2013 Draft Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

2013 Draft Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan DRAFT Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan Derek W. Stinson Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Program 600 Capitol Way N Olympia, Washington January 2013 In 1990, the Washington Wildlife Commission adopted procedures for listing and de-listing species as endangered, threatened, or sensitive and for writing recovery and management plans for listed species (WAC 232-12-297, Appendix A). The procedures, developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies, require preparation of recovery plans for species listed as threatened or endangered. Recovery, as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is the process by which the decline of an endangered or threatened species is arrested or reversed, and threats to its survival are neutralized, so that its long-term survival in nature can be ensured. This is the Draft Washington State Status Update and Recovery Plan for the Mazama Pocket Gopher. It summarizes what is known of the historical and current distribution and abundance of the Mazama pocket gopher in Washington and describes factors affecting known populations and its habitat. It prescribes strategies to recover the species, such as protecting populations and existing habitat, evaluating and restoring habitat, and initiating research and cooperative programs. Target population objectives and other criteria for down-listing to state Sensitive are identified. As part of the State’s listing and recovery procedures, the draft recovery plan is available for a 90-day public comment period. Please submit written comments on this report by 19 April 2013 via e-mail to: [email protected], or by mail to: Endangered Species Section Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98501-1091 This report should be cited as: Stinson, D. W. 2013. Draft Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Washington State Recovery Plan. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia. 91+ vi pp. DRAFT January 2013 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................................................. ii LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ............................................................................................................ iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................................... iv INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 1 DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................................. 3 TAXONOMY AND Distribution ................................................................................................................. 4 NATURAL HISTORY ................................................................................................................................. 6 Behavior, Burrowing and Burrows ........................................................................................................... 6 Diet and Foraging ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Home Range, Movements, and Dispersal ............................................................................................... 11 Reproduction ........................................................................................................................................... 13 Pocket Gopher Demography and Population Dynamics ......................................................................... 14 Predation .......................................................................................................................................... 15 Ecological Relationships and Functions ................................................................................................. 16 HABITAT REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................................... 19 Mazama Pocket Gopher Association with Prairies and Grassland Vegetation ...................................... 19 Effects of Soil Characteristics on Distribution and Abundance of Pocket Gophers .............................. 20 POPULATION AND HABITAT STATUS ............................................................................................... 23 Past Status of Habitat and Populations ................................................................................................... 23 Pocket Gopher Surveys and Population Estimation ................................................................................ 27 Present Status of Populations and Habitats ............................................................................................. 30 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................................. 38 Habitat Management and Restoration ..................................................................................................... 38 Research .................................................................................................................................................. 39 Conservation Planning ............................................................................................................................ 40 Information and Education ...................................................................................................................... 41 FACTORS AFFECTING CONTINUED EXISTENCE ............................................................................. 41 Adequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms ...................................................................................... 41 Impacts of Habitat Loss, Fragmentation, Degradation, and Succession ................................................. 43 Airport Management and Development .................................................................................................. 46 Military Training ..................................................................................................................................... 48 Climate Change ....................................................................................................................................... 48 Altered Ecological Communities ............................................................................................................ 49 RECOVERY .............................................................................................................................................. 50 RECOVERY GOAL ................................................................................................................................... 50 RECOVERY OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................................... 52 Rationale ................................................................................................................................................. 52 RECOVERY STRATEGIES AND TASKS ............................................................................................... 53 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE ........................................................................................................... 65 REFERENCES CITED ............................................................................................................................... 67 PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS .......................................................................................................... 76 Appendix A. Washington Administrative Code. ........................................................................................ 77 Appendix B. Measurements and dorsal fur colora of eight subspecies of Mazama pocket gophers from Washington. ................................................................................................................................... 80 Appendix C. Hypothesized suitabilitya of certain soils of Thurston, and Pierce counties for Mazama DRAFT January 2013 ii Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Pocket Gophers based on presence and abundance. ...................................................................... 81 Appendix D. Hypothesized suitabilitya of certain soils of Mason County for Mazama Pocket Gophers based on gopher presence and abundance. .................................................................................... 82 Appendix E. Washington localities, year, collector of Mazama pocket gopher specimens collected from 1825– 2006, in major research collections. ................................................................................... 83 Appendix. F. Summary of population status, site ownership, habitat, and site management for populations of Mazama pocket gophers in five counties in Washington. ..................................... 89 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. General locations of eight subspecies of Mazama pocket gopher in western Washington. ........... 6 Table 3. Plant species eaten or cached by Mazama pocket gophers. ......................................................... 10 Table 3. Implementation schedule and preliminary cost estimates for implementation of recovery tasks. 65 Figure 1. Mazama pocket gopher (photo
Recommended publications
  • Special Publications Museum of Texas Tech University Number 63 18 September 2014
    Special Publications Museum of Texas Tech University Number 63 18 September 2014 List of Recent Land Mammals of Mexico, 2014 José Ramírez-Pulido, Noé González-Ruiz, Alfred L. Gardner, and Joaquín Arroyo-Cabrales.0 Front cover: Image of the cover of Nova Plantarvm, Animalivm et Mineralivm Mexicanorvm Historia, by Francisci Hernández et al. (1651), which included the first list of the mammals found in Mexico. Cover image courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library at Brown University. SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS Museum of Texas Tech University Number 63 List of Recent Land Mammals of Mexico, 2014 JOSÉ RAMÍREZ-PULIDO, NOÉ GONZÁLEZ-RUIZ, ALFRED L. GARDNER, AND JOAQUÍN ARROYO-CABRALES Layout and Design: Lisa Bradley Cover Design: Image courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library at Brown University Production Editor: Lisa Bradley Copyright 2014, Museum of Texas Tech University This publication is available free of charge in PDF format from the website of the Natural Sciences Research Laboratory, Museum of Texas Tech University (nsrl.ttu.edu). The authors and the Museum of Texas Tech University hereby grant permission to interested parties to download or print this publication for personal or educational (not for profit) use. Re-publication of any part of this paper in other works is not permitted without prior written permission of the Museum of Texas Tech University. This book was set in Times New Roman and printed on acid-free paper that meets the guidelines for per- manence and durability of the Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity of the Council on Library Resources. Printed: 18 September 2014 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Special Publications of the Museum of Texas Tech University, Number 63 Series Editor: Robert J.
    [Show full text]
  • Host-Parasite Associations of the Cratogeomys Fumosus Species Group and Their Chewing Lice, Geomydoecus
    THERYA, 2019, Vol. 10 (2): 81-89 DOI: 10.12933/therya-19-739 ISSN 2007-3364 Host-parasite associations of the Cratogeomys fumosus species group and their chewing lice, Geomydoecus ALEX POPINGA1, 2, JAMES W. DEMASTES1*, THERESA A. SPRADLING1, DAVID J. HAFNER3, AND MARK S. HAFNER4 1 Department of Biology, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA 50614-0421. Email: [email protected] (ANP), [email protected] (JWD), [email protected] (TAS). 2 Present address: Department of Physics and Department of Computer Science, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand 1010. 3 Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA. Email: [email protected] (DJH). 4 Museum of Natural Science and Department of Biological Sciences, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA. Email: [email protected] (MSH). *Correspondence Chewing lice (Phthiraptera: Trichodectidae) and the pocket gophers (Rodentia: Geomyidae) that they inhabit have shared an intimate his- torical association that has made them a textbook study for cophylogeny. Herein, we examine the chewing lice found on pocket gophers of the Cratogeomys fumosus species group using DNA sequence data from the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I gene to determine relationships among lice for comparison to published host phylogeny. Although matrix approaches indicate a correlation between host and parasite genetic distances, cophylogenetic reconstruction methods fail to detect a pattern of widespread cophylogeny. In conclusion, this study provides an exception to the rule of host-parasite cophylogeny that could be the result of the young age of the relationships considered herein and the complex history of the Trans-Mexican Volcanic Belt.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. EPA, Pesticide Product Label, 0.5% STRYCHNINE MILO for HAND
    Jl.l!l€' 23, 1997 Dr. Alan V. Tasker Acting Leader, rata Support Teaill Tec.'mical and Sciemtific Services USDA/AHflS/BBEP Unit ISO ) 4700 River Foad Rivcreale, ND 20737 Dear Dr. Tasker, Subject: 0.5% Str.fclmine Mlo rex Ha.'ld Baiting fucket C,ophers EPA Registratirn No. 56228-19 Your Slil;;nissions of Septemb€r 23, 19%, and June 2, 1997 ~Je nave reviewed ,YOUr sl.ibmi~sicn of Sept€T."'~r 19, 1996:. ThE' cnongp--s in tl"le inert ingredients a'ld t..'1e revised basic and alte..."7late Confidential StatC1"~nts of Forl'1Ula (CSFs) ;;.r8 acceptable. He 1=1<: fort-l;;.rd to receiving the product chemistry data on the nc-w formulation. Your letter of SepteJl'J::>er 23, 19%, imicates thClt some of these studies ~Jere underway at that tire. The proposed revis20 label stibIcJ tted 00 June 2, 1997, is J:-.asically ) acceptC!ble, but the change identified l.-elow must be made. 1. In the "NOI'E TO PHYSICIAN", change "CI\UrION," to "NOrrcp.:" so as not to conflict with the label's required signal Nord "I'i"lNGFR". 8u.1:'mit one r:::q:y of the fin.-J.l printed label before releasing this prcrluct for shipment. :;;~x¥~~ COP~ E William H. JacObs BEST AVA'LAB\.. i\cting Product 1<1a.'l8.ger 14 Insecticide-Rodenticide Branch Reo.istration Division (7505C) :::::, ~.. ..w·-1······ _.. ._-j.. ......w. ··1· "~'~"·Tm--I··· ·1· ............ ·····1· _............. DATE ~ •......••.•....... .........•..••.• ....... ~ ..•....... ..........................................................................................- ....... EPA Form 1320-102-70) OFFICIAL FILE COpy r.. PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTS 0.5% STRYCHNINE r~1.0 HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND FOR HAND BAITING STORAGE AND DISPOSAL I -, DOMESTIC ANIMALS Do not contaminate water, food, or POCKET GOPHERS feed by storage or disposal.
    [Show full text]
  • Malde, 1964). in the Present Status of North Texas 10,000 Years Ago (Kupsch, 1960)
    Ritchie, 1953; Malde, 1964). In the Present Status of North Texas 10,000 years ago (Kupsch, 1960). The Central Valley of California, along the Origin Theories retreat was followed by a warming base of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, trend which lasted from about 8,000 Although a myriad of hypotheses the Hydrostatic Pressure Theory is B.C.to the beginning of the Christian have been projected concerning mima popular (Nikiforoff, 1941; Retzer, era (Dix, 1964) and is recognized as mounds in north Texas, no specific 1945). A recent study of landscape the Hypsithermal period (Deevy and theory of mima mound formation is features of the Texas Gulf Coast by Flint, 1957). During the Hypsithermal commonly accepted.’ Theories of Aronow (1968) resulted in a theory of period, the deciduous forest retreated erosion and accumulation are “Landscape Deterioration.” eastward and grasslands occupied the currently the most widely accepted. The Patterned Ground Theory is vacated area. Some members of the The erosional theory suggests that the based on the concept that a network forest flora, especially grasses, removal of the intermound area by of polygonal-fissured ice could have withstood the climatic change. These running water and wind has left the developed on the landscape early in species survived, reproduced, and mounds as essentially residual forms the last ice recession. As the landscape integrated with the grassland flora (Featherman, 1872; Holland et al., began to thaw, the meltwater removed (Dix, 1964). Gleason (1923) noted 1952; Goebel, 1971). Goebel (1971) the glacial till from around the still that the three most important grass postulated that mima mounds in north frozen hemispheroidal cores of each genera Texas primarily result from a low (Andropogon, Sorghas trum, polygon.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Risk Assessments for Methods Used in Wildlife Damage Management
    Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment for the Use of Wildlife Damage Management Methods by USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Chapter I Introduction to Risk Assessments for Methods Used in Wildlife Damage Management MAY 2017 Introduction to Risk Assessments for Methods Used in Wildlife Damage Management EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services (WS) Program completed Risk Assessments for methods used in wildlife damage management in 1992 (USDA 1997). While those Risk Assessments are still valid, for the most part, the WS Program has expanded programs into different areas of wildlife management and wildlife damage management (WDM) such as work on airports, with feral swine and management of other invasive species, disease surveillance and control. Inherently, these programs have expanded the methods being used. Additionally, research has improved the effectiveness and selectiveness of methods being used and made new tools available. Thus, new methods and strategies will be analyzed in these risk assessments to cover the latest methods being used. The risk assements are being completed in Chapters and will be made available on a website, which can be regularly updated. Similar methods are combined into single risk assessments for efficiency; for example Chapter IV contains all foothold traps being used including standard foothold traps, pole traps, and foot cuffs. The Introduction to Risk Assessments is Chapter I and was completed to give an overall summary of the national WS Program. The methods being used and risks to target and nontarget species, people, pets, and the environment, and the issue of humanenss are discussed in this Chapter. From FY11 to FY15, WS had work tasks associated with 53 different methods being used.
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Morphological Characteristics of Prairie Mounds in the Forested Region of South-Central United States
    Soil morphological characteristics of prairie mounds in the forested region of south-central United States Brad Lee A and Brian Carter B APlant and Soil Sciences Department, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40546, Email [email protected] BPlant and Soil Sciences Department, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078, Email [email protected] Abstract Prairie mounds are common in the prairie islands of the forested regions of the south-central United States, however their origin is not well understood. A topographic survey and pedon investigation of a mound and intermound area was conducted in a grassed field of prairie mounds 15 – 25 m in diameter and ~ 1 m. Both soils contain three parent materials: loess over an alluvial silty clay paleosol underlain by weathered shale. The mounded soil loess thickness is ~1.5 m while the loess in the intermound area is ~0.5 m thick. Fragic soil properties (dense, brittle, silt coats above dense horizon) are present in the loess immediately above the paleosol contact. Crayfish ( Cambarus spp .) chimneys in the intermound and abundant gopher burrows (Geomys spp .) above the fragic horizon in the mound mound and loess of the intermound soil indicate the soils across the field are actively bioturbated. Depletions near the surface of the intermound soil indicate a seasonally high water table. Relict crayfish krotavinas in the paleosol under the mound and active crayfish burrows in intermound areas suggest the entire plain was previously bioturbated by crayfish. Bioturbation by gophers appears to be more recent and associated with the loess deposit. Key Words Prairie pimples, pimpled plains, mima mounds, Arkansas River valley.
    [Show full text]
  • Mazama Pocket Gopher FAQ September 2019 1 Mazama Pocket
    Mazama Pocket Gopher FAQ September 2019 Mazama Pocket Gophers in Western Washington – Frequently Asked Questions U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Washington Fish and Wildlife Office Lacey, WA What are pocket gophers? In some areas, the name “gopher” and/or “pocket gopher” is commonly applied to a variety of mammals including ground squirrels and moles. However, true pocket gophers are burrowing small mammals that get their name from their fur-lined cheek pouches, or pockets. These pockets are used for carrying food. Two species of pocket gophers occur in Washington: the Northern pocket gopher is the most widespread, occupying much of eastern Washington. The Mazama pocket gopher is the only pocket gopher in most of western Washington—on the Olympic Peninsula and in the southern Puget Sound area. There are 7 subspecies of Mazama pocket gopher currently found in Thurston, Pierce, Clallam, Mason, and Wahkiakum counties in Washington State. Another subspecies of pocket gopher was historically found in and around Tacoma, but that subspecies is presumed to be extinct. The federally-listed Olympia, Tenino, and Yelm pocket gophers are only found in Thurston County and the Roy Prairie pocket gopher is only found in Pierce County. In 2016, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) completed a genetic study of pocket gophers in the south Puget Sound area. The study supports the determination that the Mazama pocket gophers found in Thurston County are distinct subspecies. What is the current legal status of the four listed Mazama pocket gopher subspecies (Roy Prairie, Olympia, Tenino, and Yelm) found in Thurston and Pierce counties? Four subspecies of the Mazama pocket gopher found in Thurston and Pierce counties were listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA) by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Mammalian Mitochondrial DNA Evolution: a Comparison of the Cytochrome B and Cytochrome C Oxidase II Genes
    J Mol Evol (1995) 40:260-272 jouRA,oMOLECULAR VOLUTION © Springer-VerlagNew York Inc. 1995 Mammalian Mitochondrial DNA Evolution: A Comparison of the Cytochrome b and Cytochrome c Oxidase II Genes Rodney L. Honeycutt,1 Michael A. Nedbal, 1 Ronald M. Adkins, 1'* Laura L. Janecek 1'2 i Department of Wildlife & Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University, 210 Nagle Hall, College Station, TX 77843, USA 2 Savannah River Ecology Laboratory, University of Georgia, Aiken, SC 29801, USA Received: 10 June 1994 / Accepted: 10 October 1994 Abstract. The evolution of two mitochondrial genes, Introduction cytochrome b and cytochrome c oxidase subunit II, was examined in several eutherian mammal orders, with spe- The mitochondrial cytochrome b (COB) and cytochrome cial emphasis on the orders Artiodactyla and Rodentia. c oxidase subunit II (COII) genes have been used in When analyzed using both maximum parsimony, with several recent molecular systematic studies of rodents either equal or unequal character weighting, and neigh- (DeWalt et al. 1993; Ma et al. 1993; Thomas and Martin bor joining, neither gene performed with a high degree of 1993), ungulates (Irwin et al. 1991; Irwin and Wilson consistency in terms of the phylogenetic hypotheses sup- 1992; Miyamoto et al. 1994), marine mammals (Irwin ported. The phylogenetic inconsistencies observed for and Arnason 1994), primates (Ruvolo et al. 1991; Diso- both these genes may be the result of several factors tell et al. 1992; Adkins and Honeycutt 1994), and euthe- including differences in the rate of nucleotide substitu- rian mammal orders (Adkins and Honeycutt 1991, 1993; tion among particular lineages (especially between or- Honeycutt and Adldns 1993).
    [Show full text]
  • Micro Moths on Great Cumbrae Island (Vc100)
    The Glasgow Naturalist (online 2017) Volume 26, xx-xx Micro moths on Great Cumbrae Island (vc100) P. G. Moore 32 Marine Parade, Millport, Isle of Cumbrae KA28 0EF E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT Forsythia sp. Behind the office is a large mature Few previous records exist for miCro-moths from black mulberry tree (Morus nigra) and to one side is vC100. Data are presented from the first year-round a tall privet hedge (Ligustrum ovalifolium). To the moth-trapping exerCise accomplished on Great rear of my property is a wooded escarpment with Cumbrae Island; one of the least studied of the old-growth ash (Fraxinus excelsior) frequently ivy- Clyde Isles (vC100). Data from a Skinner-type light- Covered (Hedera helix), sycamore (Acer trap, supplemented by Collection of leaf mines from pseudoplatanus) and rowan (Sorbus aucuparia), local trees, revealed the presence of 71 species of with an undergrowth of hawthorn (Crataegus miCro moths, representing 20 new records for the monogyna), wild garliC (Allium ursinum), nettle vice-County. (Urtica dioica), bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) and bramble (Rubus fructicosus). Rhind (1988) detailed INTRODUCTION the vasCular plants found on Great Cumbrae Island The extensive nineteenth-century list of between 1985 and 1987 and delineated the history Lepidoptera in the 1901 handbook on the natural of the island's botanical investigations. Leaves of history of Glasgow and the West of SCotland issued brambles in my garden, beech trees (Fagus for the Glasgow meeting of the British AssoCiation sylvatica) and hazel (Corylus avellana) at other for the Advancement of SCience (Elliot et al., 1901) locations on the island (respectively Craiglea Wood inCluded few Cumbrae records.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Appendix 3. Gulf Islands Taxonomy Report
    Appendix 3. Gulf Islands Taxonomy Report Class Order Family Genus Species Arachnida Araneae Agelenidae Agelenopsis Agelenopsis utahana Eratigena Eratigena agrestis Amaurobiidae Callobius Callobius pictus Callobius severus Antrodiaetidae Antrodiaetus Antrodiaetus pacificus Anyphaenidae Anyphaena Anyphaena aperta Anyphaena pacifica Araneidae Araneus Araneus diadematus Clubionidae Clubiona Clubiona lutescens Clubiona pacifica Clubiona pallidula Cybaeidae Cybaeus Cybaeus reticulatus Cybaeus signifer Cybaeus tetricus Dictynidae Emblyna Emblyna peragrata Gnaphosidae Sergiolus Sergiolus columbianus Zelotes Zelotes fratris Linyphiidae Agyneta Agyneta darrelli Agyneta fillmorana Agyneta protrudens Bathyphantes Bathyphantes brevipes Bathyphantes keeni 1 Centromerita Centromerita bicolor Ceratinops Ceratinops latus Entelecara Entelecara acuminata Erigone Erigone aletris Erigone arctica Erigone cristatopalpus Frederickus Frederickus coylei Grammonota Grammonota kincaidi Linyphantes Linyphantes nehalem Linyphantes nigrescens Linyphantes pacificus Linyphantes pualla Linyphantes victoria Mermessus Mermessus trilobatus Microlinyphia Microlinyphia dana Neriene Neriene digna Neriene litigiosa Oedothorax Oedothorax alascensis Pityohyphantes Pityohyphantes alticeps Pocadicnemis Pocadicnemis pumila Poeciloneta Poeciloneta fructuosa Saaristoa Saaristoa sammamish Scotinotylus Scotinotylus sp. 5GAB Semljicola Semljicola sp. 1GAB Sisicottus Spirembolus Spirembolus abnormis Spirembolus mundus Tachygyna Tachygyna ursina Tachygyna vancouverana Tapinocyba Tapinocyba
    [Show full text]
  • Sand Hills Pocket Gopher Geomys Lutescens
    Wyoming Species Account Sand Hills Pocket Gopher Geomys lutescens REGULATORY STATUS USFWS: No special status USFS R2: No special status USFS R4: No special status Wyoming BLM: No special status State of Wyoming: Nongame Wildlife CONSERVATION RANKS USFWS: No special status WGFD: NSS3 (Bb), Tier II WYNDD: G3, S1S3 Wyoming Contribution: HIGH IUCN: Least Concern STATUS AND RANK COMMENTS Sand Hills Pocket Gopher (Geomys lutescens) is assigned a range of state conservation ranks by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database due to uncertainty concerning its abundance in Wyoming and lack of information on population trends in the state. Also, note that the Global rank (G3) is provisional at this time – NatureServe (Arlington, Virginia) has not yet formalized a Global rank for this species. NATURAL HISTORY Taxonomy: Sand Hills Pocket Gopher was formerly considered a subspecies of Plains Pocket Gopher (G. bursarius) and given the sub-specific designation G. b. lutescens 1. It is now considered a full species based on a combination of genetic information and morphology 2 . Though two subspecies of G. lutescens have been suggested, none are widely recognized 3. It is suspected to hybridize with G. bursarius in some localities 4. Description: Like all pocket gophers, Sand Hills Pocket Gopher is adapted to fossorial life with large foreclaws, a heavy skull, strong jaw muscles, and relatively inconspicuous ears and eyes. It is similar in general appearance to the formerly synonymous G. bursarius, which has a sparsely- haired tail and relatively short pelage that can vary substantially in color from buff to black 5. However, G. lutescens is somewhat smaller and lighter in pelage color than G.
    [Show full text]
  • Small-Stone Content of Mima Mounds of the Columbia Plateau and Rocky Mountain Regions: Implications for Mound Origin
    Great Basin Naturalist Volume 47 Number 4 Article 10 10-31-1987 Small-stone content of Mima mounds of the Columbia Plateau and Rocky Mountain regions: implications for mound origin George W. Cox San Diego State University Christopher G. Gakahu Moi University, Eldoret, Kenya Douglas W. Allen San Diego State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation Cox, George W.; Gakahu, Christopher G.; and Allen, Douglas W. (1987) "Small-stone content of Mima mounds of the Columbia Plateau and Rocky Mountain regions: implications for mound origin," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 47 : No. 4 , Article 10. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol47/iss4/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. SMALL-STONE CONTENT OF MIMA MOUNDS OF THE COLUMBIA PLATEAU AND ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGIONS: IMPLICATIONS FOR MOUND ORIGIN George W. Cox', Christopher G. Gakalui", and Douglas W. Allen' Abstr.\ct —Mima moundfields were investigated at the Lawrence Memorial Grassland Preserve, located on the Columbia Plateau in southern Wasco County, Oregon, and at three locations in the San Luis Valley and Sangre de Cristo Mountains, southern Colorado, to test the alternative hypotheses of mound origin by erosion, frost action, and soil translocation by geomyid pocket gophers. The concentrations of two size classes of small stones, gravel (8-15 mm diameter) and pebbles (15-50 mm diameter), were sampled along mound-to-intermound transects and at different depths within the mounds.
    [Show full text]