Outline of Quino Recovery Plan - The Xerces Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

IV. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE The schedule that follows is a summary of actions and estimated costs for the Quino checkerspot recovery program. It is a guide to meet the objectives of the draft recovery plan as elaborated in Part II, Step-Down Narrative section. This schedule indicates task priorities, task numbers, task descriptions, duration of tasks, responsible agencies, and estimated costs. These actions, when accomplished, should achieve the recovery objectives. The estimated costs for many tasks remain to be determined; therefore, total costs listed are lower than the total required to achieve recovery objectives. Some tasks (e.g., habitat protection) will benefit multiple listed species in addition to the Quino checkerspot, so their costs are not wholly attributable to this species. Service staff salary is not included in cost estimates. Responsible party listings are based primarily on recent (1997 and later) Quino observation site land ownership data, jurisdictional authority, and responsibility for road and highway construction. Cost is not separated by responsible agency, cost distribution is to be determined. The list of responsible parties is not exhaustive. Any party that is a proponent of or has authority over projects that affect the Quino checkerspot has some responsibility under the Endangered Species Act for listed tasks related to their project. 91
Definitions and Abbreviations Used in the Implementation Schedule: Priorities in column one were assigned as follows: 1 = An action that must be taken to prevent extinction or to prevent the species from declining irreversibly in the foreseeable future. 2 = An action that must be taken to prevent a significant decline in species’ population, habitat quality, or some other significant negative impact short of extinction. 3 = All other actions necessary to meet the recovery objectives. Key to Acronyms used in the Implementation Schedule: BLM BP CalTrans CCH CDF CDPR CSD LMRMC RC SDC SDSU TNC UCR USFWS USMCCP USMCASM TBD Bureau of Land Management Border Patrol California Department of Transportation City of Chula Vista California Department of Forestry California Department of Parks and Recreation City of San Diego Lake Mathews Reserve Management Committee Riverside County San Diego County San Diego State University The Nature Conservancy University of California at Riverside U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Marine Corps - Camp Pendleton U.S. Marine Corps - Air Station Miramar To be determined. 92
Page 1 and 2:
QUINO CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY (Euphyd
Page 3 and 4:
DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate
Page 5 and 6:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Current Status: T
Page 7 and 8:
temporal and geographic patterns of
Page 9 and 10:
9) Manage activity on trails where
Page 11 and 12:
A. References .....................
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 1. Quino checkerspot butterf
Page 15 and 16:
Insert Figure 3 4
Page 17 and 18:
Euphydryas chalcedona. At the same
Page 19 and 20:
The Quino checkerspot butterfly pri
Page 21 and 22:
natural lands are absent, by costly
Page 23 and 24:
connectivity that may have existed
Page 25 and 26:
Mexico. Another recent record is lo
Page 27 and 28:
dwarf plantain (Plantago erecta) ca
Page 29 and 30:
Diapausing Euphydryas editha larvae
Page 31 and 32:
not possible below about 16 degrees
Page 33 and 34:
1994, Rausher 1982). Singer et al.
Page 35 and 36:
prediapause secondary hosts are imp
Page 37 and 38:
population of prediapause larvae. L
Page 39 and 40:
does not necessarily mean that smal
Page 41 and 42:
although it is not clear whether th
Page 43 and 44:
Dezzani 1998, Stylinski and Allen 1
Page 45 and 46:
Consumption of nonnative plants by
Page 47 and 48:
per year) (Bytnerowicz et al. 1987,
Page 49 and 50:
y almost 100 miles, and shifted the
Page 51 and 52: Conservation Plan. Several other pl
Page 53 and 54: Plan in July of 1996. No extant Qui
Page 55 and 56: G. Recovery Strategy The survival a
Page 57 and 58: Along with protecting habitat, equa
Page 59 and 60: In areas targeted for Quino checker
Page 61 and 62: checkerspot habitat community. Area
Page 63 and 64: ovata), fiddleneck (Amsinckia spp.)
Page 65 and 66: (Collinsia concolor) occurs in smal
Page 67 and 68: This Recovery Unit is located in so
Page 69 and 70: ut research is needed to determine
Page 71 and 72: within the proposed Recovery Unit i
Page 73 and 74: occupancy. Most of the upper canyon
Page 75 and 76: Insert Figure 5 64
Page 81 and 82: The number of known occupied habita
Page 83 and 84: C. Recovery Task Narrative Priority
Page 85 and 86: 1.2.1. Enhance or restore landscape
Page 87 and 88: should include, degree of nonnative
Page 89 and 90: 11. Protect the remaining undevelop
Page 91 and 92: Boughton, D. A. 2000. The Dispersal
Page 93 and 94: Ecological Impacts on the Golden St
Page 95 and 96: Malo, J. E., and F. Suarez. 1995. C
Page 97 and 98: Ecology Taking Flight: Butterflies
Page 99 and 100: Thomas, C. D. and I. Hanski. 1997.
Page 101: B. Personal Communications Bauer, D
Page 105 and 106: IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE FOR QUINO C
Page 113 and 114: APPENDIX I Quino Checkerspot Butter
Page 115 and 116: APPENDIX II Habitat Restoration Met
Page 117 and 118: • Cut thatch and dead nonnative p
Page 119 and 120: Native Plants for Habitat Restorati
Page 121 and 122: y Quino checkerspot, generalist pol
Page 123 and 124: Salvaged topsoil can also be used f
Page 125 and 126: Costs associated with removing that
Page 127 and 128: cover is quite different from the g
Page 129 and 130: APPENDIX III The Annual Forbland Hy
Page 131 and 132: APPENDIX IV Glossary of Terms Diapa
show all

Outline of Quino Recovery Plan - The Xerces Society

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?