Future Suggestions Sample Clauses

Future Suggestions. With the completion of each field season, it is very important for the field crew to provide suggestions for the following seasons. This bottom up perspective is imperative. Of course, as is life at the end of a long field season, many of the suggestions will sound like complaints (see below). Of course, as is life when you manage the purse strings, the principal investigator and NPS will nod sympathetically and then disregard many of these suggestions. Also, because these SOPs were just written in Fall 2000, this document should be considered a first draft and any feedback or additions would be much appreciated. The field season would be much more agreeable if the following suggestions are implemented: 1) Have a full complement of traps for each site 2) Helicopter traps into sites at beginning of year and out of sites at the end of the year (1 - 1.5 hrs of helicopter time on both ends). These two suggestions, while expensive, would save the field crew a vast amount of work. Hauling traps into field sites every Sunday and out every Friday took a major toll. And when considering the number of person-days spent hauling traps across the tundra, the helicopter really becomes a massive cost saving device. Additionally, 3) Consider changing from 12 trap sessions to 10 or 11 (each session would thus end after the 0600 or 1300 check on Thursday). This would allow the crew to get out of the field at a much more reasonable time on Thursday (1800 hrs). 4) If the above suggestions are not feasible, another layover day should be added to each weekend to allow for modest recuperation and to prevent ‗burn-out‘. 5) Develop specific criteria for shutting down a trapping session if weather becomes difficult (e.g., 3-inches of snow, overnight temps below 20 F, mortalities > 30% of morning captures). 6) In conjunction with NPS, determining flagging protocol and color scheme. This is of particular importance at Polychrome, Tek 3, and Stony. 7) Having an NPS or UAF Vehicle would prevent damage to a personal vehicle on the park road. Mileage is sufficient compensation on paved roads but not necessarily on slow, rough gravel. 8) A third person on the crew would help with the workload and potentially help with the group ―dynamics‖.

Future Suggestions. Based on our experiences with this effort, we offer the following suggestions for future captive propagation of Laguna Mountain skipper: A member of the CFWO or a designated representative should be present for the collection proc- ess to make the decisions in the field that arise unexpectedly. There is no cell phone service from the collection site in the field, virtual representation will be to the disadvantage of the success of the endeavor. We should collect during the first flight period, just after its peak. This is the standard for univoltine species and although LMS has been shown to be bivoltine, the second flight is consid- erably smaller than the first. Impacts on the flight will be less if we collect at the tail end of the primary flight period, rather than from the drastically smaller second flight, thereby taking a smaller percentage of the flight. By collecting on the first flight the rearing cycle would be done in a shorter window and not face overwintering issues. Overwintering issues are a source of loss for multiple captive programs (e.g., Oregon Zoo, Toledo Zoo, University of Florida). The goal should be to collect on the first flight and either release on the second flight or breed the adults when they eclose. This will reduce expenses, labor, and impact on wild population while increas- ing the likelihood of success. It will be easier to collect females: it took us two full days in the field to find 4 females (and we netted every butterfly observed). The collection should be of younger females, if possible, from whom eggs are collected in situ, and then rereleased. The higher productivity, increased hatch rate and the eggs remaining at- tached to the plant for the younger female, and the decreased impact by taking eggs instead of females from the wild are the basis for this suggestion. Any program must start with an adequate supply of X. xxxxxxxxxxx. Although rearing in the small oviposition containers on X. xxxxxxxxxxx was successful, there was an increased impact on the plant from the interaction between the container and the feeding on the plant. This method may be employed, if there is a large supply of H. clevelandii available. Alternative designs could be to use cut leaves from H. clevelandii inserted into the modified “Xxxxxxx” container or using the Toledo Zoo’s Xxxxxxxx’x Satyr set up in the cement tub. In any arrangement, increased exposure to direct sun is vital to larval health and survival. If this is accomplished outside...