DOCSLIB.ORG

JACKRABBITS and OTHER HARES James E

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
JACKRABBITS and OTHER HARES James E University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln The aH ndbook: Prevention and Control of Wildlife Wildlife Damage Management, Internet Center for Damage 1-1-1994 JACKRABBITS AND OTHER HARES James E. Knight Extension Wildlife Specialist, Animal and Range Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana 59717 Knight, James E., "JACKRABBITS AND OTHER HARES" (1994). The Handbook: Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage. Paper 54. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmhandbook/54 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Wildlife Damage Management, Internet Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in The aH ndbook: Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. James E. Knight Extension Wildlife Specialist Animal and Range Sciences JACKRABBITS AND Montana State University Bozeman, Montana 59717 OTHER HARES Fig. 1. Blacktail jackrabbit, Lepus californicus (left); whitetail jackrabbits, L. townsendii (middle); showshoe hare, L. americanus (right). Damage Prevention and Frightening Trapping Control Methods Guard dogs. Body-gripping and leghold traps. Repellents Box traps. Exclusion Ammonium soaps, capsaicin, naphtha- Shooting Fencing. lene, thiram, tobacco dust, ziram. Spotlighting and day shooting are Tree trunk guards. Toxicants effective where legal. Cultural Methods Anticoagulants (where registered). Hunting. Manipulation of habitat. Fumigants Other Methods Planting of less desirable crops. None are registered. Predators. PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF WILDLIFE DAMAGE — 1994 Cooperative Extension Division Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources University of Nebraska - Lincoln United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Animal Damage Control D-81 Great Plains Agricultural Council Wildlife Committee a b c Fig. 2. Range of the (a) whitetail jackrabbit, (b) blacktail jackrabbit, and (c) snowshoe hare. Identification in size. This nonnative hare is brown- Where food and shelter are available ish gray year-round. in one place, no major daily movement Three major species of jackrabbits of hares occurs. When food areas and occur in North America (Fig. 1). These shelter areas are separated, morning hares are of the genus Lepus and are Range and evening movements may be represented primarily by the blacktail The whitetail jackrabbit is found observed. Daily movements of 1 to 2 jackrabbit, the whitetail jackrabbit, and mainly in the north central and north- miles (1.6 to 3.2 km) each way are the snowshoe hare. Other members of western United States and no further fairly common. In dry seasons, 10-mile this genus include the antelope jack- south than the extreme north central (16-km) round trips from desert to rabbit and the European hare. Hares part of New Mexico and southern alfalfa fields have been reported. have large, long ears, long legs, and a Kansas (Fig. 2a).The blacktail jack- larger body size than rabbits. rabbit is found mainly in the south- Damage The whitetail jackrabbit is the largest western United States and the hare in the Great Plains, having a head southern Great Plains, and no further Hares consume 1/2 to 1 pound (1.1 to and body length of 18 to 22 inches (46 north than central South Dakota and 2.2 kg) of green vegetation each day. to 56 cm) and weighing 5 to 10 pounds southern Washington (Fig. 2b). Snow- Significant damage occurs when hare (2.2 to 4.5 kg). It is brownish gray in shoe hares occupy the northern concentrations are attracted to summer and white or pale gray in regions of North America, including orchards, gardens, ornamentals, or winter. The entire tail is white. The Canada, Alaska, the northern conti- other agricultural crops. High jack- blacktail jackrabbit, somewhat smaller nental United States, and the higher rabbit populations can also damage than its northern cousin, weighs only 3 elevations as far south as New Mexico range vegetation. to 7 pounds (1.3 to 3.1 kg) and is 17 to (Fig. 2c). Antelope jackrabbits are Most damage to gardens, landscapes, 21 inches (43 to 53 cm) long. It has a found only in southern Arizona, New or agricultural crops occurs in areas grayish-brown body, large black- Mexico, and western Mexico. The adjacent to swamps or rangeland nor- tipped ears, and a black streak on the European hare is found only in south- mally used by hares. Damage may be top of its tail. The snowshoe hare is 13 ern Quebec, New York, and other temporary and usually occurs when to 18 inches (33 to 46 cm) long and New England states. natural vegetation is dry. Green vege- weighs 2 to 4 pounds (0.9 to 1.8 kg). It General Biology, tation may be severely damaged dur- has larger feet than the whitetail and ing these dry periods. blacktail jackrabbits. The snowshoe Reproduction, and turns white in winter and is a dark Behavior Orchards and ornamental trees and brown during the summer. Its ears are shrubs are usually damaged by smaller than those of the other hares. Members of the genus Lepus are born overbrowsing, girdling, and stripping The antelope jackrabbit is 19 to 21 well-furred and able to move about. of bark, especially by snowshoe hares. inches (48 to 53 cm) long and weighs 6 Little or no nest is prepared, although This type of damage is most common to 13 pounds (2.7 to 5.9 kg). Its ears are the young are kept hidden for 3 to 4 during winter in northern areas. extremely large and its sides are a pale days. Females may produce up to 4 Rangeland overbrowsing and over- white. The European hare is the largest litters per year with 2 to 8 young per grazing can occur any time jackrabbit of the hares in the Northeast, weighing litter. Reproductive rates may vary numbers are high. Eight jackrabbits are 7 to 10 pounds (3.1 to 4.5 kg) and from year to year depending on estimated to eat as much as one sheep, reaching 25 to 27 inches (63 to 68 cm) environmental conditions. and 41 jackrabbits as much as one cow. D-82 Estimates of jackrabbit populations gizers and high-tensile wire will mini- Repellents run as high as 400 jackrabbits per mize cost and maximize effectiveness. Since state pesticide registrations vary, square mile (154/km2) extending over Tree Trunk Guards. The use of indi- check with your local Cooperative several hundred square miles. Range vidual protectors to guard the trunks Extension or USDA-APHIS-ADC damage can be severe in such situa- of young trees or vines may also be office for information on repellents le- tions, especially where vegetation pro- considered a form of exclusion. gal in your area. ductivity is low. Among the best of these are cylinders Various chemical repellents are offered made from woven wire netting. as a means of reducing or preventing Legal Status Twelve- to 18-inch-wide (30.5- to 45.7- hare damage to trees, vines, or farm cm) strips of 1-inch (2.5-cm) mesh Jackrabbits are considered nongame and garden crops. Repellents make poultry netting can be formed into cyl- animals in most states and are not protected plants distasteful to jack- inders around trees. Cylinders should protected by state game laws. A few rabbits. A satisfactory repellent must be anchored with lath or steel rods and states protect jackrabbits through also be noninjurious to plants. regulations. Most states in which braced away from the trunk to prevent snowshoe hares occur have some rabbits from pressing them against the In the past, a variety of repellents have regulations protecting them. Consult trees and gnawing through them. been recommended in the form of paints, smears, or sprays. Many of local wildlife agencies to determine the Types of tree protectors commercially these afford only temporary protection legal status of the species before apply- available include aluminum, nylon and must be reapplied too often to ing controls. mesh wrapping, and treated jute card- warrant their use. Other, more per- board. Aluminum foil, or even ordi- sistent materials have caused injurious nary sacking, has been wrapped and Damage Prevention and effects to the treated plants. Some tied around trees with effective results. Control Methods chemical substances such as lime- Wrapping the bases of haystacks with sulphur, copper carbonate, and asphalt Exclusion 3-foot-high (0.9-m) poultry netting pro- emulsions have provided a certain Fencing. Exclusion is most often vides excellent protection. amount of protection and were harm- accomplished by the construction of less to the plants. These are less com- Cultural Methods fences and gates around the area to be monly used today and have been protected. Woven wire or poultry net- Habitat Manipulation. In areas replaced by various commercial prepa- ting should exclude all hares from the where jackrabbit or hare damage is rations such as ammonium soaps, cap- area to be protected. To be effective, likely to occur, highly preferred crops saicin, dried blood, napthalene, use wire mesh of less than 1 1/2 inches such as alfalfa, young cotton plants, thiram, tobacco dust, and ziram, (3.8 cm), 30 to 36 inches (76 to 91 cm) lettuce, and young grape vines are which are probably more effective. high, with at least the bottom 6 inches usually most damaged. Crops with Repellents are applied during either (15 cm) buried below ground level. large mature plants, such as corn, usu- the winter dormant season or summer Regular poultry netting made of 20- ally are not damaged once they grow growing season. Recommendations gauge wire can provide protection for beyond the seedling stage. Where pos- vary accordingly. 5 to 7 years or more. Although the ini- sible, avoid planting vulnerable crops Be sure to use repellents according to tial cost of fences appears high—about near historically high hare populations.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Faunal Remains
    CHAPTER 13 FAUNAL REMAINS Judi L. Cameron, Consultant, Jennifer A. Waters, Desert Archaeology, Inc., Barnet Pavao-Zuckerman and Vince M. LaMotta, Arizona State Museum, and Peter D. Schulz, University of California at Davis Large numbers of animal bones were found dur- environmental modification (such as caliche-coating ing the Rio Nuevo Archaeology project. Analysts and root-etching) on each bone also was noted. examined a sample of the bones to determine how Taxonomic identifications were based on com- humans utilized animals over the course of the last parisons with a comparative collection, as well as 4,000 years. Cameron studied animal bone from Early with the aid of published keys (for mammal bones, Agricultural, Early Ceramic, and Hohokam contexts, Gilbert 1980; Olsen 1964; for bird bones, Cohen and while Waters identified bone recovered from the Serjeantson 1996; Gilbert et al. 1981; Olsen 1979). Tucson Presidio, AZ BB:13:13 (ASM), and from a Taxonomic information on fragments that could not Chinese gardeners’ well at the San Agustín Mission be identified to order or below consisted primarily locus of the Clearwater site, AZ BB:13:6 (ASM). of the definition of size categories within classes. The Pavao-Zuckerman and LaMotta analyzed bone from size categories for mammals were defined as follows: Pima features at the San Agustín Mission locus, Clear- small mammal fragments were woodrat- to rabbit- water site, and Schulz identified the fish bone recov- sized, medium mammal fragments were bobcat-/ ered from the Chinese gardener’s well. canid-sized, and large mammal fragments were deer-sized. Elements that fell in size between canid and jackrabbit were placed in a medium-small mam- FAUNAL REMAINS FROM PREHISTORIC mal category.
    [Show full text]
  • Mammal Watching in Northern Mexico Vladimir Dinets
    Mammal watching in Northern Mexico Vladimir Dinets Seldom visited by mammal watchers, Northern Mexico is a fascinating part of the world with a diverse mammal fauna. In addition to its many endemics, many North American species are easier to see here than in USA, while some tropical ones can be seen in unusual habitats. I travelled there a lot (having lived just across the border for a few years), but only managed to visit a small fraction of the number of places worth exploring. Many generations of mammologists from USA and Mexico have worked there, but the knowledge of local mammals is still a bit sketchy, and new discoveries will certainly be made. All information below is from my trips in 2003-2005. The main roads are better and less traffic-choked than in other parts of the country, but the distances are greater, so any traveler should be mindful of fuel (expensive) and highway tolls (sometimes ridiculously high). In theory, toll roads (carretera quota) should be paralleled by free roads (carretera libre), but this isn’t always the case. Free roads are often narrow, winding, and full of traffic, but sometimes they are good for night drives (toll roads never are). All guidebooks to Mexico I’ve ever seen insist that driving at night is so dangerous, you might as well just kill yourself in advance to avoid the horror. In my experience, driving at night is usually safer, because there is less traffic, you see the headlights of upcoming cars before making the turn, and other drivers blink their lights to warn you of livestock on the road ahead.
    [Show full text]
  • CANAAN VALLEY NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE April 2007
    AMENDED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT HUNT PROGRAM PROPOSAL CANAAN VALLEY NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE April 2007 U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Canaan Valley National Wildlife Refuge Tucker County, West Virginia ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/HUNTING CANAAN VALLEY NWR TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES/TABLES ....................................................................................................... vi LIST OF ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................ vii I. Introduction..........................................................................................................................1 II. Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action .........................................................................5 A. Proposed Action.......................................................................................................5 B. Purpose.....................................................................................................................5 C. Need for the Proposed Action..................................................................................6 III. Proposed Action and Its Alternatives ..................................................................................6 A. Summary of the Alternatives ...................................................................................7 B. Alternatives Dismissed from Consideration............................................................7 C. Description of Alternatives......................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • Mammals of the Rincon Mountain District, Saguaro National Park
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Mammals of the Rincon Mountain District, Saguaro National Park Natural Resource Report NPS/SODN/NRR—2011/437 ON THE COVER Jaguar killed in Rincon Mountains in 1902, photographed at saloon in downtown Tucson. Photograph courtesy Arizona Historical Society. Mammals of the Rincon Mountain District, Saguaro National Park Natural Resource Report NPS/SODN/NRR—2011/437 Author Don E. Swann With contributions by Melanie Bucci, Matthew Caron, Matthew Daniels, Ronnie Sidner, Sandy A. Wolf, and Erin R. Zylstra Saguaro National Park 3693 South Old Spanish Trail Tucson, Arizona 85730-5601 Editing and Design Alice Wondrak Biel Sonoran Desert Network 7660 E. Broadway Blvd., Suite 303 Tucson, AZ 85710 August 2011 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service’s Natural Resource Stewardship and Science offi ce, in Fort Collins, Colo- rado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate high-priority, current natural resource management information with managerial application. The series targets a general, diverse audience, and may contain NPS policy considerations or address sensitive issues of management applicability. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the informa- tion is scientifi cally credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner.
    [Show full text]
  • North American Game Birds Or Animals
    North American Game Birds & Game Animals LARGE GAME Bear: Black Bear, Brown Bear, Grizzly Bear, Polar Bear Goat: bezoar goat, ibex, mountain goat, Rocky Mountain goat Bison, Wood Bison Moose, including Shiras Moose Caribou: Barren Ground Caribou, Dolphin Caribou, Union Caribou, Muskox Woodland Caribou Pronghorn Mountain Lion Sheep: Barbary Sheep, Bighorn Deer: Axis Deer, Black-tailed Deer, Sheep, California Bighorn Sheep, Chital, Columbian Black-tailed Deer, Dall’s Sheep, Desert Bighorn Mule Deer, White-tailed Deer Sheep, Lanai Mouflon Sheep, Nelson Bighorn Sheep, Rocky Elk: Rocky Mountain Elk, Tule Elk Mountain Bighorn Sheep, Stone Sheep, Thinhorn Mountain Sheep Gemsbok SMALL GAME Armadillo Marmot, including Alaska marmot, groundhog, hoary marmot, Badger woodchuck Beaver Marten, including American marten and pine marten Bobcat Mink North American Civet Cat/Ring- tailed Cat, Spotted Skunk Mole Coyote Mouse Ferret, feral ferret Muskrat Fisher Nutria Fox: arctic fox, gray fox, red fox, swift Opossum fox Pig: feral swine, javelina, wild boar, Lynx wild hogs, wild pigs Pika Skunk, including Striped Skunk Porcupine and Spotted Skunk Prairie Dog: Black-tailed Prairie Squirrel: Abert’s Squirrel, Black Dogs, Gunnison’s Prairie Dogs, Squirrel, Columbian Ground White-tailed Prairie Dogs Squirrel, Gray Squirrel, Flying Squirrel, Fox Squirrel, Ground Rabbit & Hare: Arctic Hare, Black- Squirrel, Pine Squirrel, Red Squirrel, tailed Jackrabbit, Cottontail Rabbit, Richardson’s Ground Squirrel, Tree Belgian Hare, European
    [Show full text]
  • Lepus Flavigularis) in Oaxaca, Mexico
    Journal of Mammalogy, 87(4):748–756, 2006 HOME RANGE AND SOCIAL BEHAVIOR OF THE ENDANGERED TEHUANTEPEC JACKRABBIT (LEPUS FLAVIGULARIS) IN OAXACA, MEXICO VERO´ NICA FARI´AS,* TODD K. FULLER,FERNANDO A. CERVANTES, AND CONSUELO LORENZO Department of Natural Resources Conservation, 160 Holdsworth Way, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003-9285, USA (VF, TKF) Laboratorio de Mastozoologı´a, Instituto de Biologı´a, Universidad Nacional Auto´noma de Me´xico, Coyoaca´n, Me´xico D.F. 04510, Me´xico (VF, FAC) Departamento de Ecologı´a y Sistema´tica Terrestre, El Colegio de la Frontera Sur, San Cristo´bal de Las Casas, Chiapas 29290, Me´xico (CL) Present address of VF: Laboratorio de Ana´lisis Espaciales, Instituto de Biologı´a, Universidad Nacional Auto´noma de Me´xico, Coyoaca´n, Me´xico D.F. 04510, Me´xico We studied the home-range and core-area size and overlap of Tehuantepec jackrabbits (Lepus flavigularis) by radiotracking 32 individuals between May 2001 and April 2003 in savanna habitat in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, Oaxaca, Mexico. Annual home-range and core-area sizes averaged 55 ha 6 8 SE and 8 6 1 ha for 10 adults of both sexes using the 95% and 50% fixed-kernel isopleths, respectively. Seasonal home ranges varied widely for adults, from 15 to 111 ha for females and from 24 to 166 ha for males. Juvenile males had larger seasonal home ranges than did juvenile females (X ¼ 80 and 24 ha). For adult jackrabbits, seasonal home ranges were larger during the 1st year compared to those of the 2nd year of study (X ¼ 87 and 49 ha), particularly for females.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Knowledge and Conservation of Endangered and Critically Endangered Lagomorphs Worldwide
    THERYA, 2015, Vol. 6 (1): 11-30 DOI: 10.12933/therya-15-225, ISSN 2007-3364 Estado del conocimiento y conservación de lagomorfos en peligro y críticamente en peligro a nivel mundial State of knowledge and conservation of endangered and critically endangered lagomorphs worldwide Consuelo Lorenzo 1* , Tamara M. Rioja-Paradela 2 and Arturo Carrillo-Reyes 3 1El Colegio de La Frontera Sur, Unidad San Cristóbal. Carretera Panamericana y Periférico Sur s/n, Barrio de María Auxiliadora. San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Chiapas, 29290, México. E-mail: [email protected] (CL) 2Universidad de Ciencias y Artes de Chiapas. Libramiento Norte Poniente 1150, Colonia Lajas Maciel. Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Chiapas, 29000, México. E-mail: [email protected] (TMRP) 3Oikos: Conservación y Desarrollo Sustentable, A. C. Bugambilias 5, San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Chiapas, 29267, México. E-mail: [email protected] (ACR) *Corresponding author Introduction: Lagomorphs (rabbits, hares, and pikas) are widely distributed in every continent of the world, except Antarctica. They include 91 species: 31 rabbits of the genera Brachylagus , Bunolagus , Caprolagus , Nesolagus , Pentalagus , Poelagus , Prolagus , Pronolagus , Romerolagus, and Sylvilagus ; 32 hares of the genus Lepus and 28 pikas of the genus Ochotona . According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN 2014), the list of threatened species of lagomorphs includes one extinct, three critically endangered, ten endangered, %ve near threatened, %ve vulnerable, 61 of least concern, and six with de%cient data. Although a rich diversity of lagomorphs and endemic species exists, some of the wild populations have been declining at an accelerated rate, product of human activities and climate change.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix Lagomorph Species: Geographical Distribution and Conservation Status
    Appendix Lagomorph Species: Geographical Distribution and Conservation Status PAULO C. ALVES1* AND KLAUS HACKLÄNDER2 Lagomorph taxonomy is traditionally controversy, and as a consequence the number of species varies according to different publications. Although this can be due to the conservative characteristic of some morphological and genetic traits, like general shape and number of chromosomes, the scarce knowledge on several species is probably the main reason for this controversy. Also, some species have been discovered only recently, and from others we miss any information since they have been first described (mainly in pikas). We struggled with this difficulty during the work on this book, and decide to include a list of lagomorph species (Table 1). As a reference, we used the recent list published by Hoffmann and Smith (2005) in the “Mammals of the world” (Wilson and Reeder, 2005). However, to make an updated list, we include some significant published data (Friedmann and Daly 2004) and the contribu- tions and comments of some lagomorph specialist, namely Andrew Smith, John Litvaitis, Terrence Robinson, Andrew Smith, Franz Suchentrunk, and from the Mexican lagomorph association, AMCELA. We also include sum- mary information about the geographical range of all species and the current IUCN conservation status. Inevitably, this list still contains some incorrect information. However, a permanently updated lagomorph list will be pro- vided via the World Lagomorph Society (www.worldlagomorphsociety.org). 1 CIBIO, Centro de Investigaça˜o em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos and Faculdade de Ciˆencias, Universidade do Porto, Campus Agrário de Vaira˜o 4485-661 – Vaira˜o, Portugal 2 Institute of Wildlife Biology and Game Management, University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Gregor-Mendel-Str.
    [Show full text]
  • Lagomorphs: Pikas, Rabbits, and Hares of the World
    LAGOMORPHS 1709048_int_cc2015.indd 1 15/9/2017 15:59 1709048_int_cc2015.indd 2 15/9/2017 15:59 Lagomorphs Pikas, Rabbits, and Hares of the World edited by Andrew T. Smith Charlotte H. Johnston Paulo C. Alves Klaus Hackländer JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY PRESS | baltimore 1709048_int_cc2015.indd 3 15/9/2017 15:59 © 2018 Johns Hopkins University Press All rights reserved. Published 2018 Printed in China on acid- free paper 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Johns Hopkins University Press 2715 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland 21218-4363 www .press .jhu .edu Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Smith, Andrew T., 1946–, editor. Title: Lagomorphs : pikas, rabbits, and hares of the world / edited by Andrew T. Smith, Charlotte H. Johnston, Paulo C. Alves, Klaus Hackländer. Description: Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press, 2018. | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2017004268| ISBN 9781421423401 (hardcover) | ISBN 1421423405 (hardcover) | ISBN 9781421423418 (electronic) | ISBN 1421423413 (electronic) Subjects: LCSH: Lagomorpha. | BISAC: SCIENCE / Life Sciences / Biology / General. | SCIENCE / Life Sciences / Zoology / Mammals. | SCIENCE / Reference. Classification: LCC QL737.L3 L35 2018 | DDC 599.32—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017004268 A catalog record for this book is available from the British Library. Frontispiece, top to bottom: courtesy Behzad Farahanchi, courtesy David E. Brown, and © Alessandro Calabrese. Special discounts are available for bulk purchases of this book. For more information, please contact Special Sales at 410-516-6936 or specialsales @press .jhu .edu. Johns Hopkins University Press uses environmentally friendly book materials, including recycled text paper that is composed of at least 30 percent post- consumer waste, whenever possible.
    [Show full text]
  • PETITION to LIST the WHITE-SIDED JACKRABBIT (Lepus Callotis) UNDER the U.S
    PETITION TO LIST THE WHITE-SIDED JACKRABBIT (Lepus callotis) UNDER THE U.S. ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT White-sided Jackrabbit photo, courtesy of Cesar Mendez. In the Office of Endangered Species U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service United States Department of Interior Petitioner: WildEarth Guardians 312 Montezuma Ave. Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 (505) 988-9126 October 9, 2008 WildEarth Guardians Petition to List 1 White-sided Jackrabbit Under the ESA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In the United States the white-sided jackrabbit is found in an extremely restricted area of New Mexico, where it is known only from within 20 miles of the international border with Mexico in southern Hidalgo County. The white-sided jackrabbit’s historical distribution in Hidalgo County consisted of 46.3 square miles. This jackrabbit was found in the southern portion of two valleys in Hidalgo County: the Animas Valley and the Playas Valley, which are separated by the Animas and San Luis mountains. Current surveys indicate that the population in the Playas Valley is extirpated. Populations in the Animas Valley have declined dramatically since the first comprehensive surveys conducted in 1976. In 1976 the estimated population of white-sided jackrabbits in both the Animas and Playas Valleys totaled 340 individuals. In 1976, a 63 km survey route resulted in the observation of 100 individuals. In 1981, this same route was surveyed and 45 individuals were observed. Surveys from 1990-1995 counted less than five white- sided jackrabbits per year. In 1995 only one individual was observed in the Animas Valley, and none were found in the Playas Valley.
    [Show full text]
  • Native & Naturalized Shoreland Plantings for New Hampshire
    Native Shoreland/Riparian Buffer Plantings for New Hampshire* * This list is referenced in Env-Wq 1400 Shoreland Protection as Appendix D Common Growth Light Soil Associated Birds and Mammals Latin Name Height Rooting Habitat Name(s) Rate Preference Preference (Cover, Nesting or Food) and Food Value Trees American Basswood Rich woods, valleys, Wildlife: Pileated woodpecker, wood duck, Medium-Large Full/Part Shade (American Linden) Tilia americana Moderate Deep Moist gentle slopes other birds; deer, rabbit, squirrel 60-100’ or Full Sun Food: Seeds, twigs Wildlife: Blue jay, chickadees, nuthatches, quail, ruffed grouse, tufted titmouse, wild Fagus Medium-Large Full/Part Shade Rich woods, turkey, wood duck, woodpeckers; bear, American Beech Slow Shallow Dry or Moist grandifolia 60-90’ or Full Sun well-drained lowlands chipmunk, deer, fox, porcupine, snowshoe hare, squirrel Food: Nuts, buds, sap Wildlife: Downy woodpecker, mockingbird, American purple finch, ring-necked pheasant, rose- Ostrya Small Full/Part Shade Hophornbeam Slow Shallow Dry or Moist Rich woods breasted grosbeak, ruffed grouse, wild turkey, virginiana 20-40’ or Full Sun wood quail; deer, rabbit, squirrel (Ironwood) Food: Nuts, buds, seeds Rich woods, forested Wildlife: Quail, ruffed grouse, wood duck; American Hornbeam Carpinus Small/Shrubby Full/Part Shade Dry, Moist, Flood (Blue Slow Moderate wetlands, ravines, beaver, deer, squirrel caroliniana 20-40’ or Full Sun Tolerant Beech/Musclewood) streambanks Food: Seeds, buds Wildlife: Bluebird, brown thrasher, catbird, American
    [Show full text]
  • Demography of Snowshoe Hare Cycles in Canada's Boreal Forest
    © 2020 The Authors. The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc., on behalf of the Ecological Society of America. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. DEMOGRAPHY OF SNOWSHOE HARE CYCLES IN CANADA’S BOREAL FOREST Madan K. Oli , Charles J. Krebs, Alice J. Kenney, Rudy Boonstra, Stan Boutin, and James E. Hines Study Description For 45 yr in the undisturbed ecosystem of the Kluane boreal forest (Yukon, Canada) we have carried out mark–recapture studies on snowshoe hares in spring and fall to determine the mechanisms behind their classic 9–10- yr pop- ulation cycles. Experimental manipulations of food, predators, and stress have shown that predation is the dominant mechanism behind these cycles, and that predators reduce hare reproduction by chronic stress associated with predator chases. Our attention has now turned to behavioral ecology of predator–preda- tor and predator–hare interactions and the physiology and neurobiology of stress in female hares in a boreal forest affected by rapid climate change. Oli, M. K., C. J. Krebs, A. J. Kenney, R. Boonstra, S. Boutin, and J. E Hines. 2020. Demography of Snowshoe Hare Cycles in Canada’s Boreal Forest. Bull Ecol Soc Am 101(2):e01678. https ://doi.org/10.1002/bes2.1678 Article e01678 Photo Gallery April 2020 1 Photo Gallery Photo 1. Coyote (Canis latrans). Coyotes are one of the major predators of snowshoe hares in the Yukon boreal forest.
    [Show full text]