DOCSLIB.ORG

Fleasn and Lice from Pocket Gophers,Thomomys, in Oregon

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

John O, whitaker,Jr. Department of Life Sciences Indiana StateUniversity Terre Haute, Indiarn 47809 Chris Maset USDI Bureau of Land Managemeot Forestry SciencesLaboratory 3200 Jefferson\Vay Corvallis,Oregon 97331 anq Robert E. Lewis Departmenr of Entomology Iovra State University of Science lo,v/a State University of Science and Technology Ames, Iowa 50011 EctoparasiticMites (ExcludingGhiggers), Fleasn and Lice from Pocket Gophers,Thomomys, in Oregon Abslract Four of the five sDc{iesof pocket eoohers that occur io Oreqon were examined for ecto@rasites: thesetheseincluded:included: (11( 1) CarriasC-amaspocketiocket gopher,Tbo*ony balbiz,o-r*s,(2) Townseod pocket goprer,7.goprer, 7. tountewli.tountewli,tottn:ewli- (1)(1\ Mazama pocketoocket s(gopher,pc:rlter- T.7. mazama, andaod (4(4) ) northernnortiemrern 1rccket1rcckeroocket gopher.eooher.gophe\ T.Z ,albo;des.,alpo;d.es. Although the Botta pocleir gopher,sooher- T. buttae., occursoca'jfs in southwesterosouthwestertr Oreeon.Oregon, oone was includedi in this study. Major ectoparasites wete Ardrolaelabs geamlts and, Geornldoectts oregonat oi T. b*lbbar*s; E.binon,ystas tbonanv, Hdenosdmat*s on'ycbom,ydit, and Geomtdoecas idahoensis on T. toun- endi; Haenoganarzs reidi, Geinydoecn thomomyi; Androlaelips geonzls, aod, Foxella ignota recrla on T. nazama; Geomytloetu thornon tt, Ecbinon";yswsthomorny, Echinonlssa: longicbelae (?), and Foxella ignata rec k onT. tdlPa;.des. lntloduclion Five species of pocket gophers occur in Oregon, all in the gerts Tbomamys; tltey include the Camaspocket gopher,7. bulbiaorut, Townsendpocket gopher,7. ,ou&sendi (listed as 7. u.m.btin*s by Hall 1981), Mazama pocket gopher, T, ,zltzdnw, northetn pocket gopher, T. talpoid,el and Botta pocket gopher, T, bortae. The latter is not in- cluded in this study. Pocket gophers are unusual among North American rodents in that they harbor chewing lice, Mallophaga, rathet than sucking lice, Anoplura. Chewing lice are exceedingly bost-specific; those of pocket gophers are in the gents Geomydoecus. Geomydoecxs oregont4Joccttts on T. bdbiaorus, G. id'aboensison T, townsendi, ar.d G. thornomys on both 7. nwzanw ar,d,T. talpoi'des (Price and Emerson 1971, Pdce and Hellenthal 1!80). Mites reported trom T. b*lbfuorus arc And'rol'aelap: fahrenbolzi ar,d A, geoT/t'!r. Those reported ftom T, talpoides are Andtolaelaps fabrenbolzi, A. geomy1 Eulaelaps Northwest Sciencq Vo1. 59, No. 1, 198) stabularis,IJaetnogatndws atnbulant,H. longitarcls, H. occid,entalis,H, orycbomyd.fu,H. rcicli, Echinory:tut letuuralil E. geomydis,E, itabellinus, E. longichelae,E. reotonwe, E. thotno,myr, E. ahentil ar'd Hypoaspi: miles (Whttaket und Vilror, 1974). Thete apparendy previously are no reported parasitic mites on ?. tnazama ard r, tounsendi, Pocket gophers of the various generaand speciesaie host to 19 speciesof fleas,which are culteotly assignedto rhfee genera. This paper presents information on the later parasitic rnites, chewiog lice, arid fleas, of pocket gophers in Oregon. Although gopbets,Thonzomyl spend more time above ground than do gophers of other genera,pocLet gophers are generally isolatecl from orher animals and from other speciesof goplr"r.. S;ah isolation gives os the op- portunity to examine communities of parasites from four closely related speciesof pocket gophers from a relatively limited area, as well as to provide new data on ectoparasiticmites from two speciesof gophers. Sludy Area The_five speciesof pocket gophers that occur in Oregon do oot, so far as is knowo, overlap (Bailey 1936, Hall 1981, Maser et al. 1()8I) but follow the physiographic provinces of Oregon as defined by Franklin and Dyrness (1!71). For exan.rple,-the southern pocket gopher occurs mainly in the Ump,quaand Rogue Valleys anJ in the extreme southern extensionof the Sitka spruce (picea :itcben:ii) zone of rhe Klamath Mounteins p,ror,ince. The Camaspocket gopher is endemic to the \fillamette Valley within the \ illamette Valley province. The Mazama pocker gopher inhabits meaclow areas of the rWestern Coast Ranges, Cascades,and High Cascadesprovinces, reganclless of major veqetatiofl type_ ]n fact, one sma1l,isolated population just penetratesthe Klamath Mouotains pistol province at River, Curry County. Two speciesoccur east of the High Cascades Province.The most widely spreadis the northerri pocket gopher that occurs jn all legetation types _major within the following foor pr"'uin."r, Basin and Range, High Lava Piains,Blue Mountains,and Owyhee UpUna. in" Townsendpocket gopher occupies two limited areasof the Shrub_steppelwirh bit sagebrush,Artemiia ":*o-)_ and_Desert yL Shrub rnajor vegetationtypes within the Basi-naod Range and Owyhee Upland Provinces. \fhere the northern and Townsend pocket gophers would appear to be symparic, they are separatedby soil type_the Townsend p<xket gopher inhabits deep well-drained soiis whereasthe northero pocket gopher inhabits shallow, stony soils (Maser, unpublisheddata). Methodsand Materials PocLetgophers were trapped, placed in plastic bags,and quick_frozenin the field with dry ice (Maser et al. 1918). After rhey were transponetl to the laboratory and thawed, staodatd museum data rvere taken They were rhen examineclfot mites and fleas by brushing their fur over a white porcelaio1mn; this method of coliectionselects 1or larger specimens and missesmany of the smaller fo'ns. More detailed examinatronswill show small mites, particularly Geonrylich*.rsp. ( Listrophoridae) , to be abuodant (Fajn et al, 1978). The firr was examioed visually {or lice, rvhich were inclividually collectedqrith the.aid of forceps.Parasites were preservedin 70 percent ethyl alcohol,cleared io Nes_ bitts, and mounted pocket ifl Hoyer's soiution. gopher sample sizes were: g for ?, bulbiooras, Il tot T. townsewli,27 for T. ,rn o*nj id fi6 tir T. tatpoidet. a4 \flhitaker, Maser,and Lewis Resulls Informatioo on ectoparasiresof rhe four speciesof pocket gophers is given in Table 1. The hosts,with their most numefous parasiteslisted in order of decreasingabun- dance,were (1) T. bzlbi,uotat-Androlaelaps geotnysand Geomydoecusorcgonus, (2) T, townynd,i Echirzonyssatthonornlj, (I) 7. Mzdma FoxeLlaignota recula, Geo- nytloecut thottomls, Haetnoganatu reidi, ar'd Andtolaelapsgeolnjr, ^nd (.4) T, tal- poiiet-Foxella ignota rcula, Geomldoecat tbomomys, Echinony.rut tbomomyt, and E. Longichelae. The louse, Geomyrloec*s orcgonr!, w^s found on 7. bwlbfuotus, ar'd. G. idahoensit was found oo.T. toun:ewli. Geonldoecut thomanys occurredoo both T. rnazamaand T. tdlpoidet. Andtolaelap.rgeou1s is generally a common mite on pocket gophers. It was the most abundant ectoparasiteot T. bulbirorus, fourth io abundanceon T. mazand, bnt nor even found on T, ,oui;e1l.d; or T. tdlpo;det. More than one type of mite keyed o:ut to Echinonyssus longichelae; differences occurred in the sput of coxa I1 of dre female. In typical E, Longichelae,this spur was found to be about 89,m long by 79, m wide. The individuals rve listed as E. longichelae variant, however,had a much latger spur on coxa II; it was about 24p m long and 17p m wide in mites [tom T. ttazama and about 18,um long and 16p,m wide in those from T. talpo;d,er.Dr. C. S. Herin examinedspecimens homT.lDdzd.md and referred to them either as a variaot of EcbioonytsutlongicheLae or as a new species.There is also a prob- len with. Ecbinonlrrr; tho nrrls in that mites fror;, T. trtlpoide.thave setae on the dorsalplate that are ali approximatelythe samelength ( about 30 mm), but individuals ttom T. nazata have nluch shorter setae, more like those in Echinan'ttrtl,J geol7z)tdit of E, fem.aralit,A comparativestudy of Echinonyssurfrom thesegophers is needed. \7e found three raxa of fleas on gaphers,Foxelld ignota recula ar,d Spicatacomis cam)r on T. ln4zana and both of these plrs Foxella ignota utahentis ot T, talpoides. No fleaswere found on 7. bulbirorus or T. tounsewli ( Table 1). The flea, Spicata comi: cotnis, was groupedj until recently, with 14 allied taxa in the lienus DactyLop:yLla.Members of the gennsSpicata, also sFcific to pocket gophers, ate rerely collected in latge numbers.They are rare in collectioos,which leads us to suspectrhar they a{e nest fleas that peak in population during winter when the host caonot be easily collected.The genus Spicatals badly in need of taxooomic revisioo, but lack of sufficient numbers of specimenshas delayedsuch a study. The specimeos we report here (Table 1) were taken from March through September. Discussion The major parasitesof pocket gophers in Oregon include: fleas Foxella (ignota)1 chewing lice, Geomltloecus,(oregonus, itlahoenit, thrnnomyt); and mites, Androlaelaps (geomlr'), Haenogamarts (reidi, onlchonytlis, thotnomyt), ar'd.Echinonyrut (t'em' utaLit, longicbelae,,hontorryr'). Although there is much similarity betweeo the major ectoparasitesof gopher species!rhere are also someinteresting differences. No specimens of AndrolaeLapt$,ere fouod on T, towntendi ot T. t,tlpoidet. Fleas and Haemogama:at reidi were found on 7, 712,t2d1)Mand T. taLpoidel,but not on the other two gophers. Flaetnogatna:u:onycba ljdi; was conrmononly on 7. townsendi, The fiea complex, Foxella ignota, cootains 11 currently recognizedsubspecies that EctoparasiricMires. Fleas, and Lice J5 i o oi< z6 F' ;+dd'i cid .j j ?9?9ino?" 6< .id li a o- 6< E rr .i N' .i 6< dido E FI Ei !- 2 ea i z a iE: i ii ?t ! 4 !:, E "3.rj.. E V"a :" "EEE?=i "aE !F,'E!'IE t rt la* .E i::!::ii *it;::;::5:r rtii c: r z F-"6i;au!-: { e*6-# ])o V/hitaker, Maser, and Lewis occur on pocket gophers throughour the wesrern two-thirds of the United States and southern Caoada.The specieshas not been reported eastof Indiana where the oominate subspeciesoccurs, and the western complex of taxa is grorly understoodand in need of raxonomicrevision. FoxelLa ignota rcctlr hasa broad disrribution in the Pacific North- west, from Idaho west to the coast and from northern Nevada and California to sourhern British Columbia; it occurs oo the vario rs speciesof pocket gophers,as well as on other speciesof mammalsrhat frequent the gopher br-rrrows.
Recommended publications
  • Genetic Variation Within a Broadly Distributed Chewing Louse Genus (Thomomydoecus)

    Genetic Variation Within a Broadly Distributed Chewing Louse Genus (Thomomydoecus)

    University of Northern Iowa UNI ScholarWorks Honors Program Theses Honors Program 2020 Genetic variation within a broadly distributed chewing louse genus (Thomomydoecus) Clarissa Elizabeth Bruns University of Northern Iowa Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy Copyright ©2020 Clarissa Elizabeth Bruns Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uni.edu/hpt Part of the Entomology Commons, and the Genetics Commons Recommended Citation Bruns, Clarissa Elizabeth, "Genetic variation within a broadly distributed chewing louse genus (Thomomydoecus)" (2020). Honors Program Theses. 433. https://scholarworks.uni.edu/hpt/433 This Open Access Honors Program Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors Program at UNI ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Program Theses by an authorized administrator of UNI ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. GENETIC VARIATION WITHIN A BROADLY DISTRIBUTED CHEWING LOUSE GENUS (THOMOMYDOECUS) A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Designation University Honors with Distinction Clarissa Elizabeth Bruns University of Northern Iowa May 2020 This Study by: Clarissa Elizabeth Bruns Entitled: Genetic distribution within a broadly distributed chewing louse genus (Thomomydoecus) has been approved as meeting the thesis or project requirement for the Designation University Honors with Distinction ________ ______________________________________________________ Date James Demastes, Honors Thesis Advisor, Biology ________ ______________________________________________________ Date Dr. Jessica Moon, Director, University Honors Program Abstract No broad study has been conducted to examine the genetics of Thomomydoecus species and their patterns of geographic variation. Chewing lice and their parasite-host relationships with pocket gophers have been studied as a key example of cophylogeny (Demastes et al., 2012).
  • 2013 Draft Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan

    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.
  • U.S. EPA, Pesticide Product Label, 0.5% STRYCHNINE MILO for HAND

    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.
  • Quantifying Exposure of Wyoming's Wildlife To

    Quantifying Exposure of Wyoming's Wildlife To

    QUANTIFYING EXPOSURE OF WYOMING’S WILDLIFE TO ENERGY DEVELOPMENT IN THE F ACE OF EXPANDING PRODUCTION Prepared by Douglas Keinath1 and Matthew Kauffman2 1 Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, University of Wyoming, 1000 E. University Ave., Dept. 3381, Laramie, Wyoming 82071 USA; E-mail: [email protected] 2 U.S. Geological Survey, Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, 1000 E. University Ave., Dept. 3166, Laramie, Wyoming 82071, USA; E-mail: [email protected] December 30, 2014 Suggested citation for this report: Keinath, D. and M. Kauffman. 2014. Quantifying exposure of Wyoming’s wildlife to energy development in the face of expanding production. Report prepared by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, Laramie Wyoming and Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Cheyenne, Wyoming and the U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins, Colorado. December 30, 2014. TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables and Figures ..................................................................................................................... 3 Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 4 Methods ......................................................................................................................................................
  • Controlling Pocket Gopher Damage to Conifer Seedlings D.S

    Controlling Pocket Gopher Damage to Conifer Seedlings D.S

    FOREST PROTECTION EC 1255 • Revised May 2003 $2.50 Controlling Pocket Gopher Damage to Conifer Seedlings D.S. deCalesta, K. Asman, and N. Allen Contents ocket gophers (or just plain Gopher habits and habitat.............. 1 P “gophers”) damage conifer seed- Control program ........................... 2 lings on thousands of Identifying the pest ......................2 acres in Washington, Assessing the need for treatment ...3 Idaho, and Oregon Damage control techniques ...........3 annually. They invade clearcuts and Applying controls .......................... 7 clip (cut off) roots or Figure 1.—Typical Oregon pocket gopher. Christmas tree plantations .............7 girdle (remove bark from) the bases of conifer seedlings and saplings, causing significant economic losses. Forest plantations ........................ 7 This publication will help you design a program to reduce or eliminate Summary .................................... 8 gopher damage to seedlings and saplings in your forest plantation or Christmas tree farm. Sources of supply ......................... 8 First, we describe pocket gophers, their habits, and habitats. Then we For further information .................. 8 discuss procedures for controlling pocket gopher damages—control techniques, their effectiveness and hazard(s) to the environment, and their use under a variety of tree-growing situations. Gopher habits and habitat Three species of pocket gopher can damage conifer seedlings. The two smaller ones, the northern pocket gopher and the Mazama pocket gopher, are 5 to 9 inches long and brown with some white beneath the chin and belly. The northern gopher is found east of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington and in Idaho; the Mazama lives in Oregon and Washington west of the Cascades. David S. deCalesta, former Exten- The Camas pocket gopher is similar looking, but larger (10 to 12 inches) sion wildlife specialist, and Kim than the two others.
  • Introduction to Risk Assessments for Methods Used in Wildlife Damage Management

    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.
  • Mazama Pocket Gopher FAQ September 2019 1 Mazama Pocket

    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.
  • Pocket Gophers Habitat Modification

    Pocket Gophers Habitat Modification

    Summary of Damage Prevention and Control Methods POCKET GOPHERS HABITAT MODIFICATION Rotate to annual crops Apply herbicides to control tap‐rooted plants for 2 consecutive years Flood land Rotate or cover crop with grasses, grains, or other fibrous‐rooted plants EXCLUSION Figure 1. Plains pocket gopher. Photo by Ron Case. Small wire‐mesh fences may provide protection for ornamental trees and shrubs or flower beds Plastic netting to protect seedlings Protect pipes and underground cables with pipes at least 3 inches in diameter or surround them with 6 to 8 inches of coarse gravel. FRIGHTENING Nothing effective REPELLENTS None practical Figure 2. Pocket gophers get their name from the pouches TOXICANTS on the sides of their head. Image by PCWD. Zinc phosphide Chlorophacinone OBJECTIVES 1. Describe basic pocket gopher biology and FUMIGANTS behavior 2. Identify pocket gopher signs Aluminum phosphide and gas cartridges 3. Explain different methods to control pocket gophers SHOOTING white, but generally align with soil coloration. The great variability in size and color of pocket gophers is Not practical attributed to their low dispersal rate and limited gene flow, resulting in adaptations to local TRAPPING conditions. Thirty‐five species of pocket gophers, represented by Various specialized body‐grip traps 5 genera occupy the western hemisphere. Fourteen Baited box traps species and 3 genera exist in the US. The major features differentiating these genera are the size of SPECIES PROFILE their forefeet, claws, and front surfaces of their chisel‐like incisors. Southeastern pocket gopher (Geomys pinetis) is the only species occurring in IDENTIFICATION Alabama. Pocket gophers are so named because they have fur‐ Geomys (Figure 3) have 2 grooves on each upper lined pouches outside of the mouth, one on each incisor and large forefeet and claws.
  • Benton County Prairie Species Habitat Conservation Plan

    Benton County Prairie Species Habitat Conservation Plan

    BENTON COUNTY PRAIRIE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN DECEMBER 2010 For more information, please contact: Benton County Natural Areas & Parks Department 360 SW Avery Ave. Corvallis, Oregon 97333-1192 Phone: 541.766.6871 - Fax: 541.766.6891 http://www.co.benton.or.us/parks/hcp This document was prepared for Benton County by staff at the Institute for Applied Ecology: Tom Kaye Carolyn Menke Michelle Michaud Rachel Schwindt Lori Wisehart The Institute for Applied Ecology is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization whose mission is to conserve native ecosystems through restoration, research, and education. P.O. Box 2855 Corvallis, OR 97339-2855 (541) 753-3099 www.appliedeco.org Suggested Citation: Benton County. 2010. Prairie Species Habitat Conservation Plan. 160 pp plus appendices. www.co.benton.or.us/parks/hcp Front cover photos, top to bottom: Kincaid’s lupine, photo by Tom Kaye Nelson’s checkermallow, photo by Tom Kaye Fender’s blue butterfly, photo by Cheryl Schultz Peacock larkspur, photo by Lori Wisehart Bradshaw’s lomatium, photo by Tom Kaye Taylor’s checkerspot, photo by Dana Ross Willamette daisy, photo by Tom Kaye Benton County Prairie Species HCP Preamble The Benton County Prairie Species Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) was initiated to bring Benton County’s activities on its own lands into compliance with the Federal and State Endangered Species Acts. Federal law requires a non-federal landowner who wishes to conduct activities that may harm (“take”) threatened or endangered wildlife on their land to obtain an incidental take permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. State law requires a non-federal public landowner who wishes to conduct activities that may harm threatened or endangered plants to obtain a permit from the Oregon Department of Agriculture.
  • VERTEBRATE ASSOCIATES of BLACK-TAILED PRAIRIE DOGS in OKLAHOMA 41 Vertebrate Associates of Black-Tailed Prairie Dogs in Oklahoma

    VERTEBRATE ASSOCIATES of BLACK-TAILED PRAIRIE DOGS in OKLAHOMA 41 Vertebrate Associates of Black-Tailed Prairie Dogs in Oklahoma

    VERTEBRATE ASSOCIATES OF BLACK-TAILED PRAIRIE DOGS IN OKLAHOMA 41 Vertebrate Associates of Black-Tailed Prairie Dogs in Oklahoma Jack D. Tyler Department of Biology, Cameron University, Lawton, OK 73505 John S. Shackford 429 E. Oak Cliff Drive, Edmond, OK 73034 During surveys of black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicianus) towns in Oklahoma in 1966-1967 and 1986-1989, 72 vertebrate associates were regularly encountered as well as 25 others that were found less often. The status of several species had apparently changed during this 23-year interval. Six avian species appeared to have increased in number, but declines in populations of seven other birds, five mammals, and one reptile were indicated. ©2002 Oklahoma Academy of Science INTRODUCTION The black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys afield at all seasons except during severe ludovicianus) originally ranged throughout cold spells, when prairie dogs were inactive. western Oklahoma (1,2). During the first We used several methods in attempting half of the 20th century, however, land- to locate Black-footed ferrets (Mustela owners eradicated most of the colonies, nigripes). These included examining prairie precipitating a drastic decline in prairie dog dog burrows for “trenching” (a ferret activity) numbers from millions [Bailey (1) estimated in winter,”“squeaking” while spotlighting at 800 million in Texas alone in 1905] to only a night, and inspecting unused irrigation pipes few thousand. The objectives of this study stacked near dogtowns with the aid of a were to document the occurrence of verte- flashlight. However, we found no evidence brate species found in Oklahoma prairie dog of this rare species in Oklahoma.
  • Curriculum Vita Kenneth T

    Curriculum Vita Kenneth T

    CURRICULUM VITA KENNETH T. WILKINS Personal Faculty office: Department of Biology, Baylor University, Waco, Texas 76798-7388 (254) 710-2911, FAX: (254) 710-2969 Administrative office: Graduate School, Baylor University, Waco, Texas 76798-7264 (254) 710-3588, FAX: (254) 710-3870 e-mail: [email protected] Education B.S., Biology, University of Texas at Arlington, 1974 M.S., Wildlife & Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University, 1977 Ph.D., Zoology, University of Florida, 1982 Professional Experience Associate Dean of Graduate Studies and Research, Baylor Graduate School; Professor (tenured), Depts. of Biology and Geology, and in Institute of Biomedical Studies, Baylor University, June 2006-present. Courses taught: Mammalogy, Comparative Chordate Anatomy, Vertebrate Biology, Vertebrate Paleontology, Graduate Seminars in Biology, Graduate Proseminars in Interdisciplinary Scholarship. Associate Dean of Graduate Studies and Research, Baylor Graduate School; Professor (tenured) and Interim Graduate Program Director (Biology), Depts. of Biology and Geology, and in Institute of Biomedical Studies, Baylor University, September 2003-May 2006. Courses taught: Mammalogy, Comparative Chordate Anatomy, Vertebrate Natural History, Vertebrate Paleontology, Graduate Seminars in Biology, Graduate Proseminars in Interdisciplinary Teaching and Interdisciplinary Scholarship. Associate Dean of Graduate Studies and Research, Baylor Graduate School; Professor (tenured), Depts. of Biology and Geology, and in Institute of Biomedical Studies, Baylor University, September 2000-2003. Courses taught: Mammalogy (taught in Waco and at Chapala Ecology Station in Mexico), Comparative Chordate Anatomy, Vertebrate Natural History, Vertebrate Paleontology, Graduate Seminars in Biology, Graduate Proseminars in Interdisciplinary Teaching and Interdisciplinary Scholarship. Associate Dean of the Graduate School; Professor (tenured), Depts. of Biology and Geology, and in Institute of Biomedical Studies, Baylor University, June 1998-2000.
  • Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

    Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

    Monday, November 9, 2009 Part III Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Review of Native Species That Are Candidates for Listing as Endangered or Threatened; Annual Notice of Findings on Resubmitted Petitions; Annual Description of Progress on Listing Actions; Proposed Rule VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:08 Nov 06, 2009 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\09NOP3.SGM 09NOP3 jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS3 57804 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 215 / Monday, November 9, 2009 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR October 1, 2008, through September 30, for public inspection by appointment, 2009. during normal business hours, at the Fish and Wildlife Service We request additional status appropriate Regional Office listed below information that may be available for in under Request for Information in 50 CFR Part 17 the 249 candidate species identified in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. General [Docket No. FWS-R9-ES-2009-0075; MO- this CNOR. information we receive will be available 9221050083–B2] DATES: We will accept information on at the Branch of Candidate this Candidate Notice of Review at any Conservation, Arlington, VA (see Endangered and Threatened Wildlife time. address above). and Plants; Review of Native Species ADDRESSES: This notice is available on Candidate Notice of Review That Are Candidates for Listing as the Internet at http:// Endangered or Threatened; Annual www.regulations.gov, and http:// Background Notice of Findings on Resubmitted endangered.fws.gov/candidates/ The Endangered Species Act of 1973, Petitions; Annual Description of index.html.