Outline of Quino Recovery Plan - The Xerces Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Interim goals include (1) protecting habitat supporting known current population distributions (habitat complexes), (2) stabilizing populations within known population distributions (described habitat complexes), and (3) conducting research necessary to refine recovery criteria. Reclassification is appropriate when a taxon is no longer in danger throughout a significant portion of its range. Because data upon which to base decisions about reclassification are incomplete, downlisting criteria in this plan are necessarily preliminary. There are insufficient data on which to base delisting criteria at this time. Recovery Criteria: 1) Permanently protect habitat patches supporting known extant population distributions (habitat complexes) and possible landscape connectivity areas among them. Adequate habitat reserve area sizes are estimated to be between 1,200-4,000 hectares (3,000-10,000 acres) total per habitat complex. Recovery Units and habitat complexes described in this recovery plan are: Northwest Riverside Recovery Unit, containing the Gavilan Hills habitat complex; Southwest Riverside Recovery Unit, containing the Warm Springs Creek and Skinner/Johnson habitat complexes; South Riverside Recovery Unit, containing the Oak Mountain/Vail Lake, Sage Road/Billygoat Mountain, and Brown Canyon habitat complexes; South Riverside/North San Diego Recovery Unit, containing the Silverado and Dameron Valley/Oak Grove habitat complexes; Southwest San Diego Recovery Unit, containing the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge, Otay Lakes, Otay Foothills, Otay Mesa, Marron Valley, and Tecate habitat complexes; and Southeast San Diego Recovery Unit, containing the Jacumba Peak habitat complex. 2) Permanently provide for and implement management of described habitat complexes to restore habitat quality, including maintenance of hostplant populations, maintenance of diverse nectar sources and pollinators, control of nonnative plant invasion, and maintenance of internal landscape connectivity. The number of known occupied habitat patches and the density of butterflies within each Recovery Unit should be increased if declines are documented for 2 consecutive years of average to high annual precipitation (based on the past 20 years of local data). Management must be adaptive: i.e., ongoing surveys and monitoring must be conducted to refine management strategies and delimit v
temporal and geographic patterns of Quino checkerspot exchange among suitable habitat patches. 3) Establish and maintain a captive propagation program for purposes of reintroduction and augmentation of wild populations, maintenance of refugia populations, and research. 4) Initiate and implement a cooperative educational outreach program targeting areas where Quino checkerspot populations are most threatened. 5) Two additional populations or metapopulations must be documented or introduced in the remaining undeveloped coastal areas of the Quino checkerspot’s historic range. Undeveloped coastal areas include the western and northern slopes of the Santa Ana Mountains (northern slope, see proposed North Orange Recovery Unit description in Recovery Strategy section below), the northwest corner of San Diego County (see proposed Northwest San Diego Recovery Unit below), and undeveloped mesas and hills within the cities of San Diego, Poway, and Santee, and adjacent unincorporated land within San Diego County (see proposed South-central San Diego Recovery Unit below). Wellmanaged coastal preserves in San Diego or Orange County may be able to support stable populations of the Quino checkerspot butterfly. One of the two additional populations must include habitat within 10 kilometers (6 miles) of the ocean to maximize the stable marine climate influence and minimize susceptibility to drought. If new coastal populations are not documented by 2004, experimental populations should be established and maintained until downlisting criteria are refined. Additional inland (east of coastal areas described above) habitat complexes documented outside of Recovery Units will not be counted as one of the two additional populations specified here, but should be considered important to recovery and addressed when delisting criteria are developed. 6) The managed, protected population or metapopulation segments within currently described habitat complexes must demonstrate stability (constancy or resilience) without augmentation. When metapopulation distributions are determined by future research (one or more habitat complexes may belong to a single metapopulation) or defined by reserve boundaries, the unit monitored for vi
Page 1 and 2: QUINO CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY (Euphyd
Page 3 and 4: DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate
Page 5: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Current Status: T
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 77 and 78:
Insert Figure 7 66
Page 79 and 80:
Insert Figure 9 68
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

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

Delete template?

Save as template?