DOCSLIB.ORG

Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Revision of the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Uwharrie National Forest

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Revision of the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Uwharrie National Forest U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service Southern Region Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Revision of the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Uwharrie National Forest National Forests in North Carolina R8-MB-138B June 2011 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Revision of the Uwharrie National Forest Proposed Land and Resource Management Plan Montgomery, Randolph, and Davidson Counties, North Carolina June 2011 Responsible Agency: USDA Forest Service Elizabeth Agpaoa, Responsible Official: Regional Forester, 1720 Peachtree Road NW, Atlanta, GA 30309 404-347-4177 For more information contact: Marisue Hilliard Forest Supervisor National Forests in North Carolina 160 Zillicoa Street Suite A Asheville, NC 28801 (828) 257- 4200 The 90-day comment period begins with publication of the Notice of Availability in the Federal Register. E-mail comments to: [email protected] Subject: Uwharrie Plan Or if e-mail is not available, written comments should be submitted to: Proposed Land and Resource Management Plan NFsNC/Uwharrie National Forest 160 Zillicoa Street Suite A Asheville, NC 28801 Abstract: Three alternatives for revision of the Land and Resource Management Plan (LRMP) for the Uwharrie National Forest are described and compared in this Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Alternatives A, B, and C were analyzed in detail in this DEIS. Alternative A represents the current LRMP and is also referred to as the 1986 Plan. Alternative B is the alternative preferred by the Forest Service and is the foundation for the Proposed Plan available for review concurrently with this document. Alternative C is a variation of Alternative B developed to address an unresolved issue with equestrian use of the national forest. This DEIS documents the analysis of all alternatives and displays the environmental effects at a programmatic level. The preferred alternative, outlined in the Proposed Plan, would guide all natural resource management activities on the Uwharrie NF for the next 15 years; would address new information and concerns raised since the 1986 Plan was published; and would meet objectives of federal laws, regulation, and policies. Table of Contents Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................... vii CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION ..................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 2: ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING PROPOSED ACTION ......................................................................... 7 ALTERNATIVE A – Continuation of the 1986 Plan .......................................................................................... 7 ALTERNATIVE B –Proposed Plan [Preferred Alternative] .......................................................................... 8 ALTERNATIVE C .......................................................................................................................................................... 17 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED NOT ANALYZED IN DETAIL ..................................................................... 17 CHAPTER 3: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .............................. 26 Botanical Resources......................................................................................................................................................... 26 Non-Native Invasive Plants Species .......................................................................................................................... 49 Wildlife .................................................................................................................................................................................. 52 Management Indicator Species ............................................................................................................................. 53 Wildlife Demand Species ......................................................................................................................................... 54 Threatened, Endangered, Sensitive, and Locally Rare Wildlife Species ............................................... 55 Migratory Birds ............................................................................................................................................................ 57 Aquatic Wildlife ................................................................................................................................................................. 70 Forest Health ...................................................................................................................................................................... 89 Physical Resources ................................................................................................................................................................ 94 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................................................................ 94 Soils ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 99 Water Resources ............................................................................................................................................................ 107 Climate Change ............................................................................................................................................................... 122 Social, Economic, and Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................ 125 Roads .................................................................................................................................................................................. 125 Recreation ......................................................................................................................................................................... 126 Scenery ............................................................................................................................................................................... 139 Wilderness ........................................................................................................................................................................ 145 River Corridors Eligible for Wild and Scenic River Status ............................................................................ 150 Forest Products .............................................................................................................................................................. 153 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................................................................ 158 Local Communities ........................................................................................................................................................ 164 Social and Economic Environment ......................................................................................................................... 166 Environmental Justice.................................................................................................................................................. 173 Uwharrie National Forest Draft Environmental Impact Statement i Table of Contents Programs and Plans of other Federal agencies, State and local governments and Indian Tribes 174 Other Effects .................................................................................................................................................................... 177 CHAPTER 4: LIST OF PREPARERS ............................................................................................................................... 181 CHAPTER 5: AGENCIES AND INDIVIDUALS RECEIVING DEIS ........................................................................ 183 CHAPTER 6: GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................................................... 185 References ............................................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest Coniferous Forest Meadow Province
    Selecting Plants for Pollinators A Regional Guide for Farmers, Land Managers, and Gardeners In the Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest Coniferous Forest Meadow Province Including the states of: Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia And parts of: Georgia, Kentucky, and North Carolina, NAPPC South Carolina, Tennessee Table of CONTENTS Why Support Pollinators? 4 Getting Started 5 Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest 6 Meet the Pollinators 8 Plant Traits 10 Developing Plantings 12 Far ms 13 Public Lands 14 Home Landscapes 15 Bloom Periods 16 Plants That Attract Pollinators 18 Habitat Hints 20 This is one of several guides for Check list 22 different regions in the United States. We welcome your feedback to assist us in making the future Resources and Feedback 23 guides useful. Please contact us at [email protected] Cover: silver spotted skipper courtesy www.dangphoto.net 2 Selecting Plants for Pollinators Selecting Plants for Pollinators A Regional Guide for Farmers, Land Managers, and Gardeners In the Ecological Region of the Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest Coniferous Forest Meadow Province Including the states of: Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia And parts of: Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee a nappc and Pollinator Partnership™ Publication This guide was funded by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the C.S. Fund, the Plant Conservation Alliance, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management with oversight by the Pollinator Partnership™ (www.pollinator.org), in support of the North American Pollinator Protection Campaign (NAPPC–www.nappc.org). Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest – Coniferous Forest – Meadow Province 3 Why support pollinators? In theIr 1996 book, the Forgotten PollInators, Buchmann and Nabhan estimated that animal pollinators are needed for the reproduction “ Farming feeds of 90% of flowering plants and one third of human food crops.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Revised February 24, 2017 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2016 Compiled by Laura Gadd Robinson, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera of North America 5
    Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera by Valerio Albu, 1411 E. Sweetbriar Drive Fresno, CA 93720 and Eric Metzler, 1241 Kildale Square North Columbus, OH 43229 April 30, 2004 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Cover illustration: Blueberry Sphinx (Paonias astylus (Drury)], an eastern endemic. Photo by Valeriu Albu. ISBN 1084-8819 This publication and others in the series may be ordered from the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 Abstract A list of 1531 species ofLepidoptera is presented, collected over 15 years (1988 to 2002), in eleven southern West Virginia counties. A variety of collecting methods was used, including netting, light attracting, light trapping and pheromone trapping. The specimens were identified by the currently available pictorial sources and determination keys. Many were also sent to specialists for confirmation or identification. The majority of the data was from Kanawha County, reflecting the area of more intensive sampling effort by the senior author. This imbalance of data between Kanawha County and other counties should even out with further sampling of the area. Key Words: Appalachian Mountains,
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2012 Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist John T. Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM LIST OF THE RARE PLANTS OF NORTH CAROLINA 2012 Edition Edited by Laura E. Gadd, Botanist and John Finnegan, Information Systems Manager North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Office of Conservation, Planning, and Community Affairs Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 1601 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org Table of Contents LIST FORMAT ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3 NORTH CAROLINA RARE PLANT LIST ......................................................................................................................... 10 NORTH CAROLINA PLANT WATCH LIST ..................................................................................................................... 71 Watch Category
    [Show full text]
  • CHECKLIST of WISCONSIN MOTHS (Superfamilies Mimallonoidea, Drepanoidea, Lasiocampoidea, Bombycoidea, Geometroidea, and Noctuoidea)
    WISCONSIN ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY SPECIAL PUBLICATION No. 6 JUNE 2018 CHECKLIST OF WISCONSIN MOTHS (Superfamilies Mimallonoidea, Drepanoidea, Lasiocampoidea, Bombycoidea, Geometroidea, and Noctuoidea) Leslie A. Ferge,1 George J. Balogh2 and Kyle E. Johnson3 ABSTRACT A total of 1284 species representing the thirteen families comprising the present checklist have been documented in Wisconsin, including 293 species of Geometridae, 252 species of Erebidae and 584 species of Noctuidae. Distributions are summarized using the six major natural divisions of Wisconsin; adult flight periods and statuses within the state are also reported. Examples of Wisconsin’s diverse native habitat types in each of the natural divisions have been systematically inventoried, and species associated with specialized habitats such as peatland, prairie, barrens and dunes are listed. INTRODUCTION This list is an updated version of the Wisconsin moth checklist by Ferge & Balogh (2000). A considerable amount of new information from has been accumulated in the 18 years since that initial publication. Over sixty species have been added, bringing the total to 1284 in the thirteen families comprising this checklist. These families are estimated to comprise approximately one-half of the state’s total moth fauna. Historical records of Wisconsin moths are relatively meager. Checklists including Wisconsin moths were compiled by Hoy (1883), Rauterberg (1900), Fernekes (1906) and Muttkowski (1907). Hoy's list was restricted to Racine County, the others to Milwaukee County. Records from these publications are of historical interest, but unfortunately few verifiable voucher specimens exist. Unverifiable identifications and minimal label data associated with older museum specimens limit the usefulness of this information. Covell (1970) compiled records of 222 Geometridae species, based on his examination of specimens representing at least 30 counties.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Sustainability Will Probably Always Be Limited by Its Small Size and Fragmented Condition (See Section 3.5)
    United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service May 2011 Terrestrial Species Viability Evaluation for The Uwharrie National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement Contents 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Purpose .......................................................................................................................... 1 2.1 Requirements in the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) ............................. 1 3.0 Ecosystem Diversity ..................................................................................................... 2 3.1 Spatial Scales for Ecosystem Diversity ................................................................... 4 3.2 Characteristics of Ecosystem Diversity ................................................................... 7 3.3 Range of Variation .................................................................................................... 9 3.4 Current Condition and Trend of Ecosystem Characteristics and Status of Ecosystem Diversity ..................................................................................................... 15 3.5 – Risks to Selected Characteristics of Ecosystem Diversity ................................... 20 3.6 Recommended Forest Plan Components ............................................................... 21 3.7 Assessing effects of Forest Plan alternatives on viability ....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Temporal Change Within and Among Forest Communities of Great Smoky Mountains National Park: the Influence of Historic Disturbance and Environmental Gradients
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-2008 Temporal Change Within and Among Forest Communities of Great Smoky Mountains National Park: The Influence of Historic Disturbance and Environmental Gradients Windy A. Bunn University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons Recommended Citation Bunn, Windy A., "Temporal Change Within and Among Forest Communities of Great Smoky Mountains National Park: The Influence of Historic Disturbance and Environmental Gradients. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2008. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/3658 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Windy A. Bunn entitled "Temporal Change Within and Among Forest Communities of Great Smoky Mountains National Park: The Influence of Historic Disturbance and Environmental Gradients." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. Nathan J. Sanders, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Aimée T. Classen, Daniel Simberloff Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Windy A.
    [Show full text]
  • Impacts of Native and Non-Native Plants on Urban Insect Communities: Are Native Plants Better Than Non-Natives?
    Impacts of Native and Non-native plants on Urban Insect Communities: Are Native Plants Better than Non-natives? by Carl Scott Clem A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Auburn, Alabama December 12, 2015 Key Words: native plants, non-native plants, caterpillars, natural enemies, associational interactions, congeneric plants Copyright 2015 by Carl Scott Clem Approved by David Held, Chair, Associate Professor: Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology Charles Ray, Research Fellow: Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology Debbie Folkerts, Assistant Professor: Department of Biological Sciences Robert Boyd, Professor: Department of Biological Sciences Abstract With continued suburban expansion in the southeastern United States, it is increasingly important to understand urbanization and its impacts on sustainability and natural ecosystems. Expansion of suburbia is often coupled with replacement of native plants by alien ornamental plants such as crepe myrtle, Bradford pear, and Japanese maple. Two projects were conducted for this thesis. The purpose of the first project (Chapter 2) was to conduct an analysis of existing larval Lepidoptera and Symphyta hostplant records in the southeastern United States, comparing their species richness on common native and alien woody plants. We found that, in most cases, native plants support more species of eruciform larvae compared to aliens. Alien congener plant species (those in the same genus as native species) supported more species of larvae than alien, non-congeners. Most of the larvae that feed on alien plants are generalist species. However, most of the specialist species feeding on alien plants use congeners of native plants, providing evidence of a spillover, or false spillover, effect.
    [Show full text]
  • 100 Years of Change in the Flora of the Carolinas
    ASTERACEAE 224 Zinnia Linnaeus 1759 (Zinnia) A genus of about 17 species, herbs, of sw. North America south to South America. References: Smith in FNA (2006c); Cronquist (1980)=SE. 1 Achenes wingless; receptacular bracts (chaff) toothed or erose on the lip..............................................................Z. peruviana 1 Achenes winged; receptacular bracts (chaff) with a differentiated fimbriate lip........................................................Z. violacea * Zinnia peruviana (Linnaeus) Linnaeus, Zinnia. Cp (GA, NC, SC): disturbed areas; rare (commonly cultivated), introduced from the New World tropics. May-November. [= FNA, K, SE; ? Z. pauciflora Linnaeus – S] * Zinnia violacea Cavanilles, Garden Zinnia. Cp (GA, NC, SC): disturbed areas; rare (commonly cultivated), introduced from the New World tropics. May-November. [= FNA, K; ? Z. elegans Jacquin – S, SE] BALSAMINACEAE A. Richard 1822 (Touch-me-not Family) A family of 2 genera and 850-1000 species, primarily of the Old World tropics. References: Fischer in Kubitzki (2004). Impatiens Linnaeus (Jewelweed, Touch-me-not, Snapweed, Balsam) A genus of 850-1000 species, herbs and subshrubs, primarily tropical and north temperate Old World. References: Fischer in Kubitzki (2004). 1 Corolla purple, pink, or white; plants 3-6 (-8) dm tall; stems puberulent or glabrous; [cultivated alien, rarely escaped]. 2 Sepal spur strongly recurved; stems puberulent..............................................................................................I. balsamina 2 Sepal spur slightly
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2021
    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2021 Compiled by Brenda L. Wichmann, Botanist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina 2021 Compiled by Brenda L. Wichmann, Botanist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised every other year as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate. Further information may be obtained by contacting the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, 1651 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1651; by contacting the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, 1701 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1701; or by contacting the North Carolina Plant Conservation Program, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 1060 MSC, Raleigh, NC 27699-1060.
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetation Community Monitoring at Congaree National Park: 2014 Data Summary
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Vegetation Community Monitoring at Congaree National Park 2014 Data Summary Natural Resource Data Series NPS/SECN/NRDS—2016/1016 ON THIS PAGE Tiny, bright yellow blossoms of Hypoxis hirsuta grace the forest floor at Congaree National Park. Photograph courtesy of Sarah C. Heath, Southeast Coast Network. ON THE COVER Spiraling compound leaf of green dragon (Arisaema dracontium) at Congaree National Park. Photograph courtesy of Sarah C. Heath, Southeast Coast Network Vegetation Community Monitoring at Congaree National Park 2014 Data Summary Natural Resource Data Series NPS/SECN/NRDS—2016/1016 Sarah Corbett Heath1 and Michael W. Byrne2 1National Park Service Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network Cumberland Island National Seashore 101 Wheeler Street Saint Marys, GA 31558 2National Park Service Southeast Coast Inventory and Monitoring Network 135 Phoenix Drive Athens, GA 30605 May 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 Data Series is intended for the timely release of basic data sets and data summaries. Care has been taken to assure accuracy of raw data values, but a thorough analysis and interpretation of the data has not been completed.
    [Show full text]
  • A Revision of the Genus Deltote R. L. and Its Allied Genera from Japan and Taiwan (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae; Acontiinae) Part 1
    Bull. Kitakyushu Mus. Nat. Hut., 5: 91-133. September20, 1984 A revision of the genus Deltote R. L. and its allied genera from Japan and Taiwan (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae; Acontiinae) Part 1. A generic classification of the genus Deltote R. L. and its allied genera Kyoichiro Ueda Kitakyushu Museum of Natural History, Nishihonmachi, Kitakyushu, 805 Japan (Received November 30, 1983) Abstract Thirty-three species ofJapanese and Formosan Noctuid moths belong ing to Deltote and its allied genera of Acontiinae are revised in comparison with two European and North American species. Both of the well-known genera, Lithacodia Hubner, 1818 and Eustrotia Hubner, [1821] which have been used extensively in entomological works, arc found to be new synonyms of Deltote R. L., 1817. Four new genera, i.e., Protodeltote, Koyaga, Sugia and Pseiidodeltote are erected. The phy- logenetic relationships among them arc discussed. 1. Introduction The Acontiinae areoneof quadrifid subfamilies of the Noctuidae, and consist of rather small-sized moths. This subfamily is known from 105species represent ing 44 genera in Japan (Suci, 1982). Their larvae are usually semilooper, and the larval foods vary from lichens (Enispa, Corgatha, etc.), dead leaves (Oruza, Hyperstrotia, etc.), to Graminaceous plants (Deltote, Naranga, etc.). This subfamily seems to be heterogenous, as it is rather artficially characterized by the quadrifid type wing venation and the small size for the noctuids. For ex ample the genus Stenoloba, which had been classified in the subfamily by having the above-mentioned two characters, wasrecently transferred from thissubfamily to the subfamily Bryophilinae mainly based on the larval structure (Sugi, 1970). Thus the generic revision of this subfamily is necessary not only for the proper phylogenetic classification but to define strictly the subfamily.
    [Show full text]