DOCSLIB.ORG

Amphibian Taxon Advisory Group Regional Collection Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Amphibian Taxon Advisory Group Regional Collection Plan 1 Table of Contents ATAG Definition and Scope ......................................................................................................... 4 Mission Statement ........................................................................................................................... 4 Addressing the Amphibian Crisis at a Global Level ....................................................................... 5 Metamorphosis of the ATAG Regional Collection Plan ................................................................. 6 Taxa Within ATAG Purview ........................................................................................................ 6 Priority Species and Regions ........................................................................................................... 7 Priority Conservations Activities..................................................................................................... 8 Institutional Capacity of AZA Communities .............................................................................. 8 Space Needed for Amphibians ........................................................................................................ 9 Species Selection Criteria ............................................................................................................ 13 The Global Prioritization Process .................................................................................................. 13 Selection Tool: Amphibian Ark’s Prioritization Tool for Ex situ Conservation ........................... 14 Management Categories.............................................................................................................. 15 Results of Species Selection Process ........................................................................................... 16 Key to Categorical Designations .................................................................................................. 16 Priority I Taxa Recommended for Ex situ Management .......................................................... 17 Table 1: Priority I Taxa ....................................................................................................... 17 Priority II Taxa Recommended for In situ and Ex situ Management ....................................... 18 Table 2: Priority II Taxa ...................................................................................................... 18 Priority III Taxa Recommended for In situ Focus ..................................................................... 19 Table 3: Priority III Taxa ..................................................................................................... 19 Program Status and Data Summary Tables of Current SSP Programs ................................ 21 Table 4: Program Status Table of Current SSP Species ................................................................ 21 Table 5: Program Summary Data of Current SSP Species ............................................................ 21 Table 6: Animal Program Summary Table with Primary Roles, Goals, and Essential Action Items for the Next 1-5 years .......................................................................................... 22 SSP Program Accounts ............................................................................................................... 23 Wyoming Toad SSP ...................................................................................................................... 23 Panamanian Golden Frog SSP(s) .................................................................................................. 25 Dusky Gopher Frog SSP................................................................................................................ 27 Houston Toad SSP ......................................................................................................................... 29 Recommendation Update Table ................................................................................................. 31 Table 7: Changes from the Last RCP .......................................................................................... 31 Considerations for New Studbooks and Managed Ex situ Programs..................................... 32 Decision Matrix for Forming New Ex situ Amphibian Populations for Conservation ................. 33 2 ATAG Resources ........................................................................................................................ 34 Professional Development for Amphibian Keepers and Researchers ........................................... 34 Amphibian Husbandry ................................................................................................................... 35 Amphibian Disease Management .................................................................................................. 36 Amphibian Population Management & Data Entry Guidelines .................................................... 36 Amphibian Assisted Reproductive Technologies and ATAG National Amphibian Genome Cryobank Project ........................................................................................................................... 37 ATAG Grant Program ................................................................................................................... 38 Suggested Taxa for Exhibit ......................................................................................................... 39 Table 8: Suggested Taxa for Exhibit ............................................................................................. 39 Exhibit Species Examples ............................................................................................................. 40 Suggested Taxa for Outreach ..................................................................................................... 48 Table 9: Suggested Taxa for Outreach .......................................................................................... 49 ATAG Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 50 Responsible Population Management: Humane Euthanasia ......................................................... 50 Amphibians and Outreach ............................................................................................................. 50 Amphibians in Classroom Settings................................................................................................ 50 Amphibian Welfare ....................................................................................................................... 51 Contact Information .................................................................................................................... 52 ATAG Steering Committee ........................................................................................................... 52 ATAG Advisory Committee ......................................................................................................... 52 Program Leaders ............................................................................................................................ 53 Species Contacts ............................................................................................................................ 54 Links to Amphibian Resources ................................................................................................. 55 References ..................................................................................................................................... 56 Appendix I: AArk Amphibian Species Prioritization Ranking Results and Process............ 57 Appendix II: Creating Isolation Spaces for Amphibian Programs (2020 Update) ............... 70 Appendix III: Recommended Approved forms of Euthanasia for Amphibians ................. 134 Appendix IV: General Example of an Amphibian Welfare Assessment .............................. 135 This document was respectfully submitted to AZA Animal Population Management Committee on January 1, 2020 Cover photo credits: Steve Reichling, Jeff Bean, and Matt Baronak 3 ATAG Definition and Scope Mission Statement Working globally to address amphibian declines, the ATAG supports AZA members and partners in the conservation of amphibians, both in situ and ex situ, through scientific management of populations, education, capacity-building, and research. Amphibians are in Trouble! In 2008, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) conducted the Global Amphibian Assessment (GAA), which evaluated the status of 6,285 amphibian species. The GAA reported that the sizes of more than 43% of all measured amphibian populations had declined and less than 1% of populations had increased, indicating a troubling trend. Almost one- third (32%) of amphibians are threatened with extinction globally and 168 amphibian species may have already been lost. The majority of threatened amphibians reside in the New World, with the highest numbers in Columbia, Mexico and Ecuador. Nevertheless, the bulk of endemic species in rapid decline (80-90%) are from the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Cuba and Jamaica (IUCN, 2014). Now at the beginning of 2020, over 8,311 species of amphibians are described (Amphibiaweb, 2019). New diseases, such as the salamander chytrid fungus, Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans, are also identified, posing novel pressures upon amphibians to those that already exist, such
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Species Assessment for Boreal Toad (Bufo Boreas Boreas)
    SPECIES ASSESSMENT FOR BOREAL TOAD (BUFO BOREAS BOREAS ) IN WYOMING prepared by 1 2 MATT MCGEE AND DOUG KEINATH 1 Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, University of Wyoming, 1000 E. University Ave, Dept. 3381, Laramie, Wyoming 82071; 307-766-3023 2 Zoology Program Manager, Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, University of Wyoming, 1000 E. University Ave, Dept. 3381, Laramie, Wyoming 82071; 307-766-3013; [email protected] drawing by Summers Scholl prepared for United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Wyoming State Office Cheyenne, Wyoming March 2004 McGee and Keinath – Bufo boreas boreas March 2004 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 3 NATURAL HISTORY ........................................................................................................................... 4 Morphological Description ...................................................................................................... 4 Taxonomy and Distribution ..................................................................................................... 5 Habitat Requirements............................................................................................................. 8 General ............................................................................................................................................8 Spring-Summer ...............................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Diversity in the Riverina Rice Fields—
    Reconciling Farming with Wildlife —Managing diversity in the Riverina rice fields— RIRDC Publication No. 10/0007 RIRDCInnovation for rural Australia Reconciling Farming with Wildlife: Managing Biodiversity in the Riverina Rice Fields by J. Sean Doody, Christina M. Castellano, Will Osborne, Ben Corey and Sarah Ross April 2010 RIRDC Publication No 10/007 RIRDC Project No. PRJ-000687 © 2010 Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. All rights reserved. ISBN 1 74151 983 7 ISSN 1440-6845 Reconciling Farming with Wildlife: Managing Biodiversity in the Riverina Rice Fields Publication No. 10/007 Project No. PRJ-000687 The information contained in this publication is intended for general use to assist public knowledge and discussion and to help improve the development of sustainable regions. You must not rely on any information contained in this publication without taking specialist advice relevant to your particular circumstances. While reasonable care has been taken in preparing this publication to ensure that information is true and correct, the Commonwealth of Australia gives no assurance as to the accuracy of any information in this publication. The Commonwealth of Australia, the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC), the authors or contributors expressly disclaim, to the maximum extent permitted by law, all responsibility and liability to any person, arising directly or indirectly from any act or omission, or for any consequences of any such act or omission, made in reliance on the contents of this publication, whether or not caused by any negligence on the part of the Commonwealth of Australia, RIRDC, the authors or contributors. The Commonwealth of Australia does not necessarily endorse the views in this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • FEB Craig Guyer - 4 1999 Department of Zoology and Wildlife Science Auburn University Auburn, AL 36849 (334)-844-9232 [email protected]
    HISTORICAL AFFINITIES AND POPULATION BIOLOGY OF THE BLACK WARRIOR WATERDOG (NECTURUS ALABAMENSIS) FINAL REPORT FY 1998 FEB - 4 1999 Craig Guyer Department of Zoology and Wildlife Science Auburn University Auburn, AL 36849 (334)-844-9232 [email protected] SUMMARY 1) The Black Warrior waterdog is morphologically and genetically distinctive from other waterdogs in the state of Alabama and should be recognized as Necturus alabamensis. 2) The Black Warrior waterdog is most closely related to the mudpuppy, Necturus maculosus. 3) Four waterdogs are present in the state of Alabama, the two listed above, plus two forms from the Coastal Plains; the latter include Necturus beyeri (all rivers draining into Mobile Bay) and Necturus iodingi (Appalachicola to Perdido drainages, inclusive). 4) Populations of Black Warrior waterdogs in Sipsey Fork and Brushy Creek appear to be patchily distributed, creating challenges for determining key features of demography. 5) State and Federal protection of the Black Warrior waterdog as a threatened species is warranted. INTRODUCTION Waterdogs (Necturus: Proteidae) are paedomorphic, stream-dwelling salamanders of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains. The systematics of these creatures has challenged herpetologists for the past 60 years. The Black Warrior Waterdog, a species restricted to the upper Black Warrior drainages of Alabama, has been particularly problematic. Viosca (1937) originally described this taxon as being similar toN maculosus, but subsequent taxonomic treattnents considered specimens from this drainage to be conspecific with waterdogs from the lower portions of the Mobile drainages (N maculosus: Bishop 1943, Schmidt 1953; N beyeri alabamensis: Hecht 1958, Conant 1958; N puncta/us: Brode 1969; N beyeri: Mount 1975; N alabamensis: Conant 1975, Conant and Collins 1998).
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Incursion Plan PIP006 Salamanders and Newts
    Pre-incursion Plan PIP006 Salamanders and Newts Pre-incursion Plan PIP006 Salamanders and Newts Order: Ambystomatidae, Cryptobranchidea and Proteidae Scope This plan is in place to guide prevention and eradication activities and the management of non-indigenous populations of Salamanders and Newts (Order Caudata; Families Salamandridae, Ambystomatidae, Cryptobranchidea and Proteidae) amphibians in the wild in Victoria. Version Document Status Date Author Reviewed By Approved for Release 1.0 First Draft 26/07/11 Dana Price M. Corry, S. Wisniewski and A. Woolnough 1.1 Second Draft 21/10/11 Dana Price S. Wisniewski 2.0 Final Draft 18/01/2012 Dana Price 3.0 Revision Draft 12/11/15 Dana Price J. Goldsworthy 3.1 New Final 10/03/2016 Nigel Roberts D.Price New DEDJTR templates and document review Published by the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources, Agriculture Victoria, May 2016 © The State of Victoria 2016. This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. Authorised by the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources, 1 Spring Street, Melbourne 3000. Front cover: Smooth Newt (Lissotriton vulgaris) Photo: Image courtesy of High Risk Invasive Animals group, DEDJTR Photo: Image from Wikimedia Commons and reproduced with permission under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Generic License. ISBN 078-1-925532-40-1 (pdf/online) Disclaimer This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Notophthalmus Perstriatus) Version 1.0
    Species Status Assessment for the Striped Newt (Notophthalmus perstriatus) Version 1.0 Striped newt eft. Photo credit Ryan Means (used with permission). May 2018 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 4 Jacksonville, Florida 1 Acknowledgements This document was prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s North Florida Field Office with assistance from the Georgia Field Office, and the striped newt Species Status Assessment Team (Sabrina West (USFWS-Region 8), Kaye London (USFWS-Region 4) Christopher Coppola (USFWS-Region 4), and Lourdes Mena (USFWS-Region 4)). Additionally, valuable peer reviews of a draft of this document were provided by Lora Smith (Jones Ecological Research Center) , Dirk Stevenson (Altamaha Consulting), Dr. Eric Hoffman (University of Central Florida), Dr. Susan Walls (USGS), and other partners, including members of the Striped Newt Working Group. We appreciate their comments, which resulted in a more robust status assessment and final report. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Species Status Assessment (SSA) is an in-depth review of the striped newt's (Notophthalmus perstriatus) biology and threats, an evaluation of its biological status, and an assessment of the resources and conditions needed to maintain species viability. We begin the SSA with an understanding of the species’ unique life history, and from that we evaluate the biological requirements of individuals, populations, and species using the principles of population resiliency, species redundancy, and species representation. All three concepts (or analogous ones) apply at both the population and species levels, and are explained that way below for simplicity and clarity as we introduce them. The striped newt is a small salamander that uses ephemeral wetlands and the upland habitat (scrub, mesic flatwoods, and sandhills) that surrounds those wetlands.
    [Show full text]
  • From Marine Fishes Off New Caledonia, with a Key to Species of Cucullanus from Anguilliformes
    Parasite 25, 51 (2018) Ó F. Moravec and J.-L. Justine, published by EDP Sciences, 2018 https://doi.org/10.1051/parasite/2018050 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:FC92E481-4FF7-4DD8-B7C9-9F192F373D2E Available online at: www.parasite-journal.org RESEARCH ARTICLE OPEN ACCESS Three new species of Cucullanus (Nematoda: Cucullanidae) from marine fishes off New Caledonia, with a key to species of Cucullanus from Anguilliformes František Moravec1 and Jean-Lou Justine2,* 1 Institute of Parasitology, Biology Centre of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Branišovská 31, 370 05 Cˇ eské Budeˇjovice, Czech Republic 2 Institut Systématique, Évolution, Biodiversité (ISYEB), Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, CNRS, Sorbonne Université, EPHE, CP 51, 57 rue Cuvier, 75005 Paris, France Received 16 July 2018, Accepted 8 August 2018, Published online 20 September 2018 Abstract – Based on light and scanning electron microscopical studies of nematode specimens from the digestive tract of some rarely collected anguilliform and perciform fishes off New Caledonia, three new species of Cucullanus Müller, 1777 (Cucullanidae) are described: C. austropacificus n. sp. from the longfin African conger Conger cinereus (Congridae), C. gymnothoracis n. sp. from the lipspot moray Gymnothorax chilospilus (Muraenidae), and C. incog- nitus n. sp. from the seabream Dentex fourmanoiri (Sparidae). Cucullanus austropacificus n. sp. is characterized by the presence of cervical alae, ventral sucker, alate spicules 1.30–1.65 mm long, conspicuous outgrowths of the ante- rior and posterior cloacal lips and by elongate-oval eggs measuring 89–108 · 48–57 lm; C. gymnothoracis n. sp. is similar to the foregoing species, but differs from it in the absence of cervical alae and the posterior cloacal outgrowth, in the shape and size of the anterior cloacal outgrowth and somewhat shorter spicules 1.12 mm long; C.
    [Show full text]
  • Conger Oceanicus
    Conger Eel − Conger oceanicus Overall Vulnerability Rank = High Biological Sensitivity = Moderate Climate Exposure = Very High Data Quality = 62% of scores ≥ 2 Expert Data Expert Scores Plots Conger oceanicus Scores Quality (Portion by Category) Low Moderate Stock Status 2.4 0.5 High Other Stressors 2.5 1.2 Very High Population Growth Rate 2.1 0.8 Spawning Cycle 2.9 2.4 Complexity in Reproduction 2.4 1.9 Early Life History Requirements 2.5 1.8 Sensitivity to Ocean Acidification 1.2 1.3 Prey Specialization 1.6 2.1 Habitat Specialization 2.4 3.0 Sensitivity attributes Sensitivity to Temperature 1.6 2.8 Adult Mobility 1.5 1.8 Dispersal & Early Life History 1.3 2.8 Sensitivity Score Moderate Sea Surface Temperature 4.0 3.0 Variability in Sea Surface Temperature 1.0 3.0 Salinity 2.4 3.0 Variability Salinity 1.2 3.0 Air Temperature 4.0 3.0 Variability Air Temperature 1.0 3.0 Precipitation 1.3 3.0 Variability in Precipitation 1.4 3.0 Ocean Acidification 4.0 2.0 Exposure variables Variability in Ocean Acidification 1.0 2.2 Currents 2.2 1.0 Sea Level Rise 2.4 1.5 Exposure Score Very High Overall Vulnerability Rank High Conger Eel (Anguilla oceanica) Overall Climate Vulnerability Rank: High (93% certainty from bootstrap analysis). Climate Exposure: Very High. Three exposure factors contributed to this score: Ocean Surface Temperature (4.0), Ocean Acidification (4.0) and Air Temperature (4.0). Conger Eel are semelparous: spawning in the ocean, developing in marine and estuarine habitats, then feeding growing, and maturing in marine and estuarine habitats.
    [Show full text]
  • Review Article Distribution and Conservation Status of Amphibian
    Mongabay.com Open Access Journal - Tropical Conservation Science Vol.7 (1):1-25 2014 Review Article Distribution and conservation status of amphibian and reptile species in the Lacandona rainforest, Mexico: an update after 20 years of research Omar Hernández-Ordóñez1, 2, *, Miguel Martínez-Ramos2, Víctor Arroyo-Rodríguez2, Adriana González-Hernández3, Arturo González-Zamora4, Diego A. Zárate2 and, Víctor Hugo Reynoso3 1Posgrado en Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; Av. Universidad 3000, C.P. 04360, Coyoacán, Mexico City, Mexico. 2 Centro de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Antigua Carretera a Pátzcuaro No. 8701, Ex Hacienda de San José de la Huerta, 58190 Morelia, Michoacán, Mexico. 3Departamento de Zoología, Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 04510, Mexico City, Mexico. 4División de Posgrado, Instituto de Ecología A.C. Km. 2.5 Camino antiguo a Coatepec No. 351, Xalapa 91070, Veracruz, Mexico. * Corresponding author: Omar Hernández Ordóñez, email: [email protected] Abstract Mexico has one of the richest tropical forests, but is also one of the most deforested in Mesoamerica. Species lists updates and accurate information on the geographic distribution of species are necessary for baseline studies in ecology and conservation of these sites. Here, we present an updated list of the diversity of amphibians and reptiles in the Lacandona region, and actualized information on their distribution and conservation status. Although some studies have discussed the amphibians and reptiles of the Lacandona, most herpetological lists came from the northern part of the region, and there are no confirmed records for many of the species assumed to live in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Pseudoeurycea Naucampatepetl. the Cofre De Perote Salamander Is Endemic to the Sierra Madre Oriental of Eastern Mexico. This
    Pseudoeurycea naucampatepetl. The Cofre de Perote salamander is endemic to the Sierra Madre Oriental of eastern Mexico. This relatively large salamander (reported to attain a total length of 150 mm) is recorded only from, “a narrow ridge extending east from Cofre de Perote and terminating [on] a small peak (Cerro Volcancillo) at the type locality,” in central Veracruz, at elevations from 2,500 to 3,000 m (Amphibian Species of the World website). Pseudoeurycea naucampatepetl has been assigned to the P. bellii complex of the P. bellii group (Raffaëlli 2007) and is considered most closely related to P. gigantea, a species endemic to the La specimens and has not been seen for 20 years, despite thorough surveys in 2003 and 2004 (EDGE; www.edgeofexistence.org), and thus it might be extinct. The habitat at the type locality (pine-oak forest with abundant bunch grass) lies within Lower Montane Wet Forest (Wilson and Johnson 2010; IUCN Red List website [accessed 21 April 2013]). The known specimens were “found beneath the surface of roadside banks” (www.edgeofexistence.org) along the road to Las Lajas Microwave Station, 15 kilometers (by road) south of Highway 140 from Las Vigas, Veracruz (Amphibian Species of the World website). This species is terrestrial and presumed to reproduce by direct development. Pseudoeurycea naucampatepetl is placed as number 89 in the top 100 Evolutionarily Distinct and Globally Endangered amphib- ians (EDGE; www.edgeofexistence.org). We calculated this animal’s EVS as 17, which is in the middle of the high vulnerability category (see text for explanation), and its IUCN status has been assessed as Critically Endangered.
    [Show full text]
  • Geographic Variation, Genetic Structure, and Conservation Unit Designation in the Larch Mountain Salamander (Plethodon Larselli)
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USGS Staff -- Published Research US Geological Survey 2005 Geographic Variation, Genetic Structure, and Conservation Unit Designation in the Larch Mountain Salamander (Plethodon larselli) R. Steven Wagner Central Washington University Mark P. Miller Utah State University, [email protected] Charles M. Crisafulli US Forest Service Susan M. Haig U.S. Geological Survey, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub Wagner, R. Steven; Miller, Mark P.; Crisafulli, Charles M.; and Haig, Susan M., "Geographic Variation, Genetic Structure, and Conservation Unit Designation in the Larch Mountain Salamander (Plethodon larselli)" (2005). USGS Staff -- Published Research. 674. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/674 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USGS Staff -- Published Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. 396 Geographic variation, genetic structure, and conservation unit designation in the Larch Mountain salamander (Plethodon larselli) R. Steven Wagner, Mark P. Miller, Charles M. Crisafulli, and Susan M. Haig Abstract: The Larch Mountain salamander (Plethodon larselli Burns, 1954) is an endemic species in the Pacific north- western United States facing threats related to habitat destruction. To facilitate development of conservation strategies, we used DNA sequences and RAPDs (random amplified polymorphic DNA) to examine differences among populations of this species. Phylogenetic analyses of cytochrome b revealed a clade of haplotypes from populations north of the Columbia River derived from a clade containing haplotypes from the river’s southwestern region.
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist and Annotated Bibliography of the Subterranean Aquatic Fauna of Texas
    A CHECKLIST AND ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE SUBTERRANEAN AQUATIC FAUNA OF TEXAS JAMES R. REDDELL and ROBERT W. MITCHELL Texas Technological College WATER RESOURCES \ CENTER Lubbock, Texas WRC 69-6 INTERNATIONAL CENTER for ARID and August 1969 SEMI-ARID LAND STUDIES A CHECKLIST AND ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE SUBTERRANEAN AQUATIC FAUNA OF TEXAS James R. Reddell and Robert W. Mitchell Department of Biology Texas Tech University Lubbock, Texas INTRODUCTION In view of the ever-increasing interest in all studies relating to the water resources of Texas, we have found it timely to prepare this guide to the fauna and biological literature of our subterranean waters. The value of such a guide has already been demonstrated by Clark (1966) in his "Publications, Personnel, and Government Organizations Related to the Limnology, Aquatic Biology and Ichthyology of the Inland Waters of Texas". This publication dea ls primarily with inland surface waters, however, barely touching upon the now rather extensive literature which has accumulated on the biology of our subterranean waters. To state a n obvious fact, it is imperative that our underground waters receive the attention due them. They are one of our most important resources. Those subterranean waters for which biological data exi st are very un­ equally distributed in the state. The best known are those which are acces­ sible to collection and study via the entrances of caves. Even in cavernous regions there exist inaccessible deep aquifers which have yielded little in­ formation as yet. Biological data from the underground waters of non-cave rn­ ous areas are virtually non-existant.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to Priority Plant and Animal Species in Oregon Forests
    A GUIDE TO Priority Plant and Animal Species IN OREGON FORESTS A publication of the Oregon Forest Resources Institute Sponsors of the first animal and plant guidebooks included the Oregon Department of Forestry, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Oregon Biodiversity Information Center, Oregon State University and the Oregon State Implementation Committee, Sustainable Forestry Initiative. This update was made possible with help from the Northwest Habitat Institute, the Oregon Biodiversity Information Center, Institute for Natural Resources, Portland State University and Oregon State University. Acknowledgments: The Oregon Forest Resources Institute is grateful to the following contributors: Thomas O’Neil, Kathleen O’Neil, Malcolm Anderson and Jamie McFadden, Northwest Habitat Institute; the Integrated Habitat and Biodiversity Information System (IBIS), supported in part by the Northwest Power and Conservation Council and the Bonneville Power Administration under project #2003-072-00 and ESRI Conservation Program grants; Sue Vrilakas, Oregon Biodiversity Information Center, Institute for Natural Resources; and Dana Sanchez, Oregon State University, Mark Gourley, Starker Forests and Mike Rochelle, Weyerhaeuser Company. Edited by: Fran Cafferata Coe, Cafferata Consulting, LLC. Designed by: Sarah Craig, Word Jones © Copyright 2012 A Guide to Priority Plant and Animal Species in Oregon Forests Oregonians care about forest-dwelling wildlife and plants. This revised and updated publication is designed to assist forest landowners, land managers, students and educators in understanding how forests provide habitat for different wildlife and plant species. Keeping forestland in forestry is a great way to mitigate habitat loss resulting from development, mining and other non-forest uses. Through the use of specific forestry techniques, landowners can maintain, enhance and even create habitat for birds, mammals and amphibians while still managing lands for timber production.
    [Show full text]