DOCSLIB.ORG

Lake Manatee State Park 2018 Approved Unit Management Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Rick Scott FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF Governor Ca�os Lopez-Cantera Environmental Protection Lt Governor Marjory Stoneman DouglasBuilding 3900 CommonwealthBoulevard Noah Valenstein Tallahassee, Aorida32399-3000 Secretary August 30, 2018 Mr. Steven Cutshaw Division of Recreation and Parks Departmentof Environmental Protection 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard,MS 525 Tallahassee,Florida 32399-3000 RE: Lake Manatee State Park- Lease No. 2543 Dear Mr. Cutshaw: On August 24, 2018, the Acquisition andRestoration Council (ARC) recommended approval of the Lake Manatee State Park management plan. Therefore, Division of State Lands, Office of Environmental Services, acting as agent forthe Board of Trustees of the InternalImprovement Trust Fund, hereby approves the Lake Manatee State Park management plan. The next management planupdate is due August 24, 2028. Pursuant to s. 253.034(5)(a), F.S., each managementplan is required to "describe both short-terma nd long-termman agement goals, and include measurable objectives to achieve those goals. Short-termg oals shall be achievable within a 2-year planning period, andl ong-termgoals shall be achievable within a 10-yearplanning period. " Upon completion of short-termg oals, please submit a signedletter identifying categories, goals, and results with attached methodology to the Division of State Lands,Offic e of Environmental Services. Pursuant to s. 259.032(8)(g), F.S., by July 1 of each year, each governmentalagency and each private entity designated to managel ands shall report to the Secretary of Environmental Protection, via the Division of State Lands, on the progressof funding, staffing, and resource management of every project for which the agency or entity is responsible. Pursuant to s. 259.036(2), F.S., management areas that exceed 1,000 acres in size, shall be scheduled fora landmanagement review at least every 5 years. Pursuant to s. 259.032, F.S., andChapter 18-2.021, F.A.C., managementplans for a reas less than 160 acres may be handledin accordancewith the negative response process. This process requires small management plans and managementplan amendments be submitted to the Division of State Lands for review, andthe Acquisition and Restoration Council (ARC) forpublic notification. The Division of State Lands will approve these plans or plan amendments submitted forreview throughdelegated authority unless three or more ARC members request the division place the item on a future council meeting agenda forreview. To create better efficiency, improvecustomer service, and assist members of the ARC, the Division of State Landswill notice negative response items on Thursdays except for weeks that have State or Federal holidays that fallon Thursday or Friday. The Division of State Lands will contact you on the appropriate Friday to inform you if the item is approved via delegated authority or if it will be placed on a futureARC agenda by request of the ARC members. Approval of this land management plan does not waive the authority or jurisdiction of anygovernmental entity that may have aninterest in this project. Implementationof any uplandactivities proposed by this management plan may require a permit or other authorization fromfederal and state agencies having regulatory jurisdiction over those particularactivities. Pursuant to the conditions of your lease, please forwardcopies of all permitsto this office uponissuance. Sincerely, RaymondV. Spa · ing Chief, Officeof wironmental Services Division of State Lands Department of Environmental Protection Lake Manatee State Park Lead Agency: Department of Environmental Protection Division of Recreation and Parks Common Name of Property: Lake Manatee State Park Location: Manatee County Acreage: 548.78 Acres Acreage Breakdown Natural Communities Acres Abandoned Field/Pasture 45.1 Bottomland Forest 7.72 Baygall 16.36 Depression Marsh 6.96 Developed 34.36 Mesic Flatwoods 203.32 Scrub 98.51 Scrubby Flatwoods 62.65 Sandhill 6.46 Successional Hardwood Forest 28.29 Seepage Stream 1.03 Wet Flatwoods 31.55 Xeric Hammock 6.54 Lease/Management Agreement Number(s): 2543 Use: Single Use Management Responsibilities Agency: Dept. of Environmental Protection, Division of Recreation and Parks Responsibility: Public access and resource conservation Designated Land Use: Public outdoor recreation and conservation Sublease: None Encumbrances: None Type of Acquisition: Bond Issuance Unique Features Overview: The park serves as dedicated conservation land along the shoreline of Lake Manatee, protecting water quality in the lake. A dam was built in 1967 on the Manatee River just west of park property, and the resulting lake supplies drinking water to Bradenton and surrounding cities. The water collected here provides a major regional water supply, with over 10 million gallons per day extracted, treated, and distributed to Sarasota and Manatee counties. Lake Manatee covers 2,400 acres, and has an average depth of 38 feet, with a Lake Manatee State Park maximum depth of 51 feet. The park was given its name due to this lake that defines its northern boundary. Natural: Mesic flatwoods are the most abundant natural community found at Lake Manatee State Park, and an intensive resource management program has created viable habitat for imperiled species such as the eastern diamondback rattlesnake. The sandhill found at Lake Manatee are only small relicts of what existed prior to when the reservoir was created by damming the Manatee River, based on soil maps and aerial photography dating back to 1942. Aerial photography also depicts early agriculture on soils associated with sandhill at the park. Scrub habitat is found on higher, well-drained areas. This scrub is considered to be in good condition, with potential to improve to excellent condition with regular fire intervals. This scrub is being managed to accommodate the endemic scrub-jay. Archaeological/Historical: An archaeological resource sensitivity model was completed for Lake Manatee in 2014 by the University of South Florida, Alliance of Integrated Spatial Technologies. It is predicted that there is low site occurrence probability at Lake Manatee State Park, but it is possible that late Paleo-to-early Archaic occupants utilized the Manatee River drainage area which is now covered by the reservoir. Late Archaic and latter Manasota have been documented at higher sea levels, but nothing has been identified yet on park property. Management Goals, Objectives and Actions Measurable objectives and actions have been identified for each of the Division’s management goals for Lake Manatee State Park. Please refer to the Implementation Schedule and Cost Estimates in the Implementation Component of this plan for a consolidated spreadsheet of the recommended actions, measures of progress, target year for completion and estimated costs to fulfill the management goals and objectives of this park. While, the Division of Recreation and Parks utilizes the ten-year management plan to serve as the basic statement of policy and future direction for each park, a number of annual work plans provide more specific guidance for Division staff to accomplish many of the resource management goals and objectives of the park. Where such detailed planning is appropriate to the character and scale of the park’s natural resources, annual work plans are developed for prescribed fire management, exotic plant management and imperiled species management. Annual or longer-term work plans are developed for natural community restoration and hydrological restoration. The work plans provide the Division with crucial flexibility in its efforts to generate and implement adaptive resource management practices in the state park system. The work plans are reviewed and updated annually. Through this process, the Division’s resource management strategies are systematically evaluated to determine their effectiveness. The process and the information collected is used to refine techniques, methodologies and strategies, and ensures that each park’s prescribed management actions are monitored and Lake Manatee State Park reported as required by Chapters 253.034 and 259.037, Florida Statutes. The goals, objectives and actions identified in this management plan will serve as the basis for developing annual work plans for the park. Since the plan is based on conditions that exist at the time the plan is developed, the annual work plans will provide the flexibility needed to adapt to future conditions as they change during the ten-year management planning cycle. As the park’s annual work plans are implemented through the ten-year cycle, it may become necessary to adjust the management plan’s priority schedules and cost estimates to reflect these changing conditions. Resource Management Hydrological Management Goal: Protect water quality and quantity in the park, restore hydrology to the extent feasible and maintain the restored condition. • Objective: Conduct/obtain an assessment of the park’s hydrological restoration needs. Natural Communities Management Goal: Restore and maintain the natural communities/habitats of the park. • Objective: Within 10 years, have 488 acres of the park maintained within the optimum fire return interval. • Objective: Continue habitat/natural community restoration activities on 16 acres of sandhill natural community. • Objective: Conduct natural community/habitat improvement activities on 46 acres of abandoned pasture. Imperiled Species Management Goal: Maintain, improve or restore imperiled species populations and habitats in the park. • Objective:
Recommended publications
  • Insect Survey of Four Longleaf Pine Preserves

    Insect Survey of Four Longleaf Pine Preserves

    A SURVEY OF THE MOTHS, BUTTERFLIES, AND GRASSHOPPERS OF FOUR NATURE CONSERVANCY PRESERVES IN SOUTHEASTERN NORTH CAROLINA Stephen P. Hall and Dale F. Schweitzer November 15, 1993 ABSTRACT Moths, butterflies, and grasshoppers were surveyed within four longleaf pine preserves owned by the North Carolina Nature Conservancy during the growing season of 1991 and 1992. Over 7,000 specimens (either collected or seen in the field) were identified, representing 512 different species and 28 families. Forty-one of these we consider to be distinctive of the two fire- maintained communities principally under investigation, the longleaf pine savannas and flatwoods. An additional 14 species we consider distinctive of the pocosins that occur in close association with the savannas and flatwoods. Twenty nine species appear to be rare enough to be included on the list of elements monitored by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (eight others in this category have been reported from one of these sites, the Green Swamp, but were not observed in this study). Two of the moths collected, Spartiniphaga carterae and Agrotis buchholzi, are currently candidates for federal listing as Threatened or Endangered species. Another species, Hemipachnobia s. subporphyrea, appears to be endemic to North Carolina and should also be considered for federal candidate status. With few exceptions, even the species that seem to be most closely associated with savannas and flatwoods show few direct defenses against fire, the primary force responsible for maintaining these communities. Instead, the majority of these insects probably survive within this region due to their ability to rapidly re-colonize recently burned areas from small, well-dispersed refugia.
  • Pre-Incursion Plan PIP003 Toads and Frogs

    Pre-Incursion Plan PIP003 Toads and Frogs

    Pre-incursion Plan PIP003 Toads and Frogs Scope This plan is in place to guide prevention and eradication activities and the management of non-indigenous populations of Toads and Frogs (Order Anura) 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 11/01/12 Dana Price S.Wisniewski 2.1 Final 27/06/12 Dana Price M.Corry Visual Standard approved by ADP 3.0 New Final 6/10/15 Dana Price A.Kay New DEDJTR template and document revision Acknowledgement and special thanks to Peter Courtenay, Senior Curator, Zoos Victoria, for reviewing this document and providing comments. 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: Cane Toad (Rhinella marinus) Photo: Image courtesy of Ryan Melville, HRIA Team, DEDJTR For more information about Agriculture Victoria go to www.agriculture.vic.gov.au or phone the Customer Service Centre on 136 186. ISBN 978-1-925532-37-1 (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.
  • Conservation of the Arogos Skipper, Atrytone Arogos Arogos (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae) in Florida Marc C

    Conservation of the Arogos Skipper, Atrytone Arogos Arogos (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae) in Florida Marc C

    Conservation of the Arogos Skipper, Atrytone arogos arogos (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae) in Florida Marc C. Minno St. Johns River Water Management District P.O. Box 1429, Palatka, FL 32177 [email protected] Maria Minno Eco-Cognizant, Inc., 600 NW 35th Terrace, Gainesville, FL 32607 [email protected] ABSTRACT The Arogos skipper is a rare and declining butterfly found in native grassland habitats in the eastern and mid- western United States. Five distinct populations of the butterfly occur in specific parts of the range. Atrytone arogos arogos once occurred from southern South Carolina through eastern Georgia and peninsular Florida as far south as Miami. This butterfly is currently thought to be extirpated from South Carolina and Georgia. The six known sites in Florida for A. arogos arogos are public lands with dry prairie or longleaf pine savanna having an abundance of the larval host grass, Sorghastrum secundum. Colonies of the butterfly are threat- ened by catastrophic events such as wild fires, land management activities or no management, and the loss of genetic integrity. The dry prairie preserves of central Florida will be especially important to the recovery of the butterfly, since these are some of the largest and last remaining grasslands in the state. It may be possible to create new colonies of the Arogos skipper by releasing wild-caught females or captive-bred individuals into currently unoccupied areas of high quality habitat. INTRODUCTION tered colonies were found in New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, and Mississippi. The three re- gions where the butterfly was most abundant included The Arogos skipper (Atrytone arogos) is a very locally the New Jersey pine barrens, peninsular Florida, and distributed butterfly that occurs only in the eastern and southeastern Mississippi.
  • FROG LISTENING NETWORK This Program Is Designed to Assist You in Learning the Frogs, and Their Calls, in the Hillsborough River Greenway System

    FROG LISTENING NETWORK This Program Is Designed to Assist You in Learning the Frogs, and Their Calls, in the Hillsborough River Greenway System

    HILLSBOROUGH RIVER GREENWAYS TASK FORCE FROG LISTENING NETWORK This program is designed to assist you in learning the frogs, and their calls, in the Hillsborough River Greenway System. Through this program, volunteers can help in local frog and toad research efforts. We use frogs and toads because: • They are good biological indicators of the river system’s health. • Their lifecycles span from wetland to upland areas. • They are very susceptible to environmental change. • They track the hydrologic cycle. • They are good ecological barometers for the health of the ecosystem. Frogs indicative of healthy Ecosystems: • Gopher Frog • Certain Tree Frogs Such As The: Barking Treefrog and the Pinewoods Treefrog Frogs indicative of exotic invasion and conversion to urbanization: • Cuban Tree Frog • Marine Toad These are non-native species that have been imported or introduced to our area. Volunteers are helping by: • Learning the calls. • Listening for calls. • Recording call information. Provide the recorded call information to the HRGTF on the data forms provided. This information will be used to detect changes or trends within frog populations over time. • This in turn helps to assess the health of the Ecosystem which then benefits: •Frogs • Other area wildlife •Ourselves Frog calls are easy to learn! • They are distinctive and unique. • We will use mnemonics (phrases that sound like the frog call) to remind us what frog we are listening to. • Many of the names of the frogs are associated with their calls. • For Example: the Bullfrog has a call that sounds like a bullhorn. Frog Diversity • 2700 Worldwide • 82 in the United States • 28 in Florida • 21 in the Hillsborough River Greenway (14 Frogs; 4 Toads; 3 Exotics) First lets look at the six large frogs found in the Hillsborough River Greenway.
  • Cuban Treefrog (Osteopilus Septentrionalis) ERSS

    Cuban Treefrog (Osteopilus Septentrionalis) ERSS

    Cuban Treefrog (Osteopilus septentrionalis) Ecological Risk Screening Summary U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, September 2014 Revised, May 2018 Web Version, 1/30/2019 Photo: Denise Gregoire, U.S. Geological Survey. Licensed under Public Domain – Government Work. Available: https://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/factsheet.aspx?SpeciesID=57. (May 2018). 1 Native Range and Status in the United States Native Range From Somma et al. (2018): “Osteopilus septentrionalis is indigenous to Cuba, Isla de la Juventud (=Isle of Youth or Isle of Pines), the Bahamas, including San Salvador and Acklins Island, and the Cayman Islands (Echternacht et al., 2011; Heinicke et al., 2011; Krysko et al., 2011a).” From GISD (2018) lists Osteopilus septentrionalis as native in the Bahamas, Cayman Islands, Cuba, and Seychelles. 1 From AmphibiaWeb (2009): “This species is native to Cuba, the Isla de Pinos, the Bahamas Islands including Little Bahama Bank, Grand Bahama Bank, San Salvador, Rum, Crooked, and Acklins Islands, and the Cayman Islands including Grand Cayman, Little Cayman and Cayman Brac (Duellman and Crombie 1970).” Status in the United States From Somma et al. (2018): “The Cuban treefrog was first introduced to Florida at Key West (Barbour 1931), and has been established in mainland Florida since at least 1951 (Schwartz 1952).” “In Louisiana, individual Cuban Treefrogs have been observed occasionally in the nursery department of a home improvement store in New Orleans as early as the 1990s (Bob Thomas, pers. comm.).” “Other nonindigenous populations of Cuban Treefrogs are reported from the Caribbean: St. Croix and St. Thomas (U.S. Virgin Islands), […]” “In southern, central, and northern peninsular Florida, including the Florida Keys and Dry Tortugas, O.
  • Coqui Frogs, Greenhouse Frogs, Cuban Tree Frogs, and Cane Toads) Karen H

    Coqui Frogs, Greenhouse Frogs, Cuban Tree Frogs, and Cane Toads) Karen H

    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USDA National Wildlife Research Center - Staff U.S. Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Publications Health Inspection Service 2018 Frogs (Coqui Frogs, Greenhouse Frogs, Cuban Tree Frogs, and Cane Toads) Karen H. Beard Utah State University, [email protected] Steve A. Johnson University of Florida Aaron B. Shiels USDA, APHIS, Wildlife Services, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdm_usdanwrc Part of the Life Sciences Commons Beard, Karen H.; Johnson, Steve A.; and Shiels, Aaron B., "Frogs (Coqui Frogs, Greenhouse Frogs, Cuban Tree Frogs, and Cane Toads)" (2018). USDA National Wildlife Research Center - Staff Publications. 2035. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdm_usdanwrc/2035 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USDA National Wildlife Research Center - Staff ubP lications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. U.S. Department of Agriculture U.S. Government Publication Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Wildlife Services Frogs (Coqui Frogs, 9 Greenhouse Frogs, Cuban Tree Frogs, and Cane Toads) Karen H. Beard, Steve A. Johnson, and Aaron B. Shiels CONTENTS Introduction ...........................................................................................................
  • Coastal Butterflies & Host Plants

    Coastal Butterflies & Host Plants

    GIANT SKIPPERS Family: Hesperiidae, Subfamily: Megathymi- nae Yucca Giant-Skipper: Megathymus yuccae Host: Yuccas (Yucca aloifolia, Y. gloriosa, Y. fila- mentosa, Y. flaccida) Carolina Satyr S. Pearly-eye Gemmed Satry Viola’s Wood-Satyr Horace’s Duskywing by Gosse Silver-spotted Skipper nectaring on pickerlweed Butterflies need native host plants to complete SATYRS their life cycle. The larvae of many species can Family: Nymphalidae, Subfamily: Satyrinae only survive on specific plants; think of mon- Southern Pearly-eye: Enodia portlandia * archs and milkweeds, longwings and passion- Host: Switchcane (Arundinaria tecta) flowers. The host plants listed here are native to the coastal region of Georgia & South Caro- Creole Pearly Eye: Enodia creola Delaware Skipper Long-tailed Skipper Host: Switchcane (Arundinaria tecta) lina. They provide a critical link for butterfly survival. Protect native plants in your landscape Appalachian Brown: Satyrodes appalachia and grow them in your gardens to support Host: Carex spp., Rhynchospora spp. these important pollinators. Gemmed Satyr: Cyllopsis gemma * Host: Woodoats (Chasmanthium laxum, C. ses- siliflorum) Sachem Skipper Whirlabout Skipper Carolina Satyr: Hermeuptychia sosybius * Host: St. Augustine (Stenotaphrum secundatum) Georgia Satyr: Neonympha areolata Host: Sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense), Sedges (Cyperaceae) Fiery Skipper Checkered Skipper Provided by Coastal WildScapes Little Wood Satyr: Megisto cymela * Twin-spotted Skipper Lace-winged Roadside (www.coastalwildscapes.org) Host: St. Augustine
  • Amphibian Taxon Advisory Group Regional Collection Plan

    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 ..........................
  • The Taxonomic Report

    The Taxonomic Report

    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: The Taxonomic Report Jahr/Year: 1999 Band/Volume: 1-10 Autor(en)/Author(s): Gatrelle Ronald R. Artikel/Article: THREE NEW HESPERIOIDAE (HESPERIINAE) FROM SOUTH CAROLINA: NEW SUBSPECIES OF EUPHYES BIMACULA, POANES AARONI, AND HESPERIA ATTALUS 1-13 Volume 1 24 December 1999 Number 10 The Taxonomic Report OF THE INTERNATIONAL LEPIDOPTERA SURVEY THREE NEW HESPERIOIDAE (HESPERIINAE) FROM SOUTH CAROLINA: NEW SUBSPECIES OF EUPHYES BIMACULA, POANES AARONI, AND HESPERIA ATTALUS RONALD R. GATRELLE1, 2 126 Wells Road, Goose Creek, South Carolina 29445 ABSTRACT. Euphyes bimacula arbogasti is described as a new subspecies from Berkeley County, South Carolina. It is known from only a few widely scattered colonies in the coastal swamp forests of the southeastern United States from Georgia to southeastern North Carolina. It is darker then E. b. bimacula and E. b. illinois. Poanes aaroni minimus is described as a new subspecies from Bull Swamp, Orangeburg County, South Carolina. This unique inland subspecies is presently known only from the type locality. It is darker then P. a. aaroni and P. a. howardi. Hesperia attalus nigrescens is described as a new subspecies from the relict dunes of Sandy Island National Wildlife Sanctuary, Horry County, South Carolina. This isolated subspecies is much darker than H. a. attalus and H. a. slossonae. The Sandy Island colony of H. a. nigrescens is believed to be the only remaining colony of this subspecies. All three subspecies are similarly melanic. Additional key words: Threatened species, original descriptions. INTRODUCTION At least 33 species/subspecies of butterflies were originally described from populations inhabiting east coastal Georgia or south coastal South Carolina by the earliest workers on American Lepidoptera in the 1700’s and early 1800’s.
  • Book Review, of Systematics of Western North American Butterflies

    Book Review, of Systematics of Western North American Butterflies

    (NEW Dec. 3, PAPILIO SERIES) ~19 2008 CORRECTIONS/REVIEWS OF 58 NORTH AMERICAN BUTTERFLY BOOKS Dr. James A. Scott, 60 Estes Street, Lakewood, Colorado 80226-1254 Abstract. Corrections are given for 58 North American butterfly books. Most of these books are recent. Misidentified figures mostly of adults, erroneous hostplants, and other mistakes are corrected in each book. Suggestions are made to improve future butterfly books. Identifications of figured specimens in Holland's 1931 & 1898 Butterfly Book & 1915 Butterfly Guide are corrected, and their type status clarified, and corrections are made to F. M. Brown's series of papers on Edwards; types (many figured by Holland), because some of Holland's 75 lectotype designations override lectotype specimens that were designated later, and several dozen Holland lectotype designations are added to the J. Pelham Catalogue. Type locality designations are corrected/defined here (some made by Brown, most by others), for numerous names: aenus, artonis, balder, bremnerii, brettoides, brucei (Oeneis), caespitatis, cahmus, callina, carus, colon, colorado, coolinensis, comus, conquista, dacotah, damei, dumeti, edwardsii (Oarisma), elada, epixanthe, eunus, fulvia, furcae, garita, hermodur, kootenai, lagus, mejicanus, mormo, mormonia, nilus, nympha, oreas, oslari, philetas, phylace, pratincola, rhena, saga, scudderi, simius, taxiles, uhleri. Five first reviser actions are made (albihalos=austinorum, davenporti=pratti, latalinea=subaridum, maritima=texana [Cercyonis], ricei=calneva). The name c-argenteum is designated nomen oblitum, faunus a nomen protectum. Three taxa are demonstrated to be invalid nomina nuda (blackmorei, sulfuris, svilhae), and another nomen nudum ( damei) is added to catalogues as a "schizophrenic taxon" in order to preserve stability. Problems caused by old scientific names and the time wasted on them are discussed.
  • Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020

    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020

    Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020 Hickory Nut Gorge Green Salamander (Aneides caryaensis) Photo by Austin Patton 2014 Compiled by Judith Ratcliffe, Zoologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources www.ncnhp.org C ur Alleghany rit Ashe Northampton Gates C uc Surry am k Stokes P d Rockingham Caswell Person Vance Warren a e P s n Hertford e qu Chowan r Granville q ot ui a Mountains Watauga Halifax m nk an Wilkes Yadkin s Mitchell Avery Forsyth Orange Guilford Franklin Bertie Alamance Durham Nash Yancey Alexander Madison Caldwell Davie Edgecombe Washington Tyrrell Iredell Martin Dare Burke Davidson Wake McDowell Randolph Chatham Wilson Buncombe Catawba Rowan Beaufort Haywood Pitt Swain Hyde Lee Lincoln Greene Rutherford Johnston Graham Henderson Jackson Cabarrus Montgomery Harnett Cleveland Wayne Polk Gaston Stanly Cherokee Macon Transylvania Lenoir Mecklenburg Moore Clay Pamlico Hoke Union d Cumberland Jones Anson on Sampson hm Duplin ic Craven Piedmont R nd tla Onslow Carteret co S Robeson Bladen Pender Sandhills Columbus New Hanover Tidewater Coastal Plain Brunswick THE COUNTIES AND PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES OF NORTH CAROLINA Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina 2020 Compiled by Judith Ratcliffe, Zoologist North Carolina Natural Heritage Program N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources Raleigh, NC 27699-1651 www.ncnhp.org This list is dynamic and is revised frequently as new data become available. New species are added to the list, and others are dropped from the list as appropriate. The list is published periodically, generally every two years.
  • Captive Wildlife Allowed List

    Captive Wildlife Allowed List

    Saskatchewan Captive Wildlife Allowed Species List (as of June 1, 2021) AMPHIBIANS (CLASS AMPHIBIA) Class (Common Name) Scientific Name Family Ambystomatidae Axolotl Ambystoma mexicanum Marble Salamander Ambystoma opacum Family Bombinatoridae Oriental Fire-Bellied Toad Bombina orientalis Family Bufonidae Green Toad Anaxyrus debilis Black Indonesian Toad Bufo asper Indonesian Toad Duttaphrynus melanostictus Family Ceratophryidae Surinam Horned Frog Ceratophrys cornuta Chacoan Horned Frog Ceratophrys cranwelli Argentine Horned Frog Ceratophrys ornata Budgett’s Frog Lepidobatrachus laevis Family Dendrobatidae Dart Poison Frog Dendrobates auratus Yellow-banded Poison Dart Frog Dendrobates leucomelas Dyeing Dart Frog Dendrobates tinctorius Yellow-striped Poison Frog Dendrobates truncatus Family Hylidae Clown Tree Frog Dendropsophus leucophyllatus Bird Poop Tree Frog Dendropsophus marmoratus Barking Tree Frog Dryophytes gratiosus Squirrel Tree Frog Dryophytes squirellus Green Tree Frog Dryophytes cinereus Cuban Tree Frog Osteopilus septentrionalis Haitian Giant Tree Frog Osteopilus vastus White’s Tree Frog Ranoidea caerulea Brazilian Black and White Milky Frog Trachycephalus resinifictrix Hyperoliidae African Reed Frog Hyperolius concolor Family Mantellidae Baron’s Mantella Mantella baroni Brown Mantella Mantella betsileo Family Megophryidae Long-nosed Horned Frog Megophrys nasuta Family Microhylidae Tomato Frog Dyscophus guineti Chubby Frog Kaloula pulchra Banded Rubber Frog Phrynomantis bifasciatus Emerald Hopper Frog Scaphiophryne madagascariensis