New MDLepsOdes Listserv

Announcing MDLepsOdes, a new Google list for sightings and discussion of the field biology of butterflies and odonates.

Over the years, the butterfly and ode communities have grown closer in our joint interest in and mutual commitment to field and ecology work.  A great example is the very useful and active sister list to the north, PALepsOdes, after which MDLepsOdes is modeled.  What we find so useful about PALepsOdes is that it reaches both communities, butterfliers and ode specialists, for whom there is an increasing overlap of interest and field activity and whose field observations enrich our knowledge of both orders of insects.  The collegial and respectful discussions that inform PALepsOdes will be what we strive for here.

There are plenty of resources for butterfly gardening, rearing leps, and general educational information about insects, but this list is created especially for those of us who are interested in field work. We welcome pictures, but this isn’t primarily a site for sharing good photography unless it is part of a field work or sightings discussion.  We won’t be too picky about geographic limits of MDLepsOdes as long as the location is within a day trip’s distance for most Marylanders.

Most importantly, this isn’t a list to debate the politics of GMOs or restoration schemes or to entertain the flame wars that erupt from time to time on some of our other local lists.  Issues that touch on butterfly field research or observation — such as collecting and permit rules, access to study sites, etc. — will be welcome within reason.  As moderator, I won’t hesitate to pull the plug on posts or posters that wander repeatedly off topic or descend into the uncivil.

MDLepsOdes seeks to complement, not replace, the discussions at washbutterflies, VA-MD-DE-Bugs, and VaLeps.  Each of these lists has its focus, just as MDLepsOdes will.  If you want to follow sightings and field activities with a minimum of other distractions, this is the place the find them.

Other than that, MDLepsOdes works like all the other listservs at Google Groups:  You subscribe yourself, and if the time comes that you want to leave the list, you unsubscribe yourself.  There are also digest modes and vacation stops and other bells and whistles that are explained at the Google Groups site. To keep from being spammed, I will be approving all requests to join the list, so give me a day or so to do that.  If you have any problems, just drop me a note.

I want to drop a special invitation to the Maryland ode community — I for one would really like to see/hear about what’s being seen where.  And to those of you lep people who’ve dropped out of the other discussions, welcome back!

Special thanks to Tom Stock and Beth Johnson, who’ve provided encouragement and beta testing for the listserv to make signing up as easy as possible.  I’ll continue to rely on them to provide counsel as issues in list management come up.

We look forward to seeing you at MDLepsOdes, and please share this information freely!

To sign up, go to https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/mdlepsodes

 

YouTube: All About eButterfly

Kent McFarland at VT Leps posts that he’s doing some videos about how to use the new eButterfly database, as follows:

I am starting to put together videos on Youtube about eButterfly. I just loaded my first that explains basic navigation and features of eButterfly. If you have not used the site, I hope you will check out my video and more to come and join us in collecting data about butterflies in Vermont and beyond. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJSculPXIWI

 

Canada Annexes the U.S.!

Well, not exactly.

Last year, many of us who observe or collect butterflies in the Canadian Provinces were delighted at the launch of eButterfly, a sort of complement to the very popular eBird application designed to make the data collected by citizen scientists accessible to our colleagues and to scientists everywhere.  This delight was tempered by frustration that the U.S. still has no such citizen science database management system for butterflies – NABA has limited utility for compiling personal data, but its quirkiness, frequent glitches, and lack of access to aggregated records have made it of very modest value.  In fact, many commercial listing software packages far outstrip the capacities of NABA’s BIS database for making sense even of personal observation data.

For Canadians, eButterfly also trumped BAMONA for ease of use and ability to manipulate data.

So it was with great anticipation that I read the news last month that eButterfly is now accepting current (and historical!) U.S. records.  They’re pretty sporadic so far, but eButterfly promises to be the true lep version of eBird in most of its essential data management tools.

Same as with eBird, you need to create a user ID to open an account.  After that, you can submit your own data, slice and dice those data a number of ways, and see what other users have submitted for your area or for areas you are planning to visit.  The data collection is especially rich for Canada and for the Northeast; I have no doubt that given a year or two and some dedicated efforts to populate eButterfly with historic observation and collection data it will be a very useful resource south of the Canadian border indeed!

Currently the system contains about 28,000 records for 334 species.

 

20th Approximation “Butterflies of North Carolina”

Harry LeGrand and Tom Howard have just brought out their 20th Approximation of the Butterflies of North Carolina — 10 days ahead of schedule, no less!  This “butterfly atlas” for the state is a huge undertaking, and the 2012 update has a lot of new information from last season. And many of the species accounts and other natural history notes make it a valuable reference for us in the mid-Atlanltic.  As Harry notes, “Last year (2012) saw far more records posted to the carolinaleps listserve
than ever before, yielding somewhere in the vicinity of about 12,000 new records!”

The 20th approximation contains:

1.      A new species account, White Checkered-Skipper
2.      Many, many new county records
3.      Many, many new earliest dates (2012 was a very warm spring, and
thus there were lots of early records)
 

 

Butterfly Occurrence Charts Updated to Reflect 2012 Season Data

 

Dick Smith recently posted this to a number of us who have contributed lep sightings for his butterfly occurrence database. In the original email, the files noted below were attached, but here on LepLog you can find them all in the right hand navigation column.  All the new sightings for 2012 have been incorporated in the files here on LepLog, so start planning your summer field trips with these updated occurrence data in mind!  As always, thanks to Dick for keeping these charts updated and sharing them with butterfly enthusiasts in the middle Atlantic states.

>>

Butterfly Surveyors,

Butterfly populations are known to be dwindling worldwide and that trend has been observed in some of our species locally.  In an effort to promote conservation, it is important to keep abreast of which local species are showing such signs of decline and then concerned naturalist will be better able to propose measures that will hopefully stem some of these trends. In this effort, I am circulating the accompanying charts to local naturalists who I know have toured through Maryland and Delaware in recent years and have assembled lists of butterfly species they have encountered.  By filling in data in the attached charts for counties and cities where unknown status is indicated, we will be better able to concentrate our attention onto those remaining species for which status remains unknown and for which declines may be occurring.

There are four charts attached to this e-mail: they are (1) a Maryland and (2) a Delaware county-by-county (and city) Butterfly Occurrence Chart and (3) a Maryland and (4) a Delaware county-by-county (and city) Butterfly Unknown Status Chart. The Maryland and Delaware Butterfly Occurrence Charts indicate whether or not a butterfly record has ever been officially logged into each of the respective jurisdictions for each of the butterfly species known for these states. The check mark (✔) indicates that a record exists for a species. For certain recorded species occurrences, A, S, and X symbols are used instead of the check marks. The A and S symbols indicate, respectively, that the species record is due either to an Accidental occurrence (i.e., accidental release or introduction) or to a Stray (i.e., species incidentally wandering far from normal range). The X indicates that based on observations of local lepidopterists and my own over a period of many years, the species apparently no longer occurs in the jurisdiction shown and is therefore considered to be eXtirpated there. In addition, the attached Maryland and Delaware Butterfly Unknown Status Charts indicate, with the symbol U (for unknown), uncommon to rare species for which I have received few or no records of occurrence of the species in the indicated counties or cities in the past 15 years. All persons with information on a species in a jurisdiction where cited with the symbol U are asked to provide data for this project.  (Note that the total species on the Unknown Status Charts are a small subset of the total species on the Occurrence Charts. Species not included in the Unknown Status Charts are either generally common or are those for which we have recent data and for which no change in occurrence status is currently suspected (for more on this, please see footnote below). We are less concerned about additional data on these species.) 

For the current project, I am asking each person to send to me by e-mail at Richard.Smith@jhuapl.edu the date and location (nearest town is sufficient) of their latest observation of any of the species for the respective counties and cities indicated with a U on my Unknown Status charts. I plan to publish the status of this information once each year on the Leplog website at http://leplog.wordpress.com/washington-area-butterfly-club/.  Entries will include the latest date of a record, the approximate location of the record, and the data contributor. By citing the latest date, we will be able to assess how recently each of these species is known to have occurred in the area of interest. If certain species are eventually found to have disappeared from major parts of our region, conservation measures, such as protection of known habitat, will need to be implemented in surviving areas. Of course, if anyone observes a species currently identified with an X in an indicated area, this information will be vitally important; and conservation measures should be considered promptly at the sighting locality.

Since initiating this project early in 2011, I have received a large number of records from many of you for the Unknown Status Charts.  Thank you all much for this.  Contributed data is shown on these charts as discussed above.  We are on the road to being reassured that several of our native butterfly species are still occurring in the cities and counties previously known from the historical record.  However, as evident from the attached charts, the task is far from over.  There is still an abundance of “U” entries on these charts. Please send in any new data if you have it or when it becomes available.  Also, if anyone has later dates for the existing occurrence dates in the present charts, please forward that information to me too. Finally, please inform me if you notice that I have apparently missed entering some of your contributed data.  Here’s hoping you all have great seasons this coming year in observing butterflies and that you will be able to help replace many more U’s in my charts with recent data entries.

Richard H. (Dick) Smith

Columbia, MD

(Footnote: for those of you who are more knowledgeable about statewide conservation activity involving butterflies, note that some (but not all) of the species omitted from my Unknown Status charts are those already considered to be rare, threatened, endangered, or extirpated in Maryland or Delaware and for which conservation considerations and measures have already been placed into action.  For more on these species, please see the information and publications available at the Maryland and Delaware Natural Heritage Program websites at http://www.dnr.state.md.us/wildlife/Plants_Wildlife/espaa.asp and http://www.dnrec.delaware.gov/fw/NHESP/information/Pages/Information.aspx .) <<

 

New Features for Maryland Biodiversity Project

Many of you know the great project Bill Hubick and Jim Brighton launched to categorize Maryland’s plant and animal species, the Maryland Biodiversity Project.  They announced this week a new function for the site, county by county records for a number of organisms — birds, odes, and butterflies among them.  Here’s Bill’s note making the announcement:

>>Jim Brighton and I are excited to announce a major addition to the Maryland Biodiversity Project. Now when you visit any checklist, you can switch to “County Records” view. This will show presence/absence of records for the species in Maryland’s 23 counties. We believe our records are complete – or very close – for birds, reptiles and amphibians, butterflies, dragonflies, damselflies, and tiger beetles. If you notice anything missing or inaccurate in those lists, please let us know. All other records are being collected from any and all available sources and will be filled in as a fun, but massive, long-term effort.<<

The link for the butterflies is http://www.marylandbiodiversity.com/viewRecords.php?category=Butterflies; the full site is simply www.marylandbiodiversity.com.

 

 

UK Butterfly Monitoring Scheme

Ran across this interesting web site for UKBMS:

 

Butterflies are uniquely placed amongst British terrestrial insect and other invertebrate groups to act as indicators of the state of the environment, allowing us to assess the impacts of climate change and the progress of government policy initiatives such as the UK Biodiversity Action Plan, agri-environment schemes and site condition monitoring of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs).

Not only are butterflies biologically suitable as indicator species, having rapid lifecycles and, in many cases, high sensitivity to environmental conditions, but the recording and monitoring volunteer networks and datasets built up by Butterfly Conservation (BC) and the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH) enable accurate assessment of their trends.

The United Kingdom Butterfly Monitoring Scheme (UKBMS) is a recently formed merger of the long-running Butterfly Monitoring Scheme (BMS) with Butterfly Conservation’s co-ordination of ‘independent’ transects. You can find out more about the background of these two separate schemes on our Development page.

The UKBMS consists of a network of sites throughout the UK, covering 71 species.

The UKBMS mission is to assess the status and trends of UK butterfly populations for conservation, research and quality of life.

The objectives of the scheme are:

• To maintain and develop a network of transect sites in order to assess and interpret changes in the abundance and status of UK butterflies
• To encourage participation in recording butterfly transects by supporting volunteer recording networks
• To ensure a high level of quality assurance for butterfly transect data by development and promotion of standards, and by applying rigorous data validation and verification procedures
• To secure and manage transect monitoring data and provide access to academia, governments, industry and the public subject to approval.
• To advance knowledge in butterfly ecology through interpretation of transect monitoring data.
• To provide the scientific underpinning for solutions to butterfly conservation issues arising from and habitat and climate change
• To provide the knowledge base, including indicators of change, for government policies addressing environmental issues
• To promote public awareness and understanding of butterflies through communication of the results of the scheme.

Data are collected annually to monitor changes in the abundance of butterflies, using well-established data collection and analysis methodologies.

Results have been published in numberous publications, and you can see the key findings elsewhere on this website.

The UKBMS operates as a partnership between the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH), Butterfly Conservation (BC) and and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) with funding by a multi-agency consortium led by Defra, and including the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW), English Nature (EN), Environment and Heritage Service (EHS), Forestry Commission (FC), the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC), Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department (SEERAD), and Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH).

You can see details of planned developments to the scheme on our Objectives page.

 

WV Butterfly Atlas

Susan Olcott of the WV Department of Natural Resources recently announced the creation of a West Virginia Butterfly Atlas project to run through 2016.  Susan specifically requests that anyone wishing to participate please contact her first at either the address, phone number, or e-mail listed below to receive details on data protocol and policies.  For example, GPS coordinates of each record, which can be obtained after the fact from google.maps, are required. The announcement is below and the list of target species is linked in:

The atlas project is scheduled to run from spring 2012 through 2016.  During the first two years, efforts will concentrate on the Monongahela National Forest because we (the WV DNR) received a grant from the Forest Service to survey for rare butterflies (following up on Linda Butler’s gypsy moth control work from the 1990s).  However, I’ll be accepting vouchers from anywhere in the state.  [Definitive live photographic series displaying critical identification features, as well as collected specimens, will be accepted.]  Although I hope not to have to use [purely] sight records, I’ll be collecting those as well just in case.   We’ll be looking for all butterflies and for selected moths – Saturniidae, Sphingidae, and state rare species (17 species – WV Atlas species list.  We were successful in using volunteers for surveying for an Odonate atlas that was finished a couple of years ago, so we’re planning on using them again.  This atlas is modeled after the Maine Butterfly Survey, with similar dataforms and protocols.  Like any atlas, the primary purpose is the documentation of species accompanied by a date and good location data.

 Susan Olcott

Wildlife Diversity and Technical Services Unit

WVDNR Wildlife Resources Section

PO Box 99 1110 Railroad St

Farmington, WV 26571

(304)825-6787

fax (304)825-6270

susan.p.olcott@wv.gov

 

 

Butterflies of North Carolina — 19th Approximation

Harry LeGrand and illustrator Tom Howard have just posted their annual accounting of the species of butterflies of North Carolina, updated annually for the past 18 years. It is not considered to be a “publication,” according to Harry, but is intended to be a guide or “handbook” for butterfly watchers and others interested in butterflies, as there is, as yet, no published book on the butterflies of North Carolina.

Harry also reports that “with each passing year there are fewer and fewer new county records (check below each species’ range map for “New for 19th: …”). Obviously, we are doing better at filling in vacant county “holes” for the more common species. The bad part is threefold: 1) most of those handful who “chase” butterflies across the state for seeing or photographing have already done so, years ago, and are staying close to home these days; 2) with each passing year, one is less likely to travel to a neighboring county to fill in “dots” on the maps, as you have already done so; and 3) the rising cost of gas – predictions are over $4/gallon in a month, and possibly $5 later in the year – is keeping some folks closer to home.  But – the flight charts are getting more and more populated each year – remember that I enter every record that comes across “carolinaleps listserve”, and the State Parks folks enter their sightings into a Parks database. Thus, flight brood patterns are becoming better defined each year.”

“There are only a few completely revised species accounts, such as for Olympia Marble. For most, I left the text alone, or made a few tweaks. One new item: The USFWS is no longer using the Federal Species of Concern (FSC) designation. So, I removed that from the species accounts and the Table of Contents,” he adds.

Direct link to download the 19th: <http://ncparks.gov/19th.pdf> or visit the Butterflies of NC website and click on the link to the “19th Approx.” at http://149.168.1.196/nbnc/index.html

 

2012 — Year of the Hessel’s Hairstreak

Hessel’s hairstreak – only recognized as distinct from the similar juniper hairstreak in 1950 – is poorly known from Delmarva.  It is believed to be restricted to stands of Atlantic white-cedar, Chamaecyparis thyoides, which itself has a very narrow habitat requirement (coastal plain swamps in the Delmarva region), a tree practically decimated in the mid-Atlantic by logging, development, and swamp drainage.  Even in its preferred habitat the hairstreak is seldom encountered; the little that is known about its ecology suggests that it descends in early morning and late afternoon to nectar (Vacciniums and Amelanchier in the spring brood, Clethra in the summer) and take minerals from damp sand and soil, spending the bulk of the day high in the canopy of the white-cedars (mature trees are quite tall, 20m-30m).

Dick Smith notes that Hessel’s hairstreak apparently has not been collected in Maryland since the species was described in 1950, and is assigned to the Maryland fauna only on the basis of a reference to a (now unknown) specimen collected in the early part of the 20^th century and discovered in a collection after hesseli was described.  But there are a few places where it is possible that Hessel’s hangs on, and the success of a number of reforestation efforts in the Salisbury area on the Eastern Shore and the Severn drainage on the Western Shore give hope that it can be confidently returned to the Maryland butterfly list.  So a number of us are planning to make 2012 the Year of the Hessel’s Hairstreak.

To this end, we’ve been poring over photographs and specimen records up and down the East Coast – principally in the Carolinas, the NJ Pine Barrens, and various locations in New England – to figure out the likely habits and flight periods for Maryland hesseli.  From what we’ve been able to deduce, it’s probably a fairly early species on the Eastern Shore – early April into May would be a pretty good guess, roughly the same as juniper hairstreak and some of the elfins in the same geographic area.  The spring flight almost certainly is timed to peak bloom of various blueberries.  The second brood is about two months later, late June into July, and likely coincides with peak bloom of Clethra and possibly buttonbush.  In New Jersey, the summer flight is most often seen at field and roadside flowers near Atlantic white-cedar stands.

With the grateful assistance of colleagues at the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, The Nature Conservancy, and various other organizations, we’ve identified about a half-dozen “most likely” candidate locations to check out for Hessel’s hairstreak in 2012.  Our principal push will be the last two weeks of April and the first two weeks of May.

This is somewhat more hopeful  than hunting a needle in a haystack, but our search may not be successful.  The white-cedar stands may be too junior, too scattered, or too embedded in other forest canopy to support the habitat that Hessel’s favors.  Gypsy moth and mosquito spraying could have taken their tolls.  But we’re nothing if not optimists.

We’ll post notices on LepLog a few days before each field trip (weather depending, of course) and encourage the participation of anyone who’s interested in joining us.  Please email us at washbutterflies@gmail.com with the subject line “Hessel’s hairstreak.”