Assessing a farmland set-aside conservation program for an endangered butterfly: USDA State Acres for Wildlife Enhancement (SAFE) for the Karner blue butterfly

Published source details Neff P.K., Locke C. & Lee-Mader E. (2017) Assessing a farmland set-aside conservation program for an endangered butterfly: USDA State Acres for Wildlife Enhancement (SAFE) for the Karner blue butterfly. Journal of Insect Conservation, 21, 929-941.
Share Tweet Email

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

	Action	Category
	Provide or retain set‐aside areas in farmland Action Link
	Pay farmers to cover the costs of conservation measures (as in agri-environment schemes or conservation incentives) Action Link

Provide or retain set‐aside areas in farmland

A replicated, site comparison study in 2009–2014 in eight farm set-asides and two native prairies in Wisconsin, USA (Kleintjes et al. 2017) found that set-aside fields sown with grasses and non-woody broadleaved plants (forbs) had a similar number of butterflies to native prairies in the first year, but lower numbers after 2–5 years. For the first year after establishment, set-aside areas had a similar number of butterflies (8–52 butterflies/200 m) to native prairie (5–42 butterflies/200 m). However, 2–5 years after establishment, the number of butterflies on set-aside (5–20 butterflies/200 m) was lower than in native prairie (22–68 butterflies/200 m). The total number of species recorded on set-aside (31 species, of which six were not seen on prairies) was similar to prairie sites (35 species, of which 10 were not seen on set-aside). In spring 2009, fields (average 6.8 ha) on eight farms enrolled in a set-aside program were pre-treated with glyphosate and seeded with a mix of six grasses and 11 forbs using a no-till seed drill. They were compared with two native dry sand prairies in a powerline right-of-way, managed to suppress woody vegetation. From May–August 2009–2012, butterflies were surveyed 2–4 times/year on one 200-m transect/farm. In 2013–2014, just four farms and the two native prairies were surveyed twice/year.

(Summarised by: Andrew Bladon)
Pay farmers to cover the costs of conservation measures (as in agri-environment schemes or conservation incentives)

A replicated, site comparison study in 2009–2014 in eight farm set-asides and two native prairies in Wisconsin, USA (Kleintjes et al. 2017) found that set-aside fields which landowners were paid to sow with grasses and non-woody broadleaved plants (forbs) had a similar number of butterflies to native prairies in the first year, but lower numbers after 2–5 years. For the first year after establishment, set-aside areas had a similar number of butterflies (8–52 butterflies/200 m) to native prairie (5–42 butterflies/200 m). However, 2–5 years after establishment, the number of butterflies on set-aside (5–20 butterflies/200 m) was lower than in native prairie (22–68 butterflies/200 m). The total number of species recorded on set-aside (31 species, of which six were not seen on prairies) was similar to prairie sites (35 species, of which 10 were not seen on set-aside). In spring 2009, fields (average 6.8 ha) on eight farms enrolled in a set-aside program were pre-treated with glyphosate and seeded with a mix of six grasses and 11 forbs using a no-till seed drill. They were compared with two native dry sand prairies in a powerline right-of-way, managed to suppress woody vegetation. From May–August 2009–2012, butterflies were surveyed 2–4 times/year on one 200-m transect/farm. In 2013–2014, just four farms and the two native prairies were surveyed twice/year.

(Summarised by: Andrew Bladon)