Outline of Quino Recovery Plan - The Xerces Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

from this stock. Refuge Operating Needs System projects for Quino checkerspot habitat restoration funding have been submitted. We anticipate that future Quino checkerspot conservation efforts will increase as staff and volunteer resources grow, and new lands are acquired. Past efforts include a small enhancement project where nonnative grasses were removed, and hostplant and nectar sources were planted. Research needed to identify Quino checkerspot habitat restoration methods for the Refuge have been identified, including a plan written by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Recovery Team. 3. Captive Propagation Captive propagation efforts to date consist of a small population maintained by Dr. Gordon Pratt at University of California Riverside. This population consists of stock from Marron Valley collected in 1996. We are currently working with Dr. Pratt and Dr. Mike Singer to expand and improve current efforts and establish a formal program. Plans include collecting stock (older males and females late in the flight season) and maintaining lines from all possible metapopulations, providing new quality facilities in Riverside County, and establishing a second captive propagation site. Butterfly “ranching” within the distribution of an extant population, possibly Southwest Riverside County Multiple Species Reserve, has also been proposed (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1999). Ranching involves wild adults that lay eggs on host plant in managed habitat. Only the larvae are captive, and are reared in a protected situation, traditional propagation methods use captive adults and are referred to as “farming”(B. Toon, pers. comm.). 4. California Department of Fish and Game The California Department of Fish and Game funds Quino population and habitat monitoring activities using funds allocated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under section 6 of the Endangered Species Act. Also, under the California Environmental Quality Act an analysis of direct, indirect, and cumulative project impacts to biological resources, including the Quino checkerspot, occurs. The California Environmental Quality Act sometimes requires development and implementation of mitigation plans for projects that result in loss of habitat. 43
G. Recovery Strategy The survival and recovery of the Quino checkerspot depends on protection and restoration of habitat patches within the distribution of metapopulations, augmentation of extant populations, and reintroduction or discovery of metapopulations in areas not known to be currently occupied. Recovery efforts would be greatly facilitated, and ongoing threats reduced, by the advent of a large-scale educational outreach program involving local cooperative partnerships. Because extant metapopulations are unique, and their dynamics and distributions have not been studied, adaptive management practices and monitoring will be key aspects of recovery. Due primarily to the high degree of threat imposed by nonnative plant species invasion, management of all populations will be required into the foreseeable future (Foin et al. 1998). Habitat areas that need protection consist of all areas occupied by the butterflies, including patches of larval hostplants and sites used by adults during breeding, oviposition, nectaring, and dispersal. Stable metapopulation structure requires preservation of habitat patches that may be temporarily unoccupied by larvae so they can continue to support local populations in the future. By the time habitat patches are naturally recolonized, larval occupancy of other patches is likely to have been naturally extirpated (see Metapopulation Structure section above). The best available information indicates the Quino checkerspot is highly endangered: it was at such low densities prior to listing that it was thought to possibly be extinct (62 FR 2315), it currently is only known from approximately 10 percent of its former distribution, it is known to undergo large population fluctuations related to weather (Murphy and White 1984, see Climate Change section above), and most current populations are threatened by ongoing development (see Threats section above). Under current conditions the Quino checkerspot may go extinct in the foreseeable future. Therefore, further losses of suitable or restorable habitat patches that are near or within the distribution of habitat complexes identified in this plan likely will adversely affect the longterm conservation of the Quino checkerspot (see Distribution and Habitat Considerations section above and Figure 2). Any proposed project that might reduce the area of suitable or restorable habitat should be carefully evaluated, and conservation measures that fully protect 44
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: Plan in July of 1996. No extant Qui
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 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 and 102: B. Personal Communications Bauer, D
Page 103 and 104: Definitions and Abbreviations Used
Page 105 and 106:
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE FOR QUINO C
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?