DOCSLIB.ORG

Redwood Creek Watershed Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Redwood Creek Watershed Analysis REDWOOD CREEK WATERSHED ANALYSIS March, 1997 Di\.ision of Resource Management and Science Rcd~ooodNariorrtrl u~itlS~atc Parks Arcah. C'ali fomia prepared by: Dave Anderson, Fisheries Biologist Leone1 Arguello, Botanist Dave Best, GIs Coordinator Greg Bundros, Geologist Crisley Handly, Programs Clerk Barry Hili, Supervisory Geologist Terry Hofstra, Chief of Resource Management and Science Randy Klein, Hydrologist Jason Lowe, Fish and Wildwe Biologist (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) Mary Ann Madej, Research Geologist (U. S. Geological Service) Vicki Ozaki, Geologist Jim Popenoe, Soils Scientist Howard Sakai, Supervisory Ecologist Darci Short, Geologist Ann King Smith, Archaeologist Becca Smith, Geologist Terry Spreiter, Supervisory Geologist Sabra Steinberg, Wildlife Biologist Rick Wallen, Fish and Wildlife Biologist Judy Wartella, GIs Specialist 4- Redwood Creek 1/97 Watershed Analysis 1 Table of Contents Addendum ................................................................v ExecutiveSummary .........................................................1 btmduction ...............................................................3 Watershed ................................................................ 4 Location and Physiography .............................................. 4 Climate and Hydrology .................................................4 -10 gy .............................................................. 5 FloraandFauna ....................................................... 5 CulturalHistory ....................................................... 7 Floods, Sediment, and Land Use .............................................. 9 RecentLargeFloods ................................................... 9 Erosion and Sediment Yield ............................................. 10 Erosional Processes ............................................. 10 Landslides ............................................... 10 Fluvial Hillslope Erosion .................................... 11 Channel Storage .......................................... 12 Sediment Budget ..........................................12 Recent Trends in Sediment Loads ........................................ 14 Suspended Sediment ................................................ IS Bedload .......................................................16 Landuse ............................................................ 17 Timber Harvest ..............................., .................. 17 Roads ........................................................ 19 Mining .......................................................20 Livestock Grazing ............................................. -21 Watershed Restoration ............................................22 NaturalResourceIssues .................................................... 24 Issue 1: Resmabion of Streamride Redwoods .................................24 KeyQuestions: ........................................................ 25 1 . How many streamside redwoods died during and after recentfloods7 .................................................. 25 2 . Why did these redwoods die? ......................................... 25 3 . How was the damage to redwood groves related to flooding ahd sediment in Redwood Creek? ...........................-26 4 . How are floods and sediment related to upstream land use? ................... 27 Redwood Creek 1/97 Watershed Analysis 5 . What is the potential for hture damage to streamside redwoods? ....................29 a . Is the channel recovering fiom aggradation during theflwdsof1964. 19757 ................................... 29 b . Are streamflow and sediment loads changing? .......................29 c . What effects have changes in land use had on stream flow and sediment loads? ........................................... 29 d . How can hture resource damage be reduced effectively? ............... 31 Issue 2: Protection curd Restoration of Aquatic Habitai .......................... 32 Key Questions: ........................................................ 32 I . What conditions limit fish distriiution and populations? .......................32 2. How are these conditions related to land use? .............................36 3. How have these conditions changed in recent years? ........................ 36 Issue 3: hiection of Threatened and Endangered Wddlife ...................... 40 Key Questions: ........................................................ 40 1. What habitat characteristics are needed to maintain species of special concern and other important wildlife species? .......................... 40 Bald Eagle ............................................... 40 Marbled Murrelet .........................................41 Northern Spotted Owl .......................................41 American Peregrine Falcon .................................. 42 Amphibians .............................................-42 Humboldt Marten & Pacific Fisher ............................ 43 California Brown Pelican ....................................-44 Western Snowy Plover .................................... -44 Large Carnivores ......................................... 45 Survey and Managed Species ................................ 45 Rare Plants ............................................ ;. 46 Unique Hab'itats-The Bald Hills ...............................46 2 . What management activities affect those habitat characteristics? ...............47 hue4: Timber Production .................................................48 .Issues: Tohm.......................................................... 50 Conclusion ...............................................................52 References ........................................... Appendix A Wildlife Species in the vicinity of Redwood Creek Watershed ................... 61 Appendix B State and Federally listed threatened, endangered and sensitive fish and wildlife specie. in the vicinity of Redwood Creek Watershed ........69 Appendix C Sediment budga for the Redwood Creek Watershed, 1954-1980 ................. 71 .... .... Redwood Creek 1/97 Watershed Analysis List of Figures After hix Location map of Redwood Creek watershed ................................ .4 Graph A-Annual rain at Prairie Creek State Park (PCSP) Graph B-Mean monthly at PCSP .................................... 5 Graph showing longitudinal profile of Redwood Creek ......................... 12 Graphs show selected channel cross-section surveys, Redwood Creek ...........:. 12 Graph shows cumulative change in streambed elevation along Redwood Creek 1973-1988 .................................................... 12 Graph A - Suspended-sediment residuals for Redwood Creek at Orick, 1974- 1992 Graph B - Suspended-sediment residuals for Redwood Creek at O'Kane, 1974-1992 ................................. ;.................. 15 Graph A-Bedload residuals for Redwood Creek at Orick, 1974-1992 Gnph B-Bedload residuals for Redwood Creek at OXane, 1974- 1992 .......... 17 Map of existing roads in the Redwood Creek watershed, 1992 ................... 19 Map of roads in the Redwood Creek watershed upstream of Redwood National and Statepar...................................................... 19 Graph showing ratio of streamflow per unit area on Redwood Creek to streamflow per unit area on Little Lost Man Creek, 1975-1988 ........................ .29 Graph showing ratio of total sediment yield at Chick to total sediment yield at OXane. ..................................................... .29 Map of bamm to.fish passage, Redwood Creek and tributaries .................. 33 Graph showing water temperatures in relation to salmonid habitat. .... :.. ..........33 .. Graph A-Frequency of pools and rifnes, Redwood Creek, 1977,1983,1986. Graph B-Average pool depth, Redwood Creek, 1977,1983,1986 ................ 36 Graph showing annual timber production in Humboldt County, 1947-1992, ........ .49 List of Tables Sediment budget, Redwood Creek watershed, 1954-1980 ...................... 13 Table A-Annual streamflow, suspended-sediment loads, and bedloads at daily sediment stations, 1971-1 992, Orick. Table B-Annual streamflow, suspended-sediment loads, and bedloads at daily sediment stations, 1971-1992, O'Kane ............................... 16 Roads utilized for timber harvest in the Redwood Creek watershed, 1978-1992 ...... 21 Streams and stream crossings within timber harvest boundaries in the Redwood Creek watershed, 1978-1992 ..............................22 Average annual acres of timber harvest in the Redwood Creek watershed 1971-1978and1979-1992 ........................................30 Table A-Annual growth and cut of redwood and Douglas-fir, California, 1952 and 1976. Table B-Annual growth and cut of redwood and Douglas-fir, California, 1952and1976 ................................................... .-$ Redwood Creek 1/97 ' Watershed Analysis iv ADDENDUM NEW YEAR'S STORM DECEMBER 1996 - JANUARY 1997 A major storm struck Northwestern California in late December, 1996 and early January, 1997. Extensive flooding occurred along most major rivers in the region. Rainfall totals for the month of December, 1996, at Orick and at the Minor Creek earthflow were about 27 inches. Peak streamflow on Redwood Creek was about 6,400 cubic feet per second at the OKane station and about 43,000 cubic feet per second at Orick. Based on existing flood frequency relations, the peak flow at Orick had a recurrence interval between 15 and 20 years. Damage assessments are underway at this time (January, 1997). Many road
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Final Report, Joint Fire Science Program, AFP 2004-2
    Final report, Joint Fire Science Program, AFP 2004-2 Project Number: 04-2-1-95 Project Title: The influences of post-fire salvage logging on wildlife populations. Project Location: Davis Lake Fire, Deschutes National Forest in central Oregon Co-Principal Investigators: John P. Hayes and John Cissel. Contact Information: (541) 737-0946; [email protected] This final report details findings to date, and lists proposed and accomplished deliverables. Details on the study background, objectives, and methods are presented in the Annual Report of the Co-operative Forest Ecology Research (CFER) program (at http://www.fsl.orst.edu/cfer/research/pubs/06AnnualReport/pdfs/Manning.pdf) which can be considered a contribution to the final report. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS TO DATE Bird population responses • A total of 34 species of birds registered during two seasons of point counts. Of these, 15 species and one genus were abundant enough to warrant analysis. • Significant effects of salvage logging on bird abundance were demonstrated for 6 species. • For species whose abundances did differ, differences were probably related to effects on foraging and nesting habitat components. • Several species (brown creepers, yellow-rumped warblers, and 2 species of woodpeckers) were more abundant in unsalvaged stands. The western wood pewee also trended in that direction. While this response might be expected for woodpeckers and creepers which feed primarily on insects found in dead trees, and which nest in cavities of dead trees, the responses of warblers and pewees is harder to explain. • Species which feed and nest primarily on the ground, specifically the fox sparrow and the dark-eyed junco, were more abundant in salvaged stands.
    [Show full text]
  • Life History Account for Siskiyou Chipmunk
    California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Interagency Wildlife Task Group SISKIYOU CHIPMUNK Tamias siskiyou Family: SCIURIDAE Order: RODENTIA Class: MAMMALIA M058 Written by: C. Polite, T. Harvey Reviewed by: M. White Edited by: M. White DISTRIBUTION, ABUNDANCE AND SEASONALITY Locally common, permanent resident of mixed conifer, redwood, and Douglas-fir forests from sea level to 2000 m (0-6562 ft) in the northwestern region of the Klamath and North Coast Ranges (Johnson 1943). SPECIFIC HABITAT REQUIREMENTS Feeding: Herbivorous; forages principally on log-strewn forest floors and into adjacent chaparral; climbs freely on trunks and lower branches of large trees (Johnson 1943). Food habits of T. siskiyou unknown, but the closely related T. senex feeds on fungi and seeds of forbs, shrubs, and conifers. Cover: Uses brush, logs, stumps, snags, thickets, rock piles, and burrows as cover. Reproduction: Lines burrows with dry grass and moss. Also uses tree nests while raising young. Water: No data found. Pattern: Uses conifer forests, especially in mature, open stands with shrubs and large-diameter logs, stumps, and snags available. SPECIES LIFE HISTORY Activity Patterns: Diurnal activity. May become torpid during winter months. Seasonal Movements/Migration: Not migratory Home Range: In Washington, home ranges of T. townsendii females overlapped very little, suggesting exclusive use (Meredith 1972). In Oregon, home ranges varied from 0.5-1.0 ha (1.25-2.47 ac) (Gashwiler 1965). Territory: No data found; probably same as home range (Meredith 1972). Reproduction: Breeds from April to July; most births occur in May. One litter/yr of 4-5 young (range 3-6).
    [Show full text]
  • Mammal Watching in the Pacific Northwest, Summer 2019 with Notes on Birding, Locations, Sounds, and Chasing Chipmunks
    Mammal watching in the Pacific Northwest, summer 2019 With notes on birding, locations, sounds, and chasing chipmunks Keywords: Sciuridae, trip report, mammals, birds, summer, July Daan Drukker 1 How to use this report For this report I’ve chosen not to do the classic chronological order, but instead, I’ve treated every mammal species I’ve seen in individual headers and added some charismatic species that I’ve missed. Further down I’ve made a list of hotspot birding areas that I’ve visited where the most interesting bird species that I’ve seen are treated. If you are visiting the Pacific Northwest, you’ll find information on where to look for mammals in this report and some additional info on taxonomy and identification. I’ve written it with a European perspective, but that shouldn’t be an issue. Birds are treated in detail for Mount Rainier and the Monterey area, including the California Condors of Big Sur. For other areas, I’ve mentioned the birds, but there must be other reports for more details. I did a non-hardcore type of birding, just looking at everything I came across and learning the North American species a bit, but not twitching everything that was remotely possible. That will be for another time. Every observation I made can be found on Observation.org, where the exact date, location and in some cases evidence photos and sound recordings are combined. These observations are revised by local admins, and if you see an alleged mistake, you can let the observer and admin know by clicking on one of the “Contact” options in the upper right panel.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Species Included in ACE-II Native and Harvest Species Richness Counts (Appendix C)
    Appendix C. Species included in native and harvest species richness counts. Animal Species Included in the Range Analysis....... ............................ ................................. C-01 Animal Species with Range Models Not Included in the Analysis......................... ................. C-20 Animal Species without Range Models, therefore not Included in the Analysis......... ............ C-20 Fish Species Included in the Range Analysis.................................................................... ....... C-30 Fish with Ranges not Included in the Analysis because neither Native nor Harvest................ C-33 Native Plants Species Included in the Range Analysis............................................................. C-34 CWHR Species and ACEII hexagon analysis of ranges. Of the 1045 species in the current CWHR species list used in ACE-II, 694 had range models digitized for use. Of those, 688 are included in this hexagon analysis of the state of Cailfornia, with 660 of those classified as native to California. There were no additional species picked up offshore due to the use of hexagon centroid points. Animal species INCLUDED in this analysis. CODE COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME A001 CALIFORNIA TIGER SALAMANDER Ambystoma californiense NATIVE A002 NORTHWESTERN SALAMANDER Ambystoma gracile NATIVE A003 LONG-TOED SALAMANDER Ambystoma macrodactylum NATIVE A047 EASTERN TIGER SALAMANDER Ambystoma tigrinum INTROD A021 CLOUDED SALAMANDER Aneides ferreus NATIVE A020 SPECKLED BLACK SALAMANDER Aneides flavipunctatus NATIVE A022
    [Show full text]
  • Forest-Floor Disturbance Reduces Chipmunk (Tamias Spp.) Abundance Two Years After Variable-Retention Harvest of Pacific Northwestern Forests
    Forest-floor Disturbance Reduces Chipmunk (Tamias spp.) Abundance Two Years after Variable-retention Harvest of Pacific Northwestern Forests Wilk, R. J., Harrington, T. B., Gitzen, R. A., & Maguire, C. C. (2015). Forest-Floor Disturbance Reduces Chipmunk (Tamias spp.) Abundance Two Years after Variable-Retention Harvest of Pacific Northwestern Forests. Northwest Science, 89(1), 75-92. doi:10.3955/046.089.0106 10.3955/046.089.0106 Northwest Scientific Association Version of Record http://cdss.library.oregonstate.edu/sa-termsofuse Randall J. Wilk1, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Olympia Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 3625 93rd Avenue SW, Olympia, Washington 98512 Timothy B. Harrington, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Olympia Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 3625 93rd Avenue SW, Olympia, Washington 98512 Robert A. Gitzen2 , School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195 and Chris C. Maguire3, College of Forestry, Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331 Forest-floor Disturbance Reduces Chipmunk (Tamias spp.) Abundance Two Years after Variable-retention Harvest of Pacific Northwestern Forests Abstract We evaluated the two-year effects of variable-retention harvest on chipmunk (Tamias spp.) abundance (Nˆ) and habitat in mature coniferous forests in western Oregon and Washington because wildlife responses to density/pattern of retained trees remain largely unknown. In a randomized complete-block design, six treatments were applied to 13-ha units at three sites (blocks): four retention levels of original basal area (BA) in an aggregated tree pattern (100, 75, 40, and 15%) and two retention levels in a dispersed tree pattern (15 and 40%).
    [Show full text]
  • Forest-Floor Disturbance Reduces Chipmunk (Tamias Spp.) Abundance Two Years After Variable-Retention Harvest of Pacific Northwestern Forests Author(S): Randall J
    Forest-Floor Disturbance Reduces Chipmunk (Tamias spp.) Abundance Two Years after Variable-Retention Harvest of Pacific Northwestern Forests Author(s): Randall J. Wilk, Timothy B. Harrington, Robert A. Gitzen and Chris C. Maguire Source: Northwest Science, 89(1):75-92. Published By: Northwest Scientific Association DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3955/046.089.0106 URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3955/046.089.0106 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Randall J. Wilk1, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Olympia Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 3625 93rd Avenue SW, Olympia, Washington 98512 Timothy B. Harrington, U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Olympia Forestry Sciences Laboratory, 3625 93rd Avenue SW, Olympia, Washington 98512 Robert A. Gitzen2 , School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195 and Chris C.
    [Show full text]
  • Complete List of Amphibian, Reptile, Bird and Mammal Species in California
    Complete List of Amphibian, Reptile, Bird and Mammal Species in California California Department of Fish and Game Sept. 2008 (updated) This list represents all of the native or introduced amphibian, reptile, bird and mammal species known in California. Introduced species are marked with “I”, harvest species with “HA”, and vagrant species or species with extremely limited distributions with *. The term “introduced”, as used here, represents both accidental and intentional introductions. Subspecies are not included on this list. The most current list of species and subspecies with special management status is available from the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Taxonomy and nomenclature used within the list are the same as those used within both the CNDDB and CWHR software programs and data sets. If a discrepancy exists between this list and the ones produced by CNDDB, the CNDDB list can be presumed to be more accurate as it is updated more frequently than the CWHR data set. ________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ AMPHIBIA (Amphibians) CAUDATA (Salamanders) AMBYSTOMATIDAE (Mole Salamanders and Relatives) Long-toed Salamander Ambystoma macrodactylum Tiger Salamander Ambystoma tigrinum I California Tiger Salamander Ambystoma californiense Northwestern Salamander Ambystoma gracile RHYACOTRITONIDAE (Torrent or Seep Salamanders) Southern Torrent Salamander Rhyacotriton
    [Show full text]
  • Chetco Bar Fire Salvage Project Final Environmental Assessment
    United States Department of Agriculture Chetco Bar Fire Salvage Project Final Environmental Assessment Rogue River-Siskiyou Gold Beach Forest Service National Forest Ranger District June 2018 For More Information Contact: Jessie Berner, Chetco Bar Fire Coordinator, Powers District Ranger Gold Beach Ranger District Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest 29279 Ellensburg Ave. Gold Beach, OR 97444 Phone: (541) 439-6201 Website: https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=53150 Email: [email protected] Fax: (541) 439-7704 Cover photo: Chetco Bar Fire on the Gold Beach Ranger District of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.
    [Show full text]
  • Mammal Inventory at Oregon Islands National Wildlife Refuge, Crook
    Mammal Inventory Report Crook Point, Oregon, 2009. Siskiyou Research Group Introduction and Study Area The Crook Point Unit of Oregon Islands National Wildlife Refuge is a 134-acre undeveloped coastal headland located approximately 12 miles south of Gold Beach, Oregon. Notwithstanding post-European settlement activities of livestock grazing and timber harvesting, Crook Point provides exceptional examples of coastal headland habitats, which have largely disappeared from Oregon as a result of development and conversion (Kagan 2002). Currently, Crook Point provides habitat for rare plant species such as Poa unilateralis, Lasthenia ornduffii, and Artemisia pycnocephala (Kagan 2002, Chan 2001, Bilderback 2008). Moreover, the associated offshore islands and rocks provide important nesting habitat for seabirds, haul-out and breeding areas for marine mammals, and suitable cliff habitat for nesting peregrine falcons (Ledig 2009). Saddle Rock, the largest island associated with Crook Point, provides nesting habitat for a large population of Leach’s storm petrels (PRBO 2004). There is evidence the Saddle Rock population is being decimated by mammalian predators (reference). In 2000 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) acquired this coastal headland making it the second mainland unit in the Oregon Islands National Wildlife Refuge system. Presently USFWS is focusing on site restoration, resource protection, and biological inventory, monitoring, and research. This mammal survey is part of an effort to document the biological diversity of Crook Point. Prior to this survey no systematic mammal inventory work has been conducted at Crook Point. Objectives The primary objective of this survey was to compile a mammalian species list for Crook Point using multiple detection methods of trapping, motion-triggered trail cameras, direct observation, and animal sign (prints, scat, excavations).
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
    Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Control Operator Training Manual Revised March 31, 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS Part 1 Page # Introduction 5 Wildlife “Damage” and Wildlife “Nuisance” 5 Part 2 History 8 Definitions 9 Rules and Regulations 11 Part 3 Business Practices 13 Part 4 Methods of Control 15 Relocation of Wildlife 16 Handling of Sick or Injured Wildlife 17 Wildlife That Has Injured a Person 17 Euthanasia 18 Transportation 19 Disposal of Wildlife 20 Migratory Birds 20 Diseases (transmission, symptoms, human health) 20 Part 5 Liabilities 26 Record Keeping and Reporting Requirements 26 Live Animals and Sale of Animals 26 Complaints 27 Cancellation or Non-Renewal of Permit 27 Part 6 Best Management Practices 29 Traps 30 Bodygrip Traps 30 Foothold Traps 30 Box Traps 31 Snares 31 Specialty Traps 32 Trap Sets 33 Bait and Lures 33 Equipment 33 Trap Maintenance and Safety 34 Releasing Nontarget Wildlife 34 2 Resources 36 Part 7 Species: Bats 38 Beaver 47 Coyote 49 Eastern Cottontail 52 Eastern Gray Squirrel 54 Eastern Fox Squirrel 56 Western (Silver) Gray Squirrel 58 Gray Fox 60 Red Fox 62 Mountain Beaver 64 Muskrat 66 Nutria 68 Opossum 70 Porcupine 72 Raccoon 74 Striped Skunk 77 Oregon Species List 79 Part 8 Acknowledgements 83 References and Resources 83 3 Part 1 Introduction Wildlife “Damage” and Wildlife “ Nuisance” 4 Introduction As Oregon becomes more urbanized, wildlife control operators are playing an increasingly important role in wildlife management. The continued development and urbanization of forest and farmlands is increasing the chance for conflicts between humans and wildlife.
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico J
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Mammalogy Papers: University of Nebraska State Museum, University of Nebraska State Museum 3-7-1975 Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico J. Knox Jones Jr. Texas Tech University Dilford C. Carter Texas Tech University Hugh H. Genoways University of Nebraska - Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/museummammalogy Part of the Biodiversity Commons, and the Zoology Commons Jones, J. Knox Jr.; Carter, Dilford C.; and Genoways, Hugh H., "Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico" (1975). Mammalogy Papers: University of Nebraska State Museum. 205. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/museummammalogy/205 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Museum, University of Nebraska State at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mammalogy Papers: University of Nebraska State Museum by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Copyright 1975, Texas Tech University. Used by permission. OCCASIONAL PAPERS THE MUSEUM TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY NUMBER 28 7 MARCH 1975 REVISED CHECKLIST OF NORTH AMERICAN MAMMALS NORTH OF MEXICO J. KNOX JONES, JR., DILFORD C. CARTER, AND HUGH H. GENOWAYS Faunal checklists provide useful ready references for many kinds of endeavors, both in the laboratory and in the field, and are particularly helpful to students. Since publication two years ago of our "Checklist of North American mammals north of Mexico" (Jones et al., 1973), demand for that list has exceeded the supply set aside for general dis­ tribution; additionally, published systematic studies in the interval necessitate several changes in the list.
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico, 1979 J
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Mammalogy Papers: University of Nebraska State Museum, University of Nebraska State Museum 12-14-1979 Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico, 1979 J. Knox Jones Jr. Dilford C. Carter Texas Tech University Hugh H. Genoways University of Nebraska - Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/museummammalogy Part of the Biodiversity Commons, and the Zoology Commons Jones, J. Knox Jr.; Carter, Dilford C.; and Genoways, Hugh H., "Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico, 1979" (1979). Mammalogy Papers: University of Nebraska State Museum. 206. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/museummammalogy/206 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Museum, University of Nebraska State at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mammalogy Papers: University of Nebraska State Museum by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. ,--- -- - Copyright 1977, Texas Tech University. Used by permission. OCCASIONAL PAPERS THE MUSEUM TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY N Ul\IBER 62 14 DECEMBER 1979 REVISED CHECKLIST OF NORTH AMERICAN MAMMALS NORTH OF MEXICO, 1979 J. KNOX J ONES, JR., DILFORD C. CARTER , AND H UGH H . G E NO W AYS Faunal checklis ts p ro vid e useful read y referen ces for many kinds of endeavors, both in th e laboratory and in th e field, and are par­ ticularl y helpful to stu den ts. Since publication more than four years ago of a " Revised checklis t o f North American mammals north of Mexico " (Jones et al.
    [Show full text]