Butterfly Community No. 1

  • Tim R. New


Victoria’s Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act (FFG) recognises three main categories of entities for formal listing, namely species, communities and threatening processes. It was innovative in extending the extent of formal protection beyond the initial species level, and in addressing measures to counter the major causes of conservation concern. The most difficult of these categories to deal with is ‘ecological communities’, largely because of the difficulties of suitable definition, but is underpinned by the need for the entity to be ecologically defined, rather than simply applying to an individual site defined by place name. ‘Butterfly Community No. 1’ is the only insect-based community so far listed and has demonstrated (and, in some cases, helped to clarify) the many practical problems in definition that can arise, and in deciding the ‘boundaries’ of any such entity. It was nominated (23 October 1989), and listed (22 May 1991), on the presence of a number of ‘rare’ butterflies at Mount Piper, near Broadford in central Victoria (Fig. 9.1), constituting an assemblage that appeared decidedly unusual in both composition and richness.


Dead Wood Butterfly Species Butterfly Community Threatening Process Trap Nest 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Beardsell C (1994) Report on field surveys from 22 October to 23 January 1994 for the small and large ant-blue butterflies and their attendant ant species. Unpublished report, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  2. Britton DR (1997) Ant trap nests enable detection of a rare and localised butterfly Acropdipsas myrmecophila (Waterhouse & Lyell) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in the field. Mem Mus Vic 56: 383–387Google Scholar
  3. Britton DR, New TR (1993) Communities of diurnal Lepidoptera in central Victoria with emphasis on the Mount Piper region, Broadford (unpublished report to Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Victoria)Google Scholar
  4. Britton DR, New TR, Jelinek A (1995) Rare Lepidoptera at Mount Piper, Victoria: the role of a threatened butterfly community in advancing understanding of insect conservation. J Lepidopt Soc 49: 97–113Google Scholar
  5. Cavill GWK, Clark DV (1967) Insect venoms, attractants and repellents – VIII. Isohydronepetalactone. J Insect Physiol 13: 131–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Douglas F (1995) Recovery plan for threatened diurnal Lepidoptera in western Victoria. Part 2: Family Lycaenidae. Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  7. Douglas F, Braby MF (1992) Notes on the distribution and biology of some Hesperiidae and Lycaenidae (Lepidoptera) in Victoria. Aust Entomol Mag 19: 117–124Google Scholar
  8. Dunn KL, Dunn LE (1991) Review of Australian butterflies: distribution, life history and taxonomy. Parts 1–4. Privately published, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  9. Eastwood R, Hughes JM (2003) Molecular phylogeny and evolutionary biology of Acrodipsas (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). Mol Phylog Evol 27: 93–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grund R (1999) South Australian butterflies. Data sheet. Acrodipsas brisbanensis (Miskin) (Bronze Ant-blue). (∼rbg/acrodipsas_ds.htm, accessed July 2009)
  11. Jelinek A (1991) Butterfly community No 1. Flora and Fauna Guarantee Action Statement No 6. Department of Conservation and Environment, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  12. Jelinek A (2005) Conservation strategy for a threatened butterfly community. Vict Nat 112: 47–50Google Scholar
  13. Jelinek A, White M (1996a) Flora and Fauna Guarantee Action Statement No 70. Large ant-blue butterfly, Acrodipsas brisbanensis. Department of Natural Resources and Environment, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  14. Jelinek A, White M (1996b) Flora and Fauna Guarantee Action Statement No 71. Small ant-blue butterfly, Acrodipsas myrmecophila. Department of Natural Resources and Environment, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  15. Jelinek A, Britton DR, New TR (1994) Conservation of a ‘threatened butterfly community’ at Mount Piper, Victoria. Mem Qld Mus 36: 115–120Google Scholar
  16. New TR (1998) Recovery plan for ‘Butterfly community No.1’, a threatened butterfly community at Mt Piper in central Victoria. Department of Natural Resources and Environment, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  17. New TR, Britton DR (1997) Refining a recovery plan for an endangered lycaenid butterfly, Acrodipsas myrmecophila, in Victoria. J Insect Conserv 1: 65–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. New TR, Britton DR, Hinkley SD, Miller LJ (1996) The ant fauna of Mount Piper and its relevance to environmental assessment and the conservation of a threatened invertebrate community. Flora and Fauna Technical Report 143, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  19. Sands DPA, New TR (2002) The Action Plan for Australian Butterflies. Environment Australia, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  20. Wainer JW, Yen AL (2000) A survey of the butterfly fauna of the Paps Scenic Reserve, Mansfield, Victoria. Vic Nat 117: 131–140Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Netherlands 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ZoologyLa Trobe UniversityVictoriaAustralia

Personalised recommendations