up, maintaining, and collecting transect samples. We also thank the Pacific Region’s Inventory and Monitoring Program for providing funds for supplies and specimen identifications.

We thank the staff of the USDA ARS Bee Biology and Systematics Laboratory, Logan, Utah for specimen processing and identifications, especially Harold Ikerd, Terry Griswold, and Brian Rozick. We also thank Dr. Robbin Thorp, Distinguished Emeritus Professor, University of California, Davis, California for specimen identification and verification, especially regarding bumble bees.

References Bailey R.G. 1995. Description of the ecoregions of the United States. US Department of Agriculture Forest Service Publication 1391. Washington DC, USA. http://www.fs.fed.us/land/ecosysmgmt/ecoreg1_home.html.

Droege, S, JD Engler, E Sellers and LE O’Brien. 2016. U.S. National Protocol Framework for the Inventory and Monitoring of Bees. Inventory and Monitoring, National Wildlife Refuge System, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fort Collins, .

LANDFIRE, 2008, Existing Vegetation Type Layer, LANDFIRE 1.1.0, U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. Accessed 28 October 2010 at http://landfire.cr.usgs.gov/viewer/.

10 16 February 2018

Appendix 1. Bailey’s Provinces for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuges inventoried for bees, 2010-2016

11 16 February 2018

Appendix 2. Bailey’s Ecoregion Sections for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuges inventoried for bees, 2010-2016

12 16 February 2018