DOCSLIB.ORG

A Checklist and Distribution Maps of the Amphibians and Reptiles of South Dakota

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Checklist and Distribution Maps of the Amphibians and Reptiles of South Dakota University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societies Nebraska Academy of Sciences 2000 A Checklist and Distribution Maps of the Amphibians and Reptiles of South Dakota Royce E. Ballinger University of Nebraska - Lincoln, [email protected] Justin W. Meeker University of Nebraska-Lincoln Marcus Thies University of Nebraska-Lincoln Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/tnas Part of the Life Sciences Commons Ballinger, Royce E.; Meeker, Justin W.; and Thies, Marcus, "A Checklist and Distribution Maps of the Amphibians and Reptiles of South Dakota" (2000). Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societies. 49. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/tnas/49 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Nebraska Academy of Sciences at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societiesy b an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. 2000. Transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences, 26: 29-46 A CHECKLIST AND DISTRIBUTION MAPS OF THE AMPmBIANS AND REPTILES OF SOUTH DAKOTA Royce E. Ballinger, Justin W. Meeker, and Marcus Thies School of Biological Sciences University of Nebraska-Lincoln Lincoln, Nebraska 68588-0118 rballinger1 @ unl.edu lent treatise on the distribution and ecology of the ABSTRACT turtles of the state in an unpublished dissertation. Fourteen species of amphibians and 30 species of reptiles Several other authors (Dunlap 1963, 1967, O'Roke 1926, are documented from South Dakota, based on the examina­ Peterson 1974, Smith 1963a, 1963b, 1966, Underhill tion of 7,361 museum specimen records. No species of the 1958) provided additional information on selected spe­ herpetofauna is endemic to the state, which contains a mix­ cies or regions, and several notes on distributions have ture of species from especially the southern and western appeared over the years. Various field guides (e.g. regions of the United States. Four amphibians (Ambystoma Conant and Collins 1998) report distributions of am­ tigrinum, Bufo cognatus, Pseudacris triseriata, and Rana phibians and reptiles at a very general level and with­ pipiens) and three reptiles (Chrysemys picta, Heterodon out documentation. For a state in the central region of nasicus, and Thamnophis radix) occur statewide in appropri­ ate habitats. Three amphibians and 11 reptiles reach their the country, field guides focusing either to the east or northern distributional limits in the state, and two amphib­ west are not always careful with the details of distribu­ ians reach their southern limits. Two amphibians and five tions in the plains. This is in part due to a paucity of reptiles reach their eastern range boundary, and two amphib­ technical literature, and this paper is intended to fill ians attain their western distributional limits. Based on an that gap. analysis of county records compared to potential species oc­ currences within the 66 counties in the state, only 55.5% of Occurring within South Dakota are two species of the species-by -county records exist in the museum-specimen salamanders, 12 species offrogs or toads, seven species voucher records. One species of salamander, Necturus of turtles, seven species of lizards, and 16 species of maculosus, lacks specific voucher specimens from the state, although it has been recorded on the Minnesota side of the snakes. No species is restricted to South Dakota, and Minnesota River in northeastern South Dakota. This paper most are typical of the Great Plains region. Many provides information that is intended to aid in the discovery species have at least one of their distributional limits of additional distributional data of South Dakota's within the state. Seven species occur throughout the herpetofauna. state (Ambystoma tigrinum, Bufo cognatus, Pseudacris triseriata, Rana pipiens, Heterodon nasicus, Thamno­ t t t phis radix, and Chrysemys picta). Distributional records are still minimal for several regions of the state, espe­ A recent comprehensive checklist of the amphib­ cially the north-central area. One purpose of this re­ ians and reptiles of South Dakota is not available, and port is to generate interest in documenting herpetiles this is the first attempt to map distributions ofherpetiles in counties where they are almost certainly present but in the state, based on museum specimens. The South for which no scientific documentation is currentlyavail­ Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks has pub­ able. Records in this report are based on museum lished recent semi-technical pamphlets on the snakes collections of actual specimens, rather than simply on (Thompson and Backlund 1998) and amphibians sight records, which are occasionally erroneous and not (Fischer et al. 1999) of South Dakota. Over (1923, subject to definitive verification. 1943) and Fishbeck and Underhill (1959) are the only papers that considered all herpetiles of the entire state. In the accounts below, species are arranged in al­ These papers are out of date and did not present map phabetical order (by scientific name) within popularly data of distributions. Timken (1968) provided an excel- recognized taxonomic groups or orders. Common names 29 30 R. E. Ballinger et al. conform to those recognized by Collins (1997). Infor­ verify identifications. Some errors may still exist, but mation given is generally limited to descriptions neces­ it is unlikely that we included data outside the prob­ sary for identification, as well as size, habitat, and able range of a particular species. We are confident notes on behavior or ecology that might assist future that the documented distributions provided here are collectors in obtaining new distributional records. We reasonably accurate. Locality records are noted with encourage such records to include the deposition of dots on the maps, except that in cases where the only specimens in museum research collections. record for the county had no specific locality data, a square was placed in the center of the county. MATERIALS AND METHODS Museums and associated personnel that provided We obtained records of herpetiles from 32 muse­ data included: Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadel­ ums in the U.S. that represent national collections or phia (Ted Daeschler and Tom Uzzell); American Mu­ from those likely to contain specimens from South Da­ seum of Natural History, New York City (Darrel Frost); kota. Most museums had fewer than a hundred speci­ Strecker Museum, Baylor University, Waco (Hobart mens from South Dakota, and the largest collection, Smith); Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pitts­ containing 4549 specimens, came from the collections burgh (John Wiens); California Academy of Sciences, made by researchers at the University of South Da­ San Francisco (Joe Slowinski and Barbara Stein); Field kota, especially through the efforts of the late Professor Museum of Natural History, Chicago (Harold Voris, Don Dunlap. That collection, which was in need of Alan Resetar, and Peter Lowther); Florida Museum of curation, has now been transferred to the University of Natural History, Gainesville (David Auth); Illinois Natu­ Nebraska State Museum, in Lincoln. All museum data ral History Survey, Champaign (Chris Phillips); Iowa combined provided records of 7,361 specimens. We State University, Ames (Bruce Menzel); James Ford plotted localities based on documentation provided in Bell Museum of Natural History, University of Minne­ the museum records. We also checked specimens with sota, Minneapolis (John Moriarty and Andrew Simons); suspected errors, in particular examining those of two Louisiana Museum of Natural History at Louisiana species-pairs that are easily confused (Rana pipiens State University, Baton Rouge (Doug Rossman); Natu­ and R. blairi; Thamnophis sirtalis and T. radix) to ral History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Ange- MCPHERSON EDMUNDS .~-«,.",--... ~ •....•...._----_ ••...• f'AlIl..K"\.t., .~ ,.. SPINK !)fUEL MELLE:rn:: / BENNET TODD Figure 1. Map of South Dakota showing names of counties. South Dakota amphibians and reptiles 31 les (David Kizirian); Milwaukee Public Museum (Rob­ of the tiger salamander are occasionally incorrectly ert Henderson); Museum of Comparative Zoology, referred to as mudpuppies but are considerably differ­ Harvard University, Cambridge (Jose Rosado); The ent in most of their biology as well as appearance. University of Kansas Natural History Museum, Lawrence (John Simmons); Museum of Southwestern 1. Ambystoma tigrinum (Tiger Salamander) Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque (Howard Snell and Tom Giermakowski); Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley (David Wake); Smithsonian National Museum ofNatu­ h;~f~}L=:~"~"~~"}'~-;I~i ral History, Washington, DC (Ron Heyer and Ron Crombie); The Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natu­ , I ..' 1 )"11- ",.], ral History, Norman (Laurie Vitt); Royal Ontario Mu­ seum, Toronto (Robert Murphy and Ross MacCulloch); San Diego Natural History Museum (Paisley Cato); Sternberg Museum of Natural History, Ft. Hays State University, Hays (Jerry Choate and Korrie Chapman); Texas Cooperative Wildlife Collection, Texas A&M Uni­ 1.. ...•...•1..._. i • versity, College Station (Lee Fitzgerald and Kathryn ,v··,···P<... < Vaughan); Museum of Texas Tech University, Lubbock '.t (Richard Monk); University of Colorado Museum,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Missouri's Toads and Frogs Booklet
    TOADSMissouri’s andFROGS by Jeffrey T. Briggler and Tom R. Johnson, Herpetologists www.MissouriConservation.org © 1982, 2008 Missouri Conservation Commission Equal opportunity to participate in and benefit from programs of the Missouri Department of Conservation is available to all individuals without regard to their race, color, national origin, sex, age or disability. Questions should be directed to the Department of Conservation, P.O. Box 180, Jefferson City, MO 65102, (573) 751-4115 (voice) or 800-735-2966 (TTY), or to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Division of Federal Assistance, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Mail Stop: MBSP-4020, Arlington, VA 22203. Cover photo: Eastern gray treefrog by Tom R. Johnson issouri toads and frogs are colorful, harmless, vocal and valuable. Our forests, prairies, rivers, swamps and marshes are Mhome to a multitude of toads and frogs, but few people know how many varieties we have, how to tell them apart, or much about their natural history. Studying these animals and sharing their stories with fellow Missourians is one of the most pleasurable and rewarding aspects of our work. Toads and frogs are amphibians—a class Like most of vertebrate animals that also includes amphibians, salamanders and the tropical caecilians, which are long, slender, wormlike and legless. frogs and Missouri has 26 species and subspecies (or toads have geographic races) of toads and frogs. Toads and frogs differ from salamanders by having an aquatic relatively short bodies and lacking tails at adulthood. Being an amphibian means that tadpole stage they live two lives: an aquatic larval or tadpole and a semi- stage and a semi-aquatic or terrestrial adult stage.
    [Show full text]
  • (1-5) Or LPN Proposed FY Timeframe Curre
    National Listing Workplan 7-Year Workplan (September 2016 Version) 12M: 12-month finding on a petition to list a species. If listing is warranted, we generally intend to proceed with a concurrent proposed Key to Action Types- listing rule and proposed critical habitat designation, if critical habitat is prudent and determinable. Discretionary Status Review: Status review undertaken by discretion of the Service. Results of the review may be to propose listing, make a species a candidate for listing, provide notice of a not warranted candidate assessment, or other action as appropriate. Proposed Listing Determination: For species that are already candidates for listing, a proposed listing determination would either propose the species for listing or provide notice of a not warranted finding. We generally intend to propose critical habitat designations concurrent with proposed listing rules, to the extent prudent and determinable. Final Listing Determination: For species that have already been proposed for listing, the final listing determination would either finalize or withdraw the proposed listing rule. We generally intend to finalize critical habitat designations concurrent with final listing rules, to the extent prudent and determinable. PCH: Proposed critical habitat rulemaking when not concurrent with a proposed listing rule. FCH: Final critical habitat rulemaking for previously proposed critical habitat. rPCH: Revised proposed critical habitat for previously proposed, but not finalized, critical habitat needing revision. Priority
    [Show full text]
  • Louisiana's Animal Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN)
    Louisiana's Animal Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) ‐ Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals ‐ 2020 MOLLUSKS Common Name Scientific Name G‐Rank S‐Rank Federal Status State Status Mucket Actinonaias ligamentina G5 S1 Rayed Creekshell Anodontoides radiatus G3 S2 Western Fanshell Cyprogenia aberti G2G3Q SH Butterfly Ellipsaria lineolata G4G5 S1 Elephant‐ear Elliptio crassidens G5 S3 Spike Elliptio dilatata G5 S2S3 Texas Pigtoe Fusconaia askewi G2G3 S3 Ebonyshell Fusconaia ebena G4G5 S3 Round Pearlshell Glebula rotundata G4G5 S4 Pink Mucket Lampsilis abrupta G2 S1 Endangered Endangered Plain Pocketbook Lampsilis cardium G5 S1 Southern Pocketbook Lampsilis ornata G5 S3 Sandbank Pocketbook Lampsilis satura G2 S2 Fatmucket Lampsilis siliquoidea G5 S2 White Heelsplitter Lasmigona complanata G5 S1 Black Sandshell Ligumia recta G4G5 S1 Louisiana Pearlshell Margaritifera hembeli G1 S1 Threatened Threatened Southern Hickorynut Obovaria jacksoniana G2 S1S2 Hickorynut Obovaria olivaria G4 S1 Alabama Hickorynut Obovaria unicolor G3 S1 Mississippi Pigtoe Pleurobema beadleianum G3 S2 Louisiana Pigtoe Pleurobema riddellii G1G2 S1S2 Pyramid Pigtoe Pleurobema rubrum G2G3 S2 Texas Heelsplitter Potamilus amphichaenus G1G2 SH Fat Pocketbook Potamilus capax G2 S1 Endangered Endangered Inflated Heelsplitter Potamilus inflatus G1G2Q S1 Threatened Threatened Ouachita Kidneyshell Ptychobranchus occidentalis G3G4 S1 Rabbitsfoot Quadrula cylindrica G3G4 S1 Threatened Threatened Monkeyface Quadrula metanevra G4 S1 Southern Creekmussel Strophitus subvexus
    [Show full text]
  • An Inventory of a Subset of Historically Known Populations of The
    Section 6 (Texas Traditional) Report Review Form emailed to FWS S6 coordinator (mm/dd/yyyy): 9/11/2017 TPWD signature date on report: 8/31/2017 Project Title: To provide more evidence for the presence/absence of the southern spot-tailed earless lizard (Holbrookia lacerata subcaudalis; STEL) in southern Texas. Final or Interim Report? Final Grant #: TX-E-165-R Reviewer Station: Austin ESFO Lead station concurs with the following comments: NA (reviewer from lead station) Interim Report (check one): Final Report (check one): Acceptable (no comments) Acceptable (no comments) Needs revision prior to final report (see Needs revision (see comments below) comments below) Incomplete (see comments below) Incomplete (see comments below) Comments: FINAL PERFORMANCE REPORT As Required by THE ENDANGERED SPECIES PROGRAM TEXAS Grant No. TX E-165-R (F14AP00824) Endangered and Threatened Species Conservation An Inventory of a Subset of Historically Known Populations of the Spot-tailed Earless Lizard (Holbrookia lacerata) Prepared by: Mike Duran Carter Smith Executive Director Clayton Wolf Director, Wildlife 31 August 2017 Final Report TPWD Contract #458178—31 August 2017 FINAL REPORT STATE: ____Texas_______________ GRANT NUMBER: ___ TX E-165-R-1__ GRANT TITLE: An Inventory of a Subset of Historically Known Populations of the Spot-tailed Earless Lizard (Holbrookia lacerata). REPORTING PERIOD: ____1 September 2014 to 31 August 2017 OBJECTIVE(S). To provide more evidence for the presence/absence of the southern spot-tailed earless lizard (Holbrookia lacerata subcaudalis; STEL) in southern Texas. Segment Objectives: Task 1. March 1 – June 30, 2015 – Spring surveys. Task 2. September 15 – October 31, 2015 – Fall surveys.
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Cited in Lizards Natural History Database
    Literature Cited in Lizards Natural History database Abdala, C. S., A. S. Quinteros, and R. E. Espinoza. 2008. Two new species of Liolaemus (Iguania: Liolaemidae) from the puna of northwestern Argentina. Herpetologica 64:458-471. Abdala, C. S., D. Baldo, R. A. Juárez, and R. E. Espinoza. 2016. The first parthenogenetic pleurodont Iguanian: a new all-female Liolaemus (Squamata: Liolaemidae) from western Argentina. Copeia 104:487-497. Abdala, C. S., J. C. Acosta, M. R. Cabrera, H. J. Villaviciencio, and J. Marinero. 2009. A new Andean Liolaemus of the L. montanus series (Squamata: Iguania: Liolaemidae) from western Argentina. South American Journal of Herpetology 4:91-102. Abdala, C. S., J. L. Acosta, J. C. Acosta, B. B. Alvarez, F. Arias, L. J. Avila, . S. M. Zalba. 2012. Categorización del estado de conservación de las lagartijas y anfisbenas de la República Argentina. Cuadernos de Herpetologia 26 (Suppl. 1):215-248. Abell, A. J. 1999. Male-female spacing patterns in the lizard, Sceloporus virgatus. Amphibia-Reptilia 20:185-194. Abts, M. L. 1987. Environment and variation in life history traits of the Chuckwalla, Sauromalus obesus. Ecological Monographs 57:215-232. Achaval, F., and A. Olmos. 2003. Anfibios y reptiles del Uruguay. Montevideo, Uruguay: Facultad de Ciencias. Achaval, F., and A. Olmos. 2007. Anfibio y reptiles del Uruguay, 3rd edn. Montevideo, Uruguay: Serie Fauna 1. Ackermann, T. 2006. Schreibers Glatkopfleguan Leiocephalus schreibersii. Munich, Germany: Natur und Tier. Ackley, J. W., P. J. Muelleman, R. E. Carter, R. W. Henderson, and R. Powell. 2009. A rapid assessment of herpetofaunal diversity in variously altered habitats on Dominica.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Ecology Provincial Resources
    MANITOBA ENVIROTHON WILDLIFE ECOLOGY PROVINCIAL RESOURCES !1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank: Olwyn Friesen (PhD Ecology) for compiling, writing, and editing this document. Subject Experts and Editors: Barbara Fuller (Project Editor, Chair of Test Writing and Education Committee) Lindsey Andronak (Soils, Research Technician, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada) Jennifer Corvino (Wildlife Ecology, Senior Park Interpreter, Spruce Woods Provincial Park) Cary Hamel (Plant Ecology, Director of Conservation, Nature Conservancy Canada) Lee Hrenchuk (Aquatic Ecology, Biologist, IISD Experimental Lakes Area) Justin Reid (Integrated Watershed Management, Manager, La Salle Redboine Conservation District) Jacqueline Monteith (Climate Change in the North, Science Consultant, Frontier School Division) SPONSORS !2 Introduction to wildlife ...................................................................................7 Ecology ....................................................................................................................7 Habitat ...................................................................................................................................8 Carrying capacity.................................................................................................................... 9 Population dynamics ..............................................................................................................10 Basic groups of wildlife ................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • Summer Movements of the Common Five-Lined Skink (Plestiodon Fasciatus) in the Northern Portion of Its Range
    Herpetological Conservation and Biology 13(3):743–752. Submitted: 3 July 2018; Accepted: 25 November 2018; Published: 16 December 2018. SUMMER MOVEMENTS OF THE COMMON FIVE-LINED SKINK (PLESTIODON FASCIATUS) IN THE NORTHERN PORTION OF ITS RANGE DANIEL J. BRAZEAU1 AND STEPHEN J. HECNAR1,2 1Department of Biology, Lakehead University, 955 Oliver Road, Thunder Bay, Ontario, P7B 5E1, Canada 2Corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected] Abstract.—Common Five-lined Skinks (Plestiodon [formerly Eumeces] fasciatus) are difficult to study due to their small size, secretive habits, and semi-fossorial natural history. Habitat selection and dispersal have been studied at several locations across the range of the species, but few details of movements are known. Our objectives were to use radio-telemetry to gain more insight into skink movements and to test the efficacy of small, lightweight transmitters that we externally attached. We fitted 31 skinks with transmitters that provided up to 16 consecutive days of dispersal information. Movements varied greatly among individuals with some staying close to initial capture sites while most moved tens to hundreds of meters over a short period of observation. We located most of the tracked individuals under cover of woody debris but found they were much more mobile than previous mark- recapture studies suggested. Our tracking supported the idea that traditional home ranges were not occupied, but instead most individuals made regular linear movements while returning to the same locations occasionally. Individuals spent on average just over 30% of their time underground, in grass tussocks, and inside standing trees near the end of the active season.
    [Show full text]
  • News Release Albuquerque, NM 87103 505/248-6911 505/248-6915 (Fax)
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Public Affairs Office PO Box 1306 News Release Albuquerque, NM 87103 505/248-6911 505/248-6915 (Fax) Southwest Region (Arizona ● New Mexico ● Oklahoma ●Texas) www.fws.gov/southwest/ For Release: May 23, 2011 Contacts: Alisa Shull, (512) 490-0057 Lesli Gray, (972) 569-8588 THE SPOT-TAILED EARLESS LIZARD MAY WARRANT PROTECTION UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT The spot-tailed earless lizard (Holbrookia lacerata) may warrant federal protection as a threatened or endangered species, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announced today, following an initial review of a petition seeking to protect the spot-tailed earless lizard under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Service finds that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that listing the spot-tailed earless lizard may be warranted. This finding is based on potential threats posed by predation from fire ants. Fire ants are known to adversely impact native fauna in general, including reptiles. Fire ants occur across a large part of the spot-tailed earless lizard’s range and may pose a threat through direct predation on adults, hatchlings and eggs. The spot-tailed earless lizard is divided into two distinct subspecies, based on morphological (physical) differences and geographic separation. The northern spot-tailed earless lizard subspecies (Holbrookia lacerata lacerata) historically occurred throughout the Edwards Plateau in Texas. The southern spot-tailed earless lizard (Holbrookia lacerata subcaudalis) historically occurred through south Texas into parts of Mexico’s States of Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, and Tamaulipas. The present population of the spot-tailed earless lizard’s population status is largely unknown.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Leopard Frogs Range from the Northern United States and Canada to the More Northern Parts of the Southwestern United States
    COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE Leopard Frogs ASSESSING HABITAT QUALITY FOR PRIORITY WILDLIFE SPECIES IN COLORADO WETLANDS Species Distribution Range Northern leopard frogs range from the northern United States and Canada to the more northern parts of the southwestern United States. With the exception of a few counties, they occur throughout Colorado. Plains leopard frogs have a much smaller distribution than northern leopard frogs, occurring through the Great Plains into southeastern Arizona and eastern Colorado. NORTHERN LEOPARD FROG © KEITH PENNER / PLAINS LEOPARD FROG © RENEE RONDEAU, CNHP RONDEAU, FROGRENEE © LEOPARD PLAINS / PENNER FROGKEITH © LEOPARD NORTHERN Two species of leopard frogs occur in Colorado. Northern leopard frogs (Lithobates pipiens; primary photo, brighter green) are more widespread than plains leopard frogs (L. blairi; inset). eral, plains leopard frogs breed in more Species Description ephemeral ponds, while northern leopard Identification frogs use semi-permanent ponds. Two leopard frogs are included in this Diet guild: northern leopard frog (Lithobates Adult leopard frogs eat primarily insects pipiens) and plains leopard frog (L. blairi). and other invertebrates, including They are roughly the same size (3–4 inches crustaceans, mollusks, and worms, as as adults). Northern leopard frogs can be well as small vertebrates, such as other green or brown and plains leopard frogs amphibians and snakes. Leopard frog are typically brown. Both species have two tadpoles are herbivorous, eating mostly light dorsolateral ridges along the back; in free-floating algae, but also consuming plains leopard frog there is a break in this some animal material. ridge near the rear legs. Conservation Status Preferred Habitats Northern leopard frog populations have Due to their complicated life history traits, declined throughout their range; they are leopard frogs occupy many habitats during listed in all western states and Canada different seasons and stages of develop- as sensitive, threatened, or endangered.
    [Show full text]
  • Section IV – Guideline for the Texas Priority Species List
    Section IV – Guideline for the Texas Priority Species List Associated Tables The Texas Priority Species List……………..733 Introduction For many years the management and conservation of wildlife species has focused on the individual animal or population of interest. Many times, directing research and conservation plans toward individual species also benefits incidental species; sometimes entire ecosystems. Unfortunately, there are times when highly focused research and conservation of particular species can also harm peripheral species and their habitats. Management that is focused on entire habitats or communities would decrease the possibility of harming those incidental species or their habitats. A holistic management approach would potentially allow species within a community to take care of themselves (Savory 1988); however, the study of particular species of concern is still necessary due to the smaller scale at which individuals are studied. Until we understand all of the parts that make up the whole can we then focus more on the habitat management approach to conservation. Species Conservation In terms of species diversity, Texas is considered the second most diverse state in the Union. Texas has the highest number of bird and reptile taxon and is second in number of plants and mammals in the United States (NatureServe 2002). There have been over 600 species of bird that have been identified within the borders of Texas and 184 known species of mammal, including marine species that inhabit Texas’ coastal waters (Schmidly 2004). It is estimated that approximately 29,000 species of insect in Texas take up residence in every conceivable habitat, including rocky outcroppings, pitcher plant bogs, and on individual species of plants (Riley in publication).
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystem Disturbance and Wildlife Conservation in Western Grasslands
    Evolution and management of the North American grassland herpetofauna Norman J. Scott, Jr.1 Abstract.—The modern North American grassland herpetofauna has evolved in situ since the Miocene. Pleistocene glaciation had a minimal effect except in the far North, with only minor displacements of some species. South of the glaciers, winters were warmer and summers cooler than at present. Snake- like reptiles, leaping frogs, and turtle “tanks” are favored adaptive types in uniform dense grassland. A typical fauna consists of about 10-15 species, mostly snakes. Special habitat components, such as streams and ponds, bare ground, sand, trees, prairie dog towns, and rocky outcrops, add distinct suites of species. There is also an increase in species number from north to south and west to east. Grassland use and management, such as prairie dog con- trol, off-road vehicle traffic, and brush removal, have demonstrable effects on the herpetofauna. However, the effects of three of the most widespread management procedures—water development, grazing, and fire—are largely unstudied. Although highly fragmented, the majority of species of grassland reptiles and amphibians are widespread and populations are resilient, but there are special conservation problems associated with Pleistocene relicts with limited distributions. INTRODUCTION Parmenter et al. (1994) documented the excep- tionally high vertebrate diversity in southwestern At the time of the arrival of Europeans in North rangelands, and they emphasized that preserva- America, much of the interior of the continent was tion of this biodiversity in the remaining habitat covered by grasslands. The heart of this great fragments will depend on skillful management of expanse was the tallgrass prairie of the human activities in a fashion that integrates faunal midwestern United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Prairie Skink Plestiodon Septentrionalis
    COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Prairie Skink Plestiodon septentrionalis in Canada SPECIAL CONCERN 2017 COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC. 2017. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Prairie Skink Plestiodon septentrionalis in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. xiii + 48 pp. (http://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=en&n=24F7211B-1). Previous report(s): COSEWIC 2004. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the prairie skink Eumeces septentrionalis in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 22 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm). Bredin, E.J. 1989. COSEWIC status report on northern prairie skink Eumeces septentrionalis septentrionalis in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 41 pp. Production note: COSEWIC would like to acknowledge Connie Browne for writing a draft of the status report on Prairie Skink (Plestiodon septentrionalis) in Canada, prepared under contract with Environment Canada and Climate Change. This report was overseen by Kristiina Ovaska, Co-chair of the COSEWIC Amphibians and Reptiles Specialist Subcommittee. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment and Climate Change Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: 819-938-4125 Fax: 819-938-3984 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Ếvaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur le Scinque des prairies (Plestiodon septentrionalis) au Canada.
    [Show full text]