1 Ill be talking about the North Carolina Biodiversity Project, - PDF document

1

I’ll be talking about the North Carolina Biodiversity Project, whose similarity in name to the Maryland Biodiversity Project is purely accidental but shows a similarity in thinking between our two groups There is currently a large and growing array of websites that provide photographs, range maps, and other information on specific groups of organisms. iNaturalist, eBird, BugGuide are some of the best known national groups; several states or regions have developed websites that focus on particular areas, including the Maryland project that was just described. I’ll be focusing more on why locally -focused websites are a good idea, as compared to national websites that compile information from across the range of a species 2

Public support for biodiversity conservation is needed now more than ever. We need to do whatever we can to not only maintain our current base but to expand it as widely as possible Websites are ideally suited for making information easily obtainable. Always available, free of charge, can include information formally buried deep in dusty tomes or communicated just among academic specialists Uniquely suited for working with the public to obtain information, i.e., engaging Citizen Scientists Continued importance of taxonomic, ecological, or conservation experts: NCBP takes an active role in vetting data and synthesizing it, making it useful to a wide range of partners, including the scientific, conservation, and environmental education communities, including state parks. Providing a forum for the sharing of information among as wide a group of partners is our ultimate objective. 3

The NCBC itself was organized in 2015 but was built on websites begun in the 1990s Harry LeGrand and Tom Howard The Butterflies of North Carolina has been in existence since the 1994, starting with a series of pdfs made available online that provided range maps, flight charts, ecological data, and conservation status for the entire range of butterfly species that occur in North Carolina. While the pdfs continue to be updated every year, this information has also been transferred to a website that was first produced in the early 2000s. 4

We now have seven website up and running, with an eighth added just last week – the Bryophytes of North Carolina We wait until we have a group of experts on a particular group before setting up new websites. In addition to the Bryophytes, we are also in conversations with groups who would like to set up websites for Herps, Tiger Beetles, and Spiders 5

This is a list of the products we have produced so far, with the Bryophytes still to be added. Some are still in the checklist stage; all are works in progress 6

Diverse group: former NHP biologists, biology professors, one student, agency biologists and administrators, members of private conservation organizations, nature photographers All of us are devoted naturalists; experts on particular groups of species, obtaining hard won knowledge from many hours spent the field or laboratory, either professionally or avocationally or both; Tom is the one constant, serving as webmaster for all of the projects 7

Whereas the NCBP consists of the authors of the websites, the Division of Parks and Recreation acts as our publisher, providing the server space, web design, and IT support – mainly Tom – that allows us to get our information out into the world. We also have a close mutualistic relationship in that we have the same interests in supporting interest in biodiversity and its conservation; the NCBP plays a particular role in vetting state park records, ensuring that records are accurate and useful for making management decisions within the park units The NCBP is an unincorporated association; as such, we do not qualify for 501(c)(3) non-profit status. In order for us to obtain grants, however, we have developed a partnership with the Southern Conservation Partners who serves as a financial sponsor, allowing us to use their 501(c)(3) status as an umbrella Two other important partners, with which we have information-sharing agreements are the NCSU Insect Museum and the NC Natural Heritage Program. In addition to data, we provide conservation recommendations to NHP, including Global and State Ranks 8

Features of the websites: Similar to field guides, but without the space or photo limits. Since we are not worried about making a profit, we are also free to do some things not typically covered in standard field guides: We can a wider range of species – we are, in fact, intending to include all species in our websites that belong to a particular taxonomic group and that occur in North Carolina This means we can cover both the rare species – even giving them special prominence – as well as the species that people are most likely to encounter We can cover unpopular as well as popular taxa, and can go into greater detail about their ecological significance – beyond the usual descriptions of their beneficial or harmful aspects relative to human interactions We can cover a narrower geographic range than is often profitable 9

Here is an example of a species description from the Orthoptera Website. This is an example of an extremely important group ecologically but one that receives little attention or liking from the general public. They also receive scarcely little attention from conservationists. We are able to give a detailed description of the species as it exists in North Carolina. Our form, in fact, looks very little like the species portrayed in the field guide by Capineira et al., who picked a specimen representative of the species as it mostly exists across its entire range 10

The range as it exists in North Carolina also appears to be different from what you expect for the species as a whole, again as illustrated in the field guide. 11

We give particular emphasis it describing the habitats specifically used in North Carolina. In the case of this species, all of our observations come from either wet longleaf pine savannas or sandhill seeps, in several cases where there is standing water. The same is true for other sites where the habitat has been recorded, and even in this old museum specimen, the same habitat appears likely, given our knowledge of where specifically it had been collected – knowledge of the state comes in very handy in these cases. As in the other examples, the field guide gives a very different description of the habitat for this species: “inhabits weedy and brushy locations, particularly dry habitats.” Putting together information on the distribution and habitat associations of a given species, we are able to estimate its conservation status within the state. The ranks shown here were ones I added when I was still working for the Natural Heritage Program. 12

Currently, however, no new surveys are being conducted on insect populations by the Natural Heritage Program itself, nor are there any insect experts still working for the Program. One solution is to recruit more people to keep a look out for species. For several of our websites now, we allow public submission of records. This shows the form we use for the Moths website. All anyone needs to do to enter a record is click on this menu item. 13

Here is the form that appears (note that a species name needs to be entered before this form is displayed; requires the submitter to make at least a preliminary guess as to the identity of the species) Submitter must enter the identity of the collector, the location and date of the collection or observation, the number observed, and the method used to make the observation. 14

We also ask for some basic information on the type of habitat where the observation was made and for these public submissions, we also require that a photograph be attached. Under special circumstances, we will also accept specimens. 15

All of these records are vetted by the website authors before they are entered into our database. Here is a sample of the records that we have obtained and reviewed through this process. (Normally the dates of observation should also be included as part of the records) 16

The records in green represent photographic records (records based on actual specimens get priority, so there are more counties where we have photographs than actually show up as green). A complete list of the records for a given county can be obtained by clicking on the county. There is also a menu option for displaying all of the records for a given species across the entire state 17

Making use of a wider range of observers has already produced some exciting records. This photo, for instance, was taken in an industrial area that probably never would have been selected as a good place to sample for moths; abandoned railroads in the middle of an urban area would never be at the top of the list for a Natural Heritage Inventory. 18