Euphyes dion - (Edwards, 1879)
Dion Skipper
Other English Common Names: Dion skipper
Synonym(s): Euphyes alabamae ;Euphyes macguirei
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Euphyes dion (W. H. Edwards, 1879) (TSN 706610)
French Common Names: hespérie farouche
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.115869
Element Code: IILEP77030
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Invertebrates - Insects - Butterflies and Moths - Butterflies and Skippers
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Mandibulata Insecta Lepidoptera Hesperiidae Euphyes
Genus Size: C - Small genus (6-20 species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Concept Reference: Opler, P. A., and A. D. Warren. 2002. Butterflies of North America. 2. Scientific Names List for Butterfly Species of North America, north of Mexico. C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. 79 pp.
Concept Reference Code: B02OPL01EHUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Euphyes dion
Conservation Status

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G4
Global Status Last Reviewed: 13Sep2015
Global Status Last Changed: 01Sep1998
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G4 - Apparently Secure
Nation: United States
National Status: N4 (01Sep1998)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N4 (24Aug2017)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Alabama (SU), Arkansas (SU), Connecticut (S3), Delaware (S1), Florida (S2S3), Georgia (S2S4), Illinois (S3), Indiana (S2S3), Iowa (S3), Kansas (S2S3), Kentucky (S3), Louisiana (SU), Maryland (S3), Massachusetts (S2), Michigan (S3S4), Minnesota (S4), Mississippi (S2S4), Missouri (S2S4), Nebraska (S2), New Jersey (S4), New York (S3), North Carolina (S4), North Dakota (S1), Ohio (S4), Oklahoma (S3), Pennsylvania (S3), South Carolina (SNR), Tennessee (S3?), Texas (SNR), Vermont (S2), Virginia (S4), Wisconsin (S4)
Canada Ontario (S4), Quebec (S3)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
Color legend for Distribution Map
Endemism: occurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AL, AR, CT, DE, FL, GA, IA, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NJ, NY, OH, OK, PA, SC, TN, TX, VA, VT, WI
Canada ON, QC

Range Map
No map available.

U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
AR Saline (05125)
CT Fairfield (09001), Litchfield (09005)
DE Sussex (10005)
FL Clay (12019), Duval (12031), Escambia (12033), Franklin (12037), Levy (12075), Liberty (12077), Nassau (12089), Okaloosa (12091), Santa Rosa (12113), Wakulla (12129), Walton (12131), Washington (12133)
IA Black Hawk (19013), Bremer (19017), Buchanan (19019), Butler (19023), Calhoun (19025), Cerro Gordo (19033), Chickasaw (19037), Dickinson (19059), Fayette (19065), Hancock (19081), Kossuth (19109), Lucas (19117), Osceola (19143), Pocahontas (19151)
IN La Porte (18091), Lake (18089), Porter (18127), Starke (18149)
MA Berkshire (25003), Hampshire (25015)
ND Ransom (38073)
NE Antelope (31003), Buffalo (31019), Holt (31089), Knox (31107), Lancaster (31109), Merrick (31121), Nance (31125), Richardson (31147), Sarpy (31153), Saunders (31155), Stanton (31167)
PA Adams (42001), Bradford (42015), Tioga (42117), Warren (42123)
VT Addison (50001), Bennington (50003), Chittenden (50007), Grand Isle (50013), Lamoille (50015), Rutland (50021), Windham (50025)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
01 West (01080107)+, Middle Connecticut (01080201)+, Housatonic (01100005)+, Saugatuck (01100006)+*
02 Hudson-Hoosic (02020003)+, Broadkill-Smyrna (02040207)+, Tioga (02050104)+, Upper Susquehanna-Tunkhannock (02050106)+, Monocacy (02070009)+, Pokomoke-Western Lower Delmarva (02080111)+
03 St. Marys (03070204)+, Lower St. Johns (03080103)+, Waccasassa (03110101)+, Apalachee Bay-St. Marks (03120001)+, Lower Ochlockonee (03120003)+, Apalachicola (03130011)+, New (03130013)+, Choctawhatchee Bay (03140102)+, Yellow (03140103)+, Blackwater (03140104)+, Pensacola Bay (03140105)+, Perdido (03140106)+, Lower Choctawhatchee (03140203)+
04 Little Calumet-Galien (04040001)+, Otter Creek (04150402)+, Missiquoi River (04150407)+, Lake Champlain (04150408)+
05 Upper Allegheny (05010001)+, Conewango (05010002)+
07 Upper Wapsipinicon (07080102)+, Upper Cedar (07080201)+, Winnebago (07080203)+, West Fork Cedar (07080204)+, Middle Cedar (07080205)+, Upper Iowa (07080207)+, East Fork Des Moines (07100003)+, Middle Des Moines (07100004)+, North Raccoon (07100006)+, Lake Red Rock (07100008)+, Kankakee (07120001)+, Chicago (07120003)+
08 Upper Saline (08040203)+
09 Lower Sheyenne (09020204)+
10 Lower Niobrara (10150007)+, Middle Platte-Prairie (10200103)+, Lower Platte (10200202)+, Salt (10200203)+, South Loup (10210004)+, Loup (10210009)+, Upper Elkhorn (10220001)+, Lower Elkhorn (10220003)+, Little Sioux (10230003)+, Big Papillion-Mosquito (10230006)+, Tarkio-Wolf (10240005)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Habitat Type: Terrestrial
Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Palustrine Habitat(s): Bog/fen, HERBACEOUS WETLAND, Riparian, SCRUB-SHRUB WETLAND
Habitat Comments: Generally open to shrubby sedge wetlands and occasionally in northern New Jersey (definitely subspecies DION) even in openings in limey red maple swamps. Subspecies DION northward generally on calcareous soils associated with large sedges like CAREX LACUSTRIS. Coastal plain and southeastern populations (mostly subspecies ALABAMAE) in a great variety of sedge situations from swales in wet pine barrens (especially in southern New Jersey), to bogs, roadside ditches and a very good colonizer. Southeastern and coastal plain populations often associated with CAREX HYALINOLEPIS or C. STRIATA. Both subspecies sometimes with SCIRPUS CYPERINUS in ditches (Schweitzer).
Adult Food Habits: Nectarivore
Food Comments: Caterpillar Hosts: Various sedges including woolgrass (Scirpus cyperinus), hairy sedge (Carex lacustris), and shoreline sedge (Carex hyalinolepis). Adult Food: Nectar from flowers of pickerelweed, sneezeweed, buttonbush, Alsike clover, and others (Lotts and Naberhaus 2017).
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Group Name: Euphyes, Poanes and other Wetland Skippers

Use Class: Not applicable
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: A location where the species occurs, or has occurred, where there is potential for persistence or regular recurrence. Minimally a wetland with the larval foodplant where at least one adult has been verified by a photograph or preferably a specimen. Photographs must be diagnostic and will probably need to show both wing surfaces, and there may be circumstances where only a specimen will suffice. Specimens are much easier to obtain.
Mapping Guidance: Habitat patches are usually discrete, small and easily defined by the dominance of the foodplant. Most or all other species use both open and semi-shaded patches but E. DUKESII is a forest or woodland species. Consult the habitat and food comments fields for species-specific information on what constitutes suitable habitat when mapping occurrences of these species.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 2 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Alternate Separation Procedure: Within a wetland complex consider multiple colonies as one metapopulation by using the suitable habitat distance.
Separation Justification: Adults of these species sometimes to often (e.g. E. dion alabamae) stray out of habitat and even the sedentary P. massasoit as well as both subspecies of E. dion will move a kilometer or more for nectar. However, habitats are often small (a few hectares) and populations often appear small (20 or less on a given day) so relatively conservative separation distances seem reasonable. Certainly a distance of a few km will provide a large amount of separation even if not a complete lack of gene flow. However apply the suitable habitat figure when two collection sites are along the same river, same wetland complex or in other circumstances where at least a few patches of foodplant occur in wet spots between them. Justification for this includes observations of not less than three tiny transient colonies of Euphyes dion alabamae in Cumberland County New Jersey in habitat patches of less than 0.1 hectare with no known source habitat within a kilometer. Thus females do find and oviposit in tiny patches and adults from these as well as the dispersing females themselves should connect multiple source colonies. Suitable habitat patches more than a kilometer in any dimension are rare, so generally colonies more than a few kilometers apart are separate occurrences unless obviously connected. However in such rare cases where habitats are really extensive with foodplant throughout or even dominant there is not reason to believe these skippers should not be likewise.
Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): 1 km
Inferred Minimum Extent Justification: The inferred extent is nearly always at least the entire contiguous habitat/foodplant patch since these are usually only a few dozens of hectares at most. Colonies can persist at least decades in under a hectare of really good habitat. If the habitat is really several kilometers in extent it will usually be fully occupied (apparently nearly always so for the better known species) but cap inferred extent at this distance pending further observation.
Date: 14Sep2001
Author: Schweitzer, Dale F.
Population/Occurrence Viability
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 08May2001

Zoological data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs) and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

  • Barbour, Spider. No date. Memorandum to Kathryn J. Schneider regarding revision of animal status list: invertebrates.

  • Belth, Jeffrey E. 2013. Butterflies of Indiana A Field Guide. Indiana University Press.Bloomington, IN.

  • Bess, James. 2005. A Report on the Remnant-Dependent Insects of the Coastal Zone Natural Area Remnants in Northwest Indiana. 23 pp..


  • Handfield, Louis. 1999. Le guide des papillons du Québec. Vol. 1 Les Éditions Brochet. Boucherville. Québec. 982 pages + planches

  • Holmes, A.M., Q.F. Hess, R.R. Tasker and A.J. Hanks. 1991. The Ontario Butterfly Atlas. Toronto Entomologists' Association, Toronto, Ontario. viii + 167 pp.

  • Huber, R. L. 1981. An updated checklist of Minnesota butterflies. Minnesota Entomological Association Newsletter 14(3):15-25.

  • Layberry, R.A. 1981. Sedge Skippers. Toronto Entomologists Association Occasional Publication #12-81: 37-39.

  • Layberry, R.A., P.W. Hall, and J.D. Lafontaine. 1998. The Butterflies of Canada. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Ontario. 280 pp.

  • Lotts, K., and T. Naberhaus, coordinators. 2017. Butterflies and Moths of North America. Available online: (Version December 2018).

  • Miller, J.Y. (ed.). 1992. The common names of North American butterflies. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington. 177p.

  • Natural Resources Commission. 2014. Roster of Indiana Animals, Insects, and Plants That Are Extirpated, Endangered, Threatened or Rare. Information Bulletin #2 (Sixth Amendment. 20pp.

  • Opler, P. A., and A. D. Warren. 2002. Butterflies of North America. 2. Scientific Names List for Butterfly Species of North America, north of Mexico. C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. 79 pp.

  • Pelham, J. P. 2008. A catalogue of the butterflies of the United States and Canada with a complete bibliography of the descriptive and systematic literature. The Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera. Volume 40. 658 pp. Revised 14 February, 2012.

  • Pohl, G.R.  J-F. Landry, B.C. Schmidt, J.D. Lafontaine, J.T. Troubridge, A.D. Macaulay, E.van Nieukerken, J.R. deWaard, J.J. Dombroskie, J. Klymko, V. Nazari and K. Stead. 2018. Annotated checklist of the moths and butterflies (Lepidoptera) of Canada and Alaska. Pensoft Publishers. 580 pp.

  • Riotte, J.C.E. 1992. Annotated List of Ontario Lepidoptera. Life Sciences Miscellaneous Publications, Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. 208 pp.

  • Schweitzer, Dale F. 1996. Memorandum to Kathryn Schneider of August 13, 1996 regarding skippers.

  • Shapiro, A.M. 1974. Butterflies and skippers of New York State. Search 4:1-60.

  • Shuey, John. 1995. Indiana S-Ranks for Butterflies. Memorandum to Cloyce Hedge. 10 pp.

  • Shull, Ernest M. 1987. The Butterflies of Indiana. Publ. by Indiana Acad. Science, distributed by Indiana Univ. Press, Bloomington/Indianapolis, 262 pp.

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of March 2019.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2019 NatureServe, 2511 Richmond (Jefferson Davis) Highway, Suite 930, Arlington, VA 22202, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2019. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.