A survey of Lepidoptera in three priority areas of the Minnesota state ...

Management Efforts
In 2009, in response to increased gypsy moth numbers in the North Shore region of MN, the USDA Forest
Service and MN Dept. of Agriculture recommended a Btk treatment for a portion of the North Shore, including
a portion of Cascade River State Park. As a result of this survey, 24 species of conservation concern were
identified within the proposed spray block, some of which would be at particular risk because they are feeding at
the same time as the gypsy moth larva (see Table 3). Negotiations with MN Dept. of Agriculture culminated in
moving the Btk treatment elsewhere and allowing only a mating disruption treatment to be applied over park
lands.
Table 3 – Species of Lepidoptera of Conservation Concern Documented within the 2009 Proposed Btk
Treatment Block at Cascade River State Park
Abagrotis placida* Chytolita petrealis Papaipema eupatorii
Anaplectoides pressus Diarsia rubifera Paradiarsia littoralis
Anathix puta Enargia infumata* Polia imbrifera
Apamea lateritia Eurois occulta* Protolampra rufipectus
Apharetra dentata Hydriomena furcata Pseudohermonassa
tenuicula
Bellura diffusa Lacinipolia lustralis Semiothisa multilinea
Bellura gortynoides Leucania multilinea* Semiothisa multilineata
Chortodes inquinata Metanema determinate* Syngrapha rectangula
*Species known to be at risk from Btk because they are feeding at the same time as gypsy moth larvae. Several
other species on this list may also be at risk from Btk but life history or other data was lacking so they were not
specifically identified as “at risk” species by the surveyor.
In general management actions, such as prescribed burning and invasives species removal are necessary to
preserve important Lepidoptera habitat, such as dry prairie and fire dependent forests. However, they can also
be detrimental to Lepidoptera that overwinter above ground. Management actions and rare species locations are
currently being reviewed and measures taken, if needed, to insure that management actions do not negatively
impact populations of rare species.
LITERATURE CITED:
Covell, Jr., Charles. 2005. Moths of eastern North America. Virginia Museum of Natural History. Special
Publication #12. Martinsville, VA.
Huber, Ronald L. 1981. Checklist of Minnesota Butterflies. James Ford Bell Museum of Natural History,
University of Minnesota. Minneapolis, MN.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 1996. A List of Minnesota Endangered, Threatened and Special
Concern Animals and Plants. http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/nhnrp/endlist.pdf. Accessed 4/26/09.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2003. Field guide to the native plant communities of Minnesota:
the Laurentian mixed forest province. Ecological Land Classification Program, MN County Biological Survey
& Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program. MNDNR, St. Paul, MN.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2005. Field guide to the native plant communities of Minnesota:
the eastern broadleaf forest province. Ecological Land Classification Program, MN County Biological Survey
& Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program. MNDNR, St. Paul, MN.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2006. Tomorrow’s habitat for the wild and rare. MNDNR, St.
Paul, MN. http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/cwcs/strategy.html. Accessed 4/26/09.
5