koi_2015_bulldozers vs. butterflies-conservation concerns
TRANSCRIPT
1
Sandy Koi 1
Butterflies versus Bulldozers 2
Conservation Concerns for South Florida: Pine Rockland Denizens in Peril 3
9173 SW 72 Ave, M-5, Miami, FL 33156 4
1+(954) 449-5428 6
7
2
Butterflies vs. Bulldozers 8
Conservation Concerns for South Florida: 9
Pine Rockland Denizens in Peril 10
© 2015 by S. Koi 11
Abstract 12
Urban/natural interface areas embody the classic conflicts between human desires and 13
endangered species, and these clashes are occurring more frequently worldwide. The playing 14
field becomes more complicated because development invites increased pesticide use and 15
decreased biodiversity; displaced wildlife is fragmented into disjointed and often isolated 16
populations. Fewer intact wild lands remain for wildlife to re-populate or for researchers to 17
relocate the exiled animals. Domestic gardens may provide habitat for some creatures, but more 18
often than not, urban wildlife becomes increasingly wedged between the concrete wall of a 19
shopping plaza and a super-highway. Here I describe several complex skirmishes that arose 20
between humans and invertebrate wildlife, and events that eradicated several self-established 21
colonies of the imperiled Atala Hairstreak butterfly in Southeast Florida, as well as two other 22
events that would have destroyed Atala colonies if were it not for the intervention of 23
conservation-minded individuals. In addition, the on-going threat of continued development in 24
the endangered Southeast Florida pine rocklands has the potential to devastate isolated colonies 25
of the United States federally endangered butterflies, Bartram’s Scrub Hairstreak and Florida 26
Leafwing, as well as one of the few remaining wild colonies of the Atala Hairstreak. 27
Keywords: Atala Butterfly, Bartram’s Scrub Hairstreak, Florida Leafwing, pine 28
rocklands, habitat alteration, defaunation, biodiversity loss 29
3
Introduction: Global Defaunation & Habitat Skirmishes 30
Biodiversity loss is occurring at an unprecedented rate, aptly named the “defaunation” of 31
our ecosystems by Dirzo et al. (2014), and the sixth great extinction is here. Higgins described 32
the mass destruction of biomes and the biota inherent within it as “ecocide” and urged global 33
legislation to force the United Nations to include ecocide as one of the ‘crimes against humanity’ 34
(Higgins 2010). 35
Urban/natural interface areas exemplify the classic conflicts between human desires and 36
endangered species, and these clashes are occurring more frequently worldwide. Land alteration 37
in urban development invites increased pesticide use, is associated with decreased biodiversity, 38
and displaced wildlife is left in disjointed, often isolated, populations (Hubbuch 1991; Culbert 39
1994; Culbert 1995(2012); Myers et al. 2000; LaBonte et al. 2001; Rondeau 2001; Kershenbaum 40
et al. 2011; Dirzo et al. 2014). This is especially significant when the ecosystems supporting 41
endangered, threatened, vulnerable and imperiled life forms are themselves under threat 42
(Hubbuch 1991; Culbert 1994; Culbert 1995(2012); Myers et al. 2000; LaBonte et al. 2001; 43
Rondeau 2001; Kershenbaum et al. 2011; Dirzo et al. 2014), as is the case with Miami-Dade 44
County pine rockland ecosystems in Southeast Florida (Miami-Dade 2007). When these 45
geographical areas are also recognized as biodiversity hotspots globally (Myers et al. 2000), this 46
devastation is a conservation concern of even greater import. 47
The foundations of life on this planet are upheld by the vast abundance and diversity of 48
invertebrates, but are largely ignored for the ecological services they perform (Prather et al. 49
2012; Dirzo et al. 2014). More than half of monitored invertebrate insect populations recently 50
show a nearly fifty percent decline in abundance (Dirzo et al. 2014). Less than 400 of the 1800 51
butterfly species on the planet have been formally assessed by the International Union for 52
Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) and no up-to-date inventory of all 53
4
butterfly species exists (Lewis 2010). Seventy-five percent of global fruit, vegetable, and grain 54
food crops are pollinated by insects (Gallai et al. 2009; Xerces 2011). Insects are enormously 55
responsible for soil and water nutrient recycling, detritus and waste disposal, food for other 56
species (including humans and other large mammals) as well as beneficial insect species control 57
of pest species (LaBonte et al. 2001; Losey and Vaughan 2006; Gallai et al. 2009; Xerces 2011; 58
Prather et al. 2012). 59
Many insect species are ephemeral, and/or diminutive, and are therefore difficult to 60
monitor, and challenging to find, and may live in isolated fragmented habitats (LaBonte et al. 61
2001; Taron and Reis 2015). Areas bordering urban localities are especially vulnerable; LaBonte 62
et al. (2001) point out that mosquito control spraying in recreational areas, controlled burns to 63
maintain forest ecology, road building for access to locations within the forest, the consequent 64
changes in soil chemistry from compaction and erosion, and herbicide use to control unwanted 65
invasive plant species are possible causes of the extirpation of the Polites mardon butterfly and a 66
flightless beetle, Agonum belleri. Negotiating the environmental impacts of pesticides used to 67
manage or eliminate invertebrate pests, while simultaneously balancing wildlife and human 68
safety, is challenging (Pimentel, 2009, 2011, 2013; Bargar 2012; Hoang et al. 2011; Xerces 69
2011; Pimentel et al. 2013). Some butterfly species disappear in an urban environment and others 70
are able to breed and even flourish, but most butterfly species are negatively impacted by urban 71
development (Hardy and Dennis 1999). 72
Climate change has also expanded or reduced potential range of many insects, but 73
anthropogenically altered landscapes negatively impact an animals’ ability to transverse 74
inhospitable matrices, obstructing possible new establishment sites (Gaston 2009; Thomas 2011; 75
Dirzo et al. 2014). Butterflies that inhabit montane regions may become extirpated as their 76
5
ecosystems warm up (Forister and Shapiro 2003; Gaston et al. 2009), and in other cases, the 77
butterflies may expand their range (Koi and Daniels 2015). In addition, it is becoming 78
increasing difficult to find suitable locations for re-location or assisted translocation because of 79
increased habitat degradation. Thomas (2011) points out that we may be reaching a point where 80
restoration of species is no longer a viable alternative because of the anthropogenic alteration of 81
the remaining landscapes. 82
Butterflies and moths are one of the insect orders with the longest running monitor data 83
available and show consistent declines in numbers and abundance (Minno 2010, 2012; 84
Schweitzer et al. 2011; Dirzo et al. 2014; Taron and Reis 2015). Dirzo et al. (2014) indicated that 85
species richness in lepidoptera is 7.6 times higher on average in undisturbed habitat than in 86
disturbed sites. 87
Entomologists know that the ecosystem requirements for insect survival differs 88
dramatically between species, but have only recently recognized that management plans for 89
restoring degraded ecosystems, or establishing connectivity between patches, varies significantly 90
and is dependent on whether the target species is identified as “megafauna” or “microfauna” 91
(Longcore and Osborne 2015). Microfauna may need less actual space, but the micro-92
requirements of that space may mandate more specificity (Longcore and Osborne 2015). 93
Habitats, host plants, and imperiled insects in Southeast Florida 94
Pine rocklands are unique to Southeast Florida, Cuba and the Bahamas, containing 95
distinctive plants and animals adapted to a severe environment. The sharp limestone substrate 96
contains little soil; solution holes appear arbitrarily and the ecosystem is subject to stochastic 97
weather events, such as hurricanes, tropical storms and subsequent salt-water intrusion. It is a 98
6
harsh environment and the biota is adapted to frequent and unpredictable natural and managed 99
fire; annual cycles of drought revolve around annual cycles of heavy rain. 100
Categorized as globally endangered by the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (Florida), 101
pine rocklands are also listed as “Environmentally Endangered Lands” in Miami-Dade County, 102
Southeast Florida (Snyder et al. 1990; Miami-Dade 2007; Florida 2010). The ecosystem is 103
dominated by slash pines (Pinus elliottii var. densa), an understory of dense saw palmetto 104
(Serenoa repens), cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), and hundreds of rare tropical herbaceous taxa 105
endemic to the ecosystem. The habitat is maintained by fires, occurring in 3 to 7 year cycles, 106
from both managed fire and natural lightning strikes (Snyder et al. 1990; Miami-Dade 2007; 107
Florida 2010). The environment requires fire to suppress exotic plant invasion, reduce pine duff 108
and recycle organic material; it also prevents an otherwise natural progression into tropical 109
hardwood hammock. 110
The organic matter recycled by fire is especially important in the nutrient-poor limestone 111
substrate. In addition, some plants are fire-dependent, requiring fire in order to sprout, set seed or 112
grow. The flora is highly adapted to the environmental stresses and the pine rocklands contain a 113
rich biodiversity in flora and fauna (Miami-Dade 2007; Florida 2010). 114
Butterflies that have historically lived in pine rocklands include Bartram’s Scrub 115
Hairstreak (Strymon acis bartrami), the Florida Leafwing (Anaea troglodyta floridalis) and the 116
Atala Hairstreak (Eumaeus atala), all hostplant specialists. The host for Bartram’s and the 117
Leafwing is pineland croton (Croton linearis), which is seldom found outside the remaining 118
vestiges of pine rocklands in Southeast Florida. It is unlikely to be found in urban gardens and 119
the proximity of those gardens to pine rockland fragments would practically be a pre-requisite 120
for hosting a Bartram’s Scrub Hairstreak or a Florida Leafwing in a backyard garden. On 121
7
September 11, 2014, the US Fish and Wildlife Service placed Bartram’s Scrub Hairstreak and 122
the Florida Leafwing on the official federally-recognized Endangered list (USFWS 2014). 123
North America’s only native cycad, Zamia integrifolia (=pumila=floridana) L. 124
(Zamiaceae: Cycadales), commonly called coontie, grows equally well in a backyard garden, an 125
urban plot, tropical and temperate hardwood hammocks, coastal shorelines or pine rocklands. 126
Once found historically from southern Georgia to the Florida Keys, the starch industries of the 127
last century depleted wild populations of coontie almost to the point of extirpation, as the roots 128
were harvested to make mildew-resistant flour, important in the humid sub-tropical environment 129
of Southeast Florida (Coile 2000; Coile and Gardner 2003). Coontie is still listed as 130
“Threatened” in wild natural areas (Coile and Gardner 2003; Donaldson 2013). 131
Cycads worldwide are currently perilously endangered or threatened (Oberpreiler 1995a, 132
1995b, 1995c, 2004; Chemnick et al. 2002; Donaldson 2003; Stevenson 2010); causes include 133
legal and illegal collection, removal of seed heads and root calyxes for food and/or “bush 134
medicines,” and the two biggest on-going threats: unsustainable trade and habitat loss 135
(Oberpreiler 1995a, 1995b, 1995c, 2004; Donaldson 2003). The Great Cycadian butterfly, 136
Eumaeus childrenae, G. Gray (1832) was recently declared endangered by a regional 137
conservation organization in Mexico, due to depletion of its six known cycad hostplants, all of 138
which are listed by IUCN as threatened, vulnerable or endangered (Donaldson 2003; Hernández-139
Baz and Rodríguez-Vargas 2014). Both legal and illegal trade impact the cycad colonies, many 140
of which are isolated and highly vulnerable, regardless of legislation and laws designed to 141
protect them (Oberpreiler 1995a, 1995b, 1995c, 2004; Chemnick et al. 2002; Donaldson 2003). 142
However, Florida’s native coontie has made a strong recovery in the landscaping industry 143
during the past twenty years, as nurseries and homeowners discovered how well-adapted the 144
8
plant is to Southeast Florida’s diverse ecosystems and stochastic weather cycles (Haynes 2000; 145
Dehgan 2002; Culbert 1995(2010)). With increasing urban development and world nursery trade, 146
many more exotic non-native cycads have been added to the repertoire available to landscape 147
planners. Herbivory of the exotic cycads are a pest management concern of economic importance 148
as the plants are produced in highly specialized south Miami-Dade nurseries and are considered a 149
valuable addition to a prestigious landscape (i.e., the non-native cycads are not generally utilized 150
along highway median strips or shopping plaza parking lots). However, our native cycad has 151
shown itself to be hardy and resilient enough to be successfully utilized along mall parking lots 152
and highway medians. 153
Although it is generally accepted as beneficial that the Atala has increased its range and 154
distribution because of increased use of cycads for landscaping, the adult butterflies have 155
expanded their oviposition choices during the past twenty years as well. That expansion includes 156
many of the non-native introduced ornamental cycads found in south Florida’s botanical and 157
domestic gardens (Hubbuch 1991; Hammer 1985). The larvae are able to successfully complete 158
their life cycle on many, if not most, of these non-native plants (Hubbuch 1991; Hammer 1995; 159
Koi 2013, 2015). 160
This expansion into exotic Cycadales, many of which are extremely rare and valuable, 161
has in turn increased potential struggles between home-owners, botanists, property managers and 162
city planners with park managers, biologists, entomologists and conservationists as the Atala 163
butterfly larvae attack these urban cycads (Hubbuch 1991; Culbert 1994; Oberpreiler 1995a, 164
1995b, 1995c; Culbert 1995,2012). 165
166
9
The reduction of the native cycads, as previously noted, caused the drastic decline in the 167
Atala butterfly’s population by the 1930’s, and by 1951 it was thought to be extinct (Klots 1951). 168
Unbeknownst to almost everyone, however, the butterfly had survived in isolated refugia (Koi 169
2013). Among the reasons that the Atala butterfly has made a dramatic recovery from near-170
extinction is the increased use of coontie, and other cycads in landscaping, as well as increased 171
conservation and restoration projects by biologists, botanists, park managers, scientists and 172
concerned citizens. 173
South Florida’s Butterflies Meet Anthropogenic Landscape Alterations 174
Unlike Bartram’s Scrub Hairstreak and the Florida Leafwing, whose hostplants are not 175
found in domestic gardens or landscaping practices, the Atala butterfly has utilized the increased 176
availability of native and non-native cycads found in ornamental landscapes. Currently, over 300 177
isolated and ephemeral populations of the butterfly are extant from Palm Beach to Miami-Dade 178
counties, most of which are harbored in private gardens rather than the few remaining natural 179
areas or parks (Koi 2004, 2013, 2015). The butterfly exhibits a classic crash-eruption cycle and 180
establishes ephemeral colonies in gardens and refugia wherever it finds suitable host and nectar 181
resources. These transient Atala colony sites may re-establish after being absent for as long as 8 182
years (Koi, unpublished). 183
The Atala butterfly has been documented in highly urbanized sites, as self-established, 184
relocated and introduced colonies (Koi 2004, 2013, 2015). One such colony self-established 185
along the shore of a heavily used urban coastal park in the City of Riviera Beach in Palm Beach 186
County, Florida; the site contained native and non-native cycads, as well as ‘weedy’ nectar 187
sources, such as Bidens alba L., and native palm trees. Neighborhood gardens surrounded the 188
colony as well. Fortunately the city zoning planner recognized the Atala butterfly and contacted 189
10
the local butterfly club to let it be known that the city was going to raze the site for a complete 190
renovation. He asked for help to humanely remove the Atala colony and the host plants located 191
there until renovations were completed. 192
Volunteers quickly went into action and removed over sixty large mature coontie plants 193
from the site as well as over 50 adult Atala butterflies. The plants and butterflies, along with 194
immature life stages, were taken immediately to a mature butterfly garden that had been installed 195
years previously on a nearby college campus. Within minutes of being released in the garden, the 196
females were ovipositing on the newly moved coonties, which were planted later in the day. The 197
City of Riviera Beach has indicated that the Atala colony will be reinstated when the renovations 198
are completed. 199
Another self-established Atala colony was almost destroyed in a location in Broward 200
County, Florida a few months later. This was also an urban coastal site located in an abandoned 201
derelict parking lot, surrounded by heavily trafficked streets, businesses and residential housing. 202
This location contained more than a hundred very large healthy coontie plants which had been 203
installed between the parking spaces. There were large well-established trees that provided shade 204
and roosting spots, and abundant nectar was available in the alley-weeds, shrubs and trees along 205
the length of the neglected site.. 206
A volunteer had been monitoring this persistent Atala colony for nearly ten years and just 207
happened to be at the site counting the eggs, larvae and pupae of the Atala butterfly population 208
when she was approached and asked to explain what she was doing. After explaining the 209
butterfly monitoring method, the man revealed that he was the superintendent for a developer 210
that had recently bought the property and that they were about to raze it in a week. 211
11
The superintendent was persuaded to allow volunteers three weeks to remove not only 212
the butterflies, but as many of the enormous coontie plants as possible, as well. The Atala 213
population erupted and crashed in normal ways over the years, but had persisted for many years. 214
Immediately, butterfly and native plant volunteers from Palm Beach, Broward and 215
Miami-Dade counties arrived during the three week respite period. Truckloads of coontie plants 216
were removed from the site; the rootstocks on these plants were deep and heavily entangled. It 217
was back-breaking work that took days to accomplish; the plants may have grown even larger 218
had they not been closed in by concrete berms. It is not known how long the parking lot had been 219
empty and unused, or how long ago the coontie was planted. 220
The adult butterflies were collected and released at a safe haven in Miami, but the 221
immatures (eggs, larvae and pupae) were removed with the plants to the many new locations to 222
start new colonies. Any remaining adult butterflies dispersed by themselves to establish new sites 223
in gardens nearby. Volunteers graciously counted the immature insects so that we could have a 224
final count of the last denizens of this colony (see Table 1). 225
Ultimately, this removal was beneficial to a number of new sites: in Delray Beach itself, in the 226
Town of Wellington, and several new colony introductions and re-introductions took place via 227
the Palm Beach County Department of Environmental Resources, including Delray Oaks Natural 228
Area, Pondhawk Natural Area, High Ridge Scrub Natural Area and Jupiter Ridge. ZooMiami 229
also benefited with rescued coontie plants, and later over 250 host plants for the Atala, Bartram’s 230
Scrub Hairstreak, the Florida Leafwing and Florida Duskywing were planted a few weeks later. 231
Continued Wildlife-Human Conservation Conflicts 232
Meanwhile, yet another development is currently being planned in Miami-Dade County 233
on a property known as the “Richmond Tract,” located beside the ZooMiami. This entire 234
12
property is the largest remaining pine rockland habitat in Miami-Dade County, outside of 235
Everglades National Park, and represents most of the less than 2% which remains. The 236
Richmond Tract also contains 260 taxa of native plants (Miami 2007), many endangered 237
(Miami-Dade 2007; Florida 2010; USFWS 2014). The developer’s plans would bulldoze acres of 238
the remaining pine rocklands to build a housing development, a large chain retail store and 239
commercial shopping mall. 240
The Richmond Tract is currently home to not only the ‘imperiled’ Atala butterfly, but 241
also two other pineland denizens, Bartram’s Scrub Hairstreak and the Florida Leafwing, both 242
recently listed as Endangered by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS 2014). In 243
addition, this property is adjacent to the Coastguard pinelands, where the Florida Duskywing 244
(Ephyriades brunnea floridensis), another of the 38 imperiled Southeast Florida butterfly 245
species, can be found. 246
There are also endangered Bonneted Bats (Eumops floridanus) on the site, and the 247
Richmond pine rocklands is one of the only places in the world where the miniscule green 248
iridescent Miami Tiger Beetle (Cicindela floridana) lives. Tiger beetles are named for their 249
aggressive stalking and lightning-fast predation and are highly sensitive to minor changes in their 250
environment (Pearson 2011). Tiger beetles occupy highly restricted habitats, and as such are 251
recognized as bioindicators (Pearson 2011). An emergency petition to USFWS has been filed to 252
request listing the Miami Tiger Beetle as federally endangered. 253
There are endangered plants located on the Richmond site, including the deltoid spurge 254
(Chamaesyce deltoidea), a rare prostrate plant which successfully stopped the destruction of the 255
nearby Rockdale pine rockland site in Miami many years ago. That site, a small triangular 256
13
remnant of land, did not have the potential economic value that paving over the Richmond pine 257
rocklands could bring. 258
The Richmond tract contains Brickell-bush (Brickellia mosieri) and tiny polygala 259
(Polygala smallii), as well. Pine rocklands are a harsh environment in which to survive, but the 260
unique plants, insects and mammals have evolved over millennia together. Destroying them for 261
the sake of an amusement park and shopping plazas seems insane. 262
Butterflies, beetles and rare plants may be a hard sell against the possible economic 263
promise of a tourist-oriented theme parks and shopping plazas, but such unnecessarily 264
destructive development is surely a foolish direction for water-stressed and densely populated 265
Southeast Florida to travel. There are thousands of acres of derelict property in Miami-Dade 266
County that could be paved over for amusement parks without destroying the remaining remnant 267
natural areas. 268
And lastly, a thought from the world-renowned cycad botanist, Rolf Oberpreiler (1995c): 269
The natural insect fauna of cycads should not be brazenly dismissed as ‘pests.’ 270
These insects are a natural and mostly vital component of the environment of the 271
cycads, and their destruction can have severe impacts on the survival of the 272
plants. The most obvious examples in this regard are the pollinators, but other 273
insects may also play important roles in e.g., the disintegration of the cones and 274
release of the seeds, the decomposition of old cones, leaves and stems, the 275
recycling of nutrients, etc. . . .their survival is so inextricably attached to that of 276
the plants that extinction of their host plants will inevitably lead to the extinction 277
of these insect species. 278
It has been long recognized that destruction of the butterflies’ hostplants leads quickly to 279
either extinction, or extirpation of the butterflies (Koh et al. 2004; Gyllenberg and Hanski 1997). 280
“System-wide decline” begins with a loss of 30% of the natural vegetation cover (Fischer and 281
Lindenmayer 2007), and the cascading effect of species co-extinctions follows soon thereafter 282
(Koh et al. 2004). Especially for small, sedentary species such as beetles and butterflies, the 283
anthropogenic changes to the natural landscape, especially when coupled with climate change, 284
14
can have a devastating effect on the animals (Walther et al. 2002; Koh et al. 2004; Fischer and 285
Lindenmayer 2007). As habitat loss becomes more pronounced, there are fewer suitable patches 286
from which re-colonization can occur, as well (Gyllenberg and Hanski 1997; Fischer and 287
Lindenmayer 2007). Habitat loss is considered the greatest threat to butterflies (Gyllenberg and 288
Hanski 1997; Koh et al. 2004; Fischer and Lindenmayer 2007; Forister et al. 2010; Thomas 289
2011). 290
Species at the highest risk for extinction are those with any or all of the following 291
characteristics: specialist hostplant use, limited dispersal ability (because of habitat alteration, 292
lack of mobility, body size, genetic behavior, or other factors), niche specialization, population 293
rarity or density, endemic to the locale, home range size, edge sensitivity, area requirements, 294
abiotic effects (humidity, temperature), complex community interactions (such as ants and 295
butterfly larvae), micro-habitat requirements, seasonal effects, connectivity of habitat patches, 296
and/or landscape structure needs (Gyllenberg and Hanski 1997; Koh et al. 2004; Fischer and 297
Lindenmayer 2007; Forister et al. 2010; Thomas 2011; Longcore and Osbourne 2015). 298
Because most extinctions occur in “island-like” environments with high concentrations of 299
endemic species (Fischer and Lindenmayer 2007; Thomas 2011), it is my hope that Miami-Dade 300
County, in the biogeographic “island-peninsula” of Southeast Florida, is not leading the way in 301
proving this further. 302
303
Acknowledgements: I thank journalist Al Sunshine for the title idea of this paper as we confront 304
the diminishing pine rocklands in Miami-Dade County, Florida. I acknowledge the ongoing 305
efforts of the volunteer citizen scientists who have helped with long-term data collection of E. 306
atala populations in Southeast Florida. I thank the University of Florida for permission to use 307
material from my thesis and my chair, Jaret Daniels. 308
309
References: 310
15
Bargar, T.A. 2012. Risk assessment for adult butterflies exposed to the mosquito control 311
pesticide naled. Environmental toxicology and chemistry. Setac Press. 31. 312
(http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/). 313
Culbert, D. F. 1994 An IPM approach for control of atala (Eumaeus atala) on Florida coonties 314
(Zamia floridana). Proceedings of Florida State Horticulturalists, 107:427:430. 315
Culbert, D. F. 1995, 2010. Florida coonties and Atala butterflies. Environmental Horticulture 316
Department, Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, 317
University of Florida. ENH117. Updated 2011, 2012. 318
Dehgan, B. 2002. More cycads suited for the south. Ornamental Outlook. May: 12-18. 319
Dirzo, R., H.S. Young, M. Galetti, G. Ceballos, N. J.B. Isaac, B. Collen. 2014. Defaunation in 320
the Anthropocene. Science 345: 401-406. Doi: 10.1126/science.1251817. 321
Donaldson, J.S. (ed.). 2003. Cycads. Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. IUCN/SSC 322
Cycad Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. ix + 86 pp. 323
Fischer, J. and D.B. Lindenmayer. 2007. Ladscape modification and habitat fragmentation: a 324
synthesis. Global ecology and biogeography 16:265-280. 325
Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI). 2010. Guide to the natural communities of Florida: 326
Pine rocklands, p. 61-66. Florida Natural Areas Inventory, Tallahassee, FL. 327
http://www.fnai.org. 328
Forister, M. L. & A. Shapiro. (2003). Climatic trends and advancing spring flights of butterflies 329
in lowland California. Global Change Biology, 9, 1130-1135. 330
Gallai, N., J.-M. Salles, J. Settele, B. E. Vaissièra. 2009. Economic valuation of the vulnerability 331
of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline. Ecological Economics 68: 810-332
821 333
16
Gaston, K.J. 2009. Geographic range limits of species. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 334
276: 1391-1393. 335
Gyllenberg, M. and I. Hanski. 1997. Habitat deterioration, habitat destruction, and 336
metapopulation persistence in a heterogenous landscape. Theoretical population biology 337
52:198-215. 338
Hardy, P.B. and R.L.H. Dennis. 1999. The impact of urban development on butterflies within a 339
city region. Biodiversity and Conservation 8: 1261-1279. 340
Haynes, J. L. 2000. Cycads in the south ‘Florida landscape.’ Proceedings of the Florida State 341
Horticultural Society 113: 309-311. 342
Hernández-Baz, F. and D.U. Rodríguez-Vargas. 2014. Libro rojo de la fauna del estado de 343
Veracruz. Goberno del Estado de Veracruz, Procuraduría Estatal de Protección al Medio 344
Ambiente, Universidad Vercruzana, 220 p. (ISBN: 978-607-502-324-3) (In Spanish) 345
Higgins, P. 2010. Eradicating Ecocide. Shepheard-Walwyn Ltd., London, UK. 202 p. 346
Hoang, T. C., R.L. Pryor, G.M. Rand and R.A. Frakes. 2011. Use of butterflies as nontarget 347
insect test species and the acute toxicity and hazard of mosquito control insecticides. 348
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 30: 997-1005. 349
Hubbuch, C. 1991. Wings of a dilemma: the Atala butterfly. Fairchild Tropical Botanic Garden 350
Bulletin 46: 20-23. 351
International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN). 2009. 352
Kershenbaum, A., A. Kershenbaum and L. Blaustein. 2011. Rock hyrax (Procavia capensis) den 353
site selection: preference for artificial sites. Wildlife Research 38: 244-248. 354
Koh, L. P., N. S. Sodhi & B.W. Brook. (2004) Co-extinctions of tropical butterflies and their 355
hostplants. Biotropica, 36, 272-274. 356
17
Koi, S. 2004. Establishing Naturally Sustainable Wild Populations of the Eumaeus atala florida 357
Röber (Lycaenidae: Lepidoptera) and its Larval Host Plant, Coontie (Zamia species) 358
within Historically Documented Florida Sites. National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, 359
Budweiser Conservation Scholarship Program. (FL)#2004-0019-001). 360
Koi, S. (2008) Nectar sources for Eumaeus atala (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae: Theclinae). Florida 361
Entomologist, 91, 118-120. 362
Koi, S. 2013. Ecology and conservation of Eumaeus atala Poey 1832 (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). 363
MS thesis. University of Florida. 295 pp. 364
Koi, S. and J.C. Daniels. 2015. New and Revised Life History of the Florida hairstreak Eumaeus 365
atala (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) with notes on its current conservation status. Florida 366
Entomologist 98(4): 1134-1147. 367
LaBonte, J. R., D. W. Scott, J.D. McIver and J.L. Hayes. (2001) Threatened, endangered, and 368
sensitive insects in eastern Oregon and Washington forests and adjacent lands. Northwest 369
Science 75: 185-198. Special Issue, 2001. 370
Lewis, O.T. 2010. Assessing the status of the world’s butterflies. Wings. Fall: 4-7. 371
Longcore, T. and K. H. Osbourne. 2015. Butterflies are not grizzly bears: Lepidoptera 372
Conservation in Practice. In Butterfly Conservation in North America. Efforts to help 373
save out charismatic microfauna. Ed. Jaret C. Daniels. Springer Science + Business 374
Media B.V. Doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-9852-5. ISBN: 978-017-9851-8. 375
Miami-Dade County. 2007. Environmentally endangered lands program management plan. Part 376
II: Management of specific habitat types. Chapter 1: Pine rocklands. 70 pp. 377
Minno, M.C. 2010. Butterfly extinctions in south Florida. American Butterflies. 18: 16-22. 378
18
Minno, M.C. 2012. Critically low populations of the Schaus’ Swallowtail (Heraclides 379
aristodemus ponceanus, Papilionidae) and Bartram’s Scrub-hairstreak Strymon acis 380
bartrami, Lycaenidae) in the Florida Keys. Southern Lepidopterists News 34: 165-166. 381
Myers, N., R. A. Mittermeier, C. G. Mittermeier & G.A.B. Da Fonseca. 2000. Biodiversity 382
hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853-858. 383
Oberprieler, R. 1995a, 1995b, 1995c. The weevils (Coleoptera: Curculionoidea) associated with 384
cycads, Proceedings, 3rd International Conference on Cycad Biology, pp. 295-365. 5-9 385
July 1993. Stellenbosch, Cycad Society of Pretoria, South Africa. 386
Oberprieler, R. 2004. Evil Weevils—the key to cycad survival and diversification. Proceedings, 387
6th International Conference on Cycad Biology, pp. 170-195. 27 July-4 Aug. 2002. 388
Chonburi, Thailand. Nong Nooch Tropical Garden. 389
Pearson, D.L. 2011. Six-legged tigers. Wings. Spring: 19-23. 390
Pimentel, D. & Hart, K. 2001. Pesticide use: ethical, environmental, and public health 391
implications. In New Dimensions in Bioethics: Science, Ethics and the Formulation of 392
Public Policy (ed. by W. Galston & E. Shurr) pp. 79-108. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 393
Boston. 394
Pimentel, D. 1995. Amounts of pesticides reaching target pests: environmental impacts and 395
ethics. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 8: 17-29. 396
Pimentel, D. 2009. Pesticides and pest control. In Integrated Pest Management: Innovation-397
Development Process (ed. by R. Peshin and A. Dhawan), pp. 83-87. Springer, 398
Netherlands. 399
19
Pimentel, D. 2011. Environmental effects of pesticides on public health, birds and other 400
organisms. Accessed at http://rachels-carson-of-401
today.blogspot.com/2011/02/environmental-effects-of-pesticides-on.html. 402
Pimentel, D. 2013. Public health risks associated with pesticides and natural toxins in food. 403
Accessed at http://ipmworld.umn.edu/chapters/pimentel.htm. 404
Prather, C. M., S. L. Pelini, A. Laws, E. Rivest, M. Woltz, C. P. Bloch, I. D. Toro, C.-K. Ho, J. 405
Kominoski, T.A.S. Newbold, S. Parsons and A. Joern. 2012. Invertebrates, ecosystem 406
services and climate change. Biological reviews. Cambridge Philosophical Society. 000-407
000:1-22. Doi:10.1111/brv.12002. 408
Ramirez-Restrepo, L., S. Koi and I. MacGregor-Fors. 2015. Tales of conservation in cities: The 409
case of Eumaeus butterflies and their threatened cycad hostplants. Biological 410
Conservation. IN PRESS. 411
Rondeau, D. 2001. Along the way back from the brink. Journal of Environmental Economics 412
and Management 42: 156-182. 413
Schweitzer, D.F., M.C. Minno, D.L.Wagner. 2011. Rare, declining and poorly known butterflies 414
and moths (Lepidoptera) of the forests and woodlands in theEastern United States. 415
United States Department of Agriculture. FHTET-2011-01. Sept. 517 pp. 416
Snyder, J.R., A. Hendron & W.B. Robertson. (1990) South Florida Rockland. Ecosystems of 417
Florida. (ed. by R. A Myers & J. J. Ewel) pp. 230-277.Orlando: University of Central 418
Florida. 419
Taron, D. and L. Ries. 2015. Butterfly monitoring for conservation. In Daniels, J., ed. Butterfly 420
conservation in North America: Efforts to help save our charismatic microfauna. 421
Springer. Doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-9852-5. 422
20
Thomas, C. 2011. Translocation of species, climate change, and the end of trying to recreate 423
past ecological communities. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 26: 216-221. 424
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2014. Bartram’s scrub hairstreak butterfly. 425
Federal registry FWS–R4–ES–2013–0084. 426
Walther, G.R., E. Post, P. Convey, A. Menzeil, C. Parmesan, T. J.C. Beebee, J. M. Fromentin, O. 427
Hough-Guldberg & Franz Bairlein. 2002. Ecological responses to recent climate change. 428
Nature 416: 389-395. 429
Xerces Society. 2011. Attracting native pollinators. Protecting North America’s bees and 430
butterflies. Storey publishing. 371 pp. 431