DOCSLIB.ORG

DNR Letterhead

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ATU F N RA O L T R N E E S M O T U STATE OF MICHIGAN R R C A P DNR E E S D MI N DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CHIG A JENNIFER M. GRANHOLM LANSING REBECCA A. HUMPHRIES GOVERNOR DIRECTOR Michigan Frog and Toad Survey 2009 Data Summary There were 759 unique sites surveyed in Zone 1, 218 in Zone 2, 20 in Zone 3, and 100 in Zone 4, for a total of 1097 sites statewide. This is a slight decrease from the number of sites statewide surveyed last year. Zone 3 (the eastern half of the Upper Peninsula) is significantly declining in routes. Recruiting in that area has become necessary. A few of the species (i.e. Fowler’s toad, Blanchard’s cricket frog, and mink frog) have ranges that include only a portion of the state. As was done in previous years, only data from those sites within the native range of those species were used in analyses. A calling index of abundance of 0, 1, 2, or 3 (less abundant to more abundant) is assigned for each species at each site. Calling indices were averaged for a particular species for each zone (Tables 1-4). This will vary widely and cannot be considered a good estimate of abundance. Calling varies greatly with weather conditions. Calling indices will also vary between observers. Results from the evaluation of methods and data quality showed that volunteers were very reliable in their abilities to identify species by their calls, but there was variability in abundance estimation (Genet and Sargent 2003). Calling Indices of abundance will be reported as in past summaries but not used to actually estimate abundance of species. In April 2009, revisions to the Michigan endangered species list were finalized and published. The Blanchard’s cricket frog was listed as state threatened. Previously this species has been considered “special concern” which provided no legal protection except as provided in the Director’s Order regulating take on reptiles and amphibians. Now the species is legally protected from harm as defined in Part 365 of PA 451, Michigan Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act. This protection includes fines for violators. Fowler’s toads were non existant in this year’s survey. This is a concern and efforts to investigate Fowler’s toad populations will be made next year. Mink frog observations continue to be low. There is a concern that data is not representative of the actual population due to the difficulty of surveying for this species. They tend to call at very early hours of the morning. There are still thoughts among the scientific community that mink frogs are actually declining in Michigan (J. Harding, pers. comm.). Pickerel frog occurrence remains low, possibly a result of confusion between this species’ calls and that of the Northern leopard frog. Pickerel frog occurrences have been known to be lower than the leopard frog in other Great Lakes states. Northern leopard frog observations continue to increase. Occurrences of the Cope’s gray treefrog continue to be low, relative to the Eastern gray treefrog. There is speculation that the continued NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION Keith J. Charters, Chair ● Mary Brown ● Hurley J. Coleman, Jr. ● John Madigan ● Timothy L. Nichols ● J. R. Richardson ● Frank Wheatlake STEVENS T. MASON BUILDING ● P.O. BOX 30028 ● LANSING, MICHIGAN 48909-7528 www.michigan.gov/dnr ● (517) 373-2329 Great Lakes, Great Times, Great Outdoors! decline in observations of Cope’s gray treefrogs may be due to the need to verify the observation. Surveyors may not be able to verify the call or may just not want to bother doing it. Data on wood frog observations should be interpreted cautiously due to their brief calling periods and associated difficulty of conducting the first run when wood frogs are calling. Green frog observations continue to show larger annual increases and decreases than other species. Reasons for this bouncing pattern are unknown at this time. Using all the routes that submitted data in 2009 the percentage of sites at which a species was heard per route was calculated for each zone (Tables 1-4). A statewide, 14-year analysis was done this year. The average number of sites per route at which a species was heard for all the routes was charted by year for each species. Trends were calculated for each species using the number of sites per route rather than changes in this factor as in the past. Negative trend numbers indicate a decline and vice versa. For most species the trends are similar between zones. Most species’ trends appear to be stable (Table 5). It is apparent, from statistical confidences (not presented in this report), that the number of years of data may still be inadequate to accurately assess populations of frogs and toads in Michigan, but research projects focusing on these populations are welcome and necessary. Table 1. 2009 SUMMARY OF FROG AND TOAD SURVEY Zone 1 - 759 sites Fowler’s Wood W. Spring Northern Pickerel American Gray **Cope’s **Blanchard’s Mink Green Bullfrog Toad Frog Chorus Peeper Leopard Frog Toad Treefrog Gray Cricket Frog Frog n=759 n=301ƒ n=759 Frog n=759 Frog n=759 n=759 n=759 Treefrog Frog n=0ƒ n=759 n=759 n=759 n=759 n=659ƒ Mean* 0 1.82 1.65 2.15 1.27 1.25 1.66 1.90 1.1 1.71 0 1.40 2.88 No. 0 259 389 619 157 7 314 526 10 5 0 478 146 Sites % 0 34.1 51.2 81.6 20.7 0.9 41.3 69.3 1.3 0.8 0 63.0 19.2 Sites * Mean calling index of sites where species were heard ƒ n is the number of sites within that species range - calculations include sites in native range of species only ** Confirmed observations Table 2. 2009 SUMMARY OF FROG AND TOAD SURVEY Zone 2 - 218 sites Fowler’s Wood W. Chorus Spring Northern Pickerel American Gray **Cope’s Blanchard’s Mink Green Bullfrog Toad Frog Frog Peeper Leopard Frog Toad Treefrog Gray Cricket Frog Frog n=218 n=120ƒ n=218 n=218 n=218 Frog n=218 n=218 n=218 Treefrog Frog n=0ƒ n=218 n=218 n=218 n=0ƒ Mean* 0 2.04 1.66 2.28 1.40 1.00 1.42 1.85 0 0 0 1.23 0 No. 0 87 72 191 23 2 59 122 0 0 0 107 0 Sites % Sites 0 39.9 33.0 87.6 10.6 0.9 27.1 56.0 0 0 0 49.1 0 * Mean calling index of sites where species were heard ƒ n is the number of sites within that species range - calculations include sites in native range of species only ** Confirmed observations Table 3. 2009 SUMMARY OF FROG AND TOAD SURVEY Zone 3 -20 sites Fowler’s Wood W. Chorus Spring Northern Pickerel American Gray **Cope’s Blanchard’s Mink Green Bullfrog Toad Frog Frog Peeper Leopard Frog Toad Treefrog Gray Cricket Frog Frog n=20 n=0ƒ n=20 n=20 n=20 Frog n=20 n=20 n=20 Treefrog Frog n=20ƒ n=20 n=20 n=20 n=0ƒ ---- 2.0 0 2.08 0 0 1.2 1.58 0 ---- 1.0 2.3 0 Mean* No. ---- 1 0 16 0 0 8 10 0 ---- 2 13 0 Sites % Sites ---- 5.0 0 80.0 0 0 40.0 50.0 0 ---- 10.0 65.0 0 Mean calling index of sites where species were heard ƒ n is the number of sites within that species range - calculations include sites in native range of species only ** Confirmed observations Table 4. 2009 SUMMARY OF FROG AND TOAD SURVEY Zone 4 - 100 sites Fowler’s Wood W. Chorus Spring Northern Pickerel American Gray **Cope’s Blanchard’s Mink Green Bullfrog Toad Frog Frog Peeper Leopard Frog Toad Treefrog Gray Cricket Frog Frog n=100 n=0ƒ n=100 n=100 n=100 Frog n=100 n=100 n=100 Treefrog Frog n=100ƒ n=100 n=100 n=100 n=0ƒ ---- 1.70 1.14 2.14 1.15 0 1.70 2.04 0 ------ 1.0 1.28 0 Mean* No. ---- 37 27 91 13 0 39 57 0 ------ 3 53 0 Sites % Sites ---- 37.0 27.0 91.0 13.0 0 39.0 57.0 0 ------ 3.0 53.0 0 * Mean calling index of sites where species were heard ƒ n is the number of sites within that species range - calculations include sites in native range of species only ** Confirmed observations Table 5. Trends of Michigan Frogs & Toads 1996-2009 SPECIES MEAN TREND (no. sites/route) WOODFR 3.6 3.4 WESTCF 4.4 4.9 SPRIPE 8.5 9.2 NORTLF 1.4 1.2 PICKFR 0.1 0.1 AMERTO 4.0 4.3 GRAYTR 6.7 7.8 FOWLTO 0.2 0.5 COPEGT 0.1 0.3 BLANCF 0.1 0.1 MINKFR 0.1 -0.1 GREFRO 5.7 6.3 BULLFR 1.1 1.4 All updated data summaries, phenologies, range maps and other information on the Michigan Frog and Toad Survey are featured on the DNR web site: http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/. Click on “Wildlife and Habitat” then “Research Projects” then “Frog and Toad Survey”. All questions concerning these data summaries and/or the Michigan Frog and Toad Survey should be directed to: Lori Sargent DNR - Wildlife Division P.O. Box 30180 Lansing, MI 48909 (517) 373-9418 e-mail: [email protected] Literature Cited Genet, K and L.G.
Recommended publications
  • Boreal Toad (Bufo Boreas Boreas) a Technical Conservation Assessment

    Boreal Toad (Bufo Boreas Boreas) a Technical Conservation Assessment

    Boreal Toad (Bufo boreas boreas) A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project May 25, 2005 Doug Keinath1 and Matt McGee1 with assistance from Lauren Livo2 1Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, P.O. Box 3381, Laramie, WY 82071 2EPO Biology, P.O. Box 0334, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309 Peer Review Administered by Society for Conservation Biology Keinath, D. and M. McGee. (2005, May 25). Boreal Toad (Bufo boreas boreas): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/ assessments/borealtoad.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank Deb Patla and Erin Muths for their suggestions during the preparation of this assessment. Also, many thanks go to Lauren Livo for advice and help with revising early drafts of this assessment. Thanks to Jason Bennet and Tessa Dutcher for assistance in preparing boreal toad location data for mapping. Thanks to Bill Turner for information and advice on amphibians in Wyoming. Finally, thanks to the Boreal Toad Recovery Team for continuing their efforts to conserve the boreal toad and documenting that effort to the best of their abilities … kudos! AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES Doug Keinath is the Zoology Program Manager for the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, which is a research unit of the University of Wyoming and a member of the Natural Heritage Network. He has been researching Wyoming’s wildlife for the past nine years and has 11 years experience in conducting technical and policy analyses for resource management professionals.
  • Developing Methods to Mitigate Chytridiomycosis, an Emerging Disease of Amphibians

    Developing Methods to Mitigate Chytridiomycosis, an Emerging Disease of Amphibians

    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2013 Developing methods to mitigate chytridiomycosis, an emerging disease of amphibians Geiger, Corina C Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich ZORA URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-86534 Dissertation Published Version Originally published at: Geiger, Corina C. Developing methods to mitigate chytridiomycosis, an emerging disease of amphibians. 2013, University of Zurich, Faculty of Science. ❉❡✈❡❧♦♣✐♥❣ ▼❡❤♦❞ ♦ ▼✐✐❣❛❡ ❈❤②✐❞✐♦♠②❝♦✐✱ ❛♥ ❊♠❡❣✐♥❣ ❉✐❡❛❡ ♦❢ ❆♠♣❤✐❜✐❛♥ Dissertation zur Erlangung der naturwissenschaftlichen Doktorw¨urde (Dr. sc. nat.) vorgelegt der Mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Fakult¨at der Universit¨atZ¨urich von Corina Claudia Geiger von Chur GR Promotionskomitee Prof. Dr. Lukas Keller (Vorsitz) Prof. Dr. Heinz-Ulrich Reyer Dr. Benedikt R. Schmidt (Leitung der Dissertation) Dr. Matthew C. Fisher (Gutachter) Z¨urich, 2013 ❉❡✈❡❧♦♣✐♥❣ ▼❡❤♦❞ ♦ ▼✐✐❣❛❡ ❈❤②✐❞✐♦♠②❝♦✐✱ ❛♥ ❊♠❡❣✐♥❣ ❉✐❡❛❡ ♦❢ ❆♠♣❤✐❜✐❛♥ Corina Geiger Dissertation Institute of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies University of Zurich Supervisors Dr. Benedikt R. Schmidt Prof. Dr. Heinz-Ulrich Reyer Dr. Matthew C. Fisher Prof. Dr. Lukas Keller Z¨urich, 2013 To all the midwife toads that got sampled during this project ”The least I can do is speak out for those who cannot speak for themselves.” - Jane Goodall Acknowledgements I cordially thank Beni Schmidt for his support which was always so greatly appreciated, be it in fund raising, designing experiments or for his skilled statistical and editorial judgments. He managed to explain the meaning of any complex problem in simple terms and again and again he turned out to be a walking encyclopedia of amphibians, statistical models, Bd and many other common and uncommon topics.
  • Quick Guide to Calling Amphibians Reference: Maine’S Amphibians and Reptiles

    Quick Guide to Calling Amphibians Reference: Maine’S Amphibians and Reptiles

    Quick Guide to Calling Amphibians Reference: Maine’s Amphibians and Reptiles Spring Peeper (Pseudacris crucifer): One of Maine’s most widespread species and our smallest frog, measuring under an inch and a half, with a dark, imperfect cross or “X” pattern on the back. It has relatively smooth skin and is generally brown to gray with some yellow on the throat. A full chorus of these tiny frogs can be heard up to a half-mile away; each male makes a shrill, pure, high-pitched breeding call. Wood Frog (Rana sylvatica): The first frog to emerge in the spring, the wood frog can tolerate cold and even freezing temperatures for short periods of ©USGS NEARMI time. It has a dark mask over and below each eye ©USGS NEARMI and is otherwise dark red or tan. Wood frogs are widespread in Maine but limit their breeding generally to temporary or vernal pools. The wood frog’s call sounds like the quack of a duck. ©James Hardy ©James Hardy American Toad (Bufo americanus): Maine’s only toad, the American toad has dry, bumpy skin and is largely terrestrial, going in water only to breed and lay eggs. Its call is a high, musical trill that can last 30 seconds or more. Northern Leopard Frog (Rana pipiens): Apparent declines in the population make the northern leopard frog a species of “Special Concern” in the state of Maine. The leopard frog and its close cousin the pickerel frog are the only frogs in Maine with distinct spots. The leopard frog has two to three unevenly spaced rows of irregular oval spots on its back.
  • RSG Book Template 2011 V4 051211

    RSG Book Template 2011 V4 051211

    The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN or any of the funding organizations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of IUCN. Published by: IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group & Environment Agency-ABU DHABI Copyright: © 2011 International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Citation: Soorae, P. S. (ed.) (2011). Global Re-introduction Perspectives: 2011. More case studies from around the globe. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group and Abu Dhabi, UAE: Environment Agency-Abu Dhabi. xiv + 250 pp. ISBN: 978-2-8317-1432-5 Cover photo: Clockwise starting from top-left: i. Mountain yellow-legged frog © Adam Backlin ii. American alligator © Ruth Elsey iii. Dwarf eelgrass © Laura Govers, RU Nijmegen iv. Mangrove finch © Michael Dvorak BirdLife Austria v. Berg-Breede whitefish © N. Dean Impson vi. Zanzibar red colobus monkey © Tom Butynski & Yvonne de Jong Cover design & layout by: Pritpal S. Soorae, IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group Produced by: IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group & Environment Agency-ABU DHABI Download at: www.iucnsscrsg.org iii Amphibians Re-introduction program for the common midwife toad and Iberian frog in the Natural Park of Peñalara in Madrid, Spain:
  • Exotic and Invasive Alien Species in Newfoundland and Labrador

    Exotic and Invasive Alien Species in Newfoundland and Labrador

    EXOTIC SPECIES: For More Information: Exotic and Invasive Alien Species Plants, animals and micromicro----organismsorganisms in Newfoundland and Labrador existing in habitats beyond their natural distribution. Their introduction is Department of Environment and usually caused by humans or human Conservation activities but most do not become Wildlife Division Newfoundland and Labrador is home to tens of invasive. Exotic species are also referred to Endangered Species and Biodiversity thousands of animals, plants, and other organisms. as introduced, nonnon----native,native, alien and nonnon---- Phone: (709) 637-2026 Together, these species create the unique indigenous species. www.gov.nl.ca/ environment and diverse habitats of the province. INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES: However, intentionally or accidentally, exotic Botanical Gardens of Memorial University species have been introduced to the province. Harmful exotic species whose Memorial University of Newfoundland and While most exotics may have little or no impact on introduction or spread threatens the Labrador Cabbage White, S. Pardy Moores local ecosystems, some species may become environment, economy, or society, Phone: (709) 737-8590 www.mun.ca/botgarden invasive. including human health. PATHWAYS OF INTRODUCTION: Exotic and Canadian Biodiversity Network The activity, most commonly human, www.cbin.ec.gc.ca that provides the opportunity for species to establish in new habitats. Wild Species 2005 Invasive Alien www.wildspecies.ca THREATS: IAS Concepts, Terms & Context, CAB The potential negative outcomes to a http://www.cabi.org/ias_ctc.asp?Heading=Terms Species in habitat or species after the introduction of an exotic species. Threats include IUCN 100 of the World’s Worst Invasive Alien Species biodiversity loss, introduction of www.issg.org/database Newfoundland Snowshoe Hare Coltsfoot predators, and loss of food source.
  • Edna Increases the Detectability of Ranavirus Infection in an Alpine Amphibian Population

    Edna Increases the Detectability of Ranavirus Infection in an Alpine Amphibian Population

    viruses Technical Note eDNA Increases the Detectability of Ranavirus Infection in an Alpine Amphibian Population Claude Miaud 1,* ,Véronique Arnal 1, Marie Poulain 1, Alice Valentini 2 and Tony Dejean 2 1 CEFE, EPHE-PSL, CNRS, Univ. Montpellier, Univ Paul Valéry Montpellier 3, IRD, Biogeography and Vertebrate Ecology, 1919 route de Mende, 34293 Montpellier, France; [email protected] (V.A.); [email protected] (M.P.) 2 SPYGEN, 17 Rue du Lac Saint-André, 73370 Le Bourget-du-Lac, France; [email protected] (A.V.); [email protected] (T.D.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +33-(0)4-67-61-33-43 Received: 15 March 2019; Accepted: 4 June 2019; Published: 6 June 2019 Abstract: The early detection and identification of pathogenic microorganisms is essential in order to deploy appropriate mitigation measures. Viruses in the Iridoviridae family, such as those in the Ranavirus genus, can infect amphibian species without resulting in mortality or clinical signs, and they can also infect other hosts than amphibian species. Diagnostic techniques allowing the detection of the pathogen outside the period of host die-off would thus be of particular use. In this study, we tested a method using environmental DNA (eDNA) on a population of common frogs (Rana temporaria) known to be affected by a Ranavirus in the southern Alps in France. In six sampling sessions between June and September (the species’ activity period), we collected tissue samples from dead and live frogs (adults and tadpoles), as well as insects (aquatic and terrestrial), sediment, and water. At the beginning of the breeding season in June, one adult was found dead; at the end of July, a mass mortality of tadpoles was observed.
  • Peatlands Many Wildlife Species Use Peatlands for Part of Their Life Cycle, Whether for Breeding, Feeding, Species Focus Cover Or Nesting

    Peatlands Many Wildlife Species Use Peatlands for Part of Their Life Cycle, Whether for Breeding, Feeding, Species Focus Cover Or Nesting

    Wildlife found in peatlands Many wildlife species use peatlands for part of their life cycle, whether for breeding, feeding, Species Focus cover or nesting. Below are some examples of species that depend on peatland habitats. Be on of conservation concern the lookout for these species and other wildlife associated with peatlands. Follow stewardship guidelines to help maintain or enhance peatlands. Species of conservation concern--those wildlife Bog Lemming species identified in the Wildlife Action Plan as having the greatest need of conservation--appear in There are two species of bog lemming found in Bog Lemming New Hampshire: northern (which is very rare) and bold typeface. southern. Both have very short tails, distinguishing them from voles and other small rodents. They inhabit peatlands, digging burrows 6-12” beneath · Blanding’s turtle** · Ribbon snake the peat. They also build runways through surface · Eastern towhee · Ringed boghaunter dragonfly** vegetation, which they use for foraging on the · Mink frog · Rusty blackbird tender parts of grasses and sedges (look for · Southern bog lemming · Spotted turtle* distinctive piles of bright green fecal pellets). In · Northern bog lemming · Spruce grouse the summer, bog lemmings may nest in surface Palm warbler · runways instead of underground nests, making * state-threatened species them particularly vulnerable to trampling. Lemming ** state-endangered species populations fluctuate greatly and are poorly understood. Rusty Blackbird Where to get help If you have information about a wildlife species of conservation concern, contact NH Fish & Game’s Wildlife Rusty Blackbird Division at 603-271-2461. Contact the UNH Cooperative Extension Wildlife Specialist at 603-862-3594 for Rusty blackbirds are a northern species (e.g.
  • Chirp, Croak, and Snore

    Chirp, Croak, and Snore

    MINNESOTA CONSERVATION VOLUNTEER Young Naturalists Teachers Guide Prepared by “Chirp, Croak, and Snore” Multidisciplinary Jack Judkins, Classroom Activities Curriculum Teachers guide for the Young Naturalists article “Chirp, Croak, and Snore” by Mary Hoff. Connections Published in the March–April 2014 Minnesota Conservation Volunteer, or visit www.dnr.state.mn.us/young_naturalists/frogs-and-toads-of-minnesota/index.html. Minnesota Young Naturalists teachers guides are provided free of charge to classroom teachers, parents, and students. This guide contains a brief summary of the article, suggested independent reading levels, word count, materials list, estimates of preparation and instructional time, academic standards applications, preview strategies and study questions overview, adaptations for special needs students, assessment options, extension activities, Web resources (including related Minnesota Conservation Volunteer articles), copy-ready study questions with answer key, and a copy-ready vocabulary sheet and vocabulary study cards. There is also a practice quiz (with answer key) in Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments format. Materials may be reproduced and/or modified to suit user needs. Users are encouraged to provide feedback through an online survey at www.mndnr.gov/education/teachers/activities/ynstudyguides/survey.html. *All Minnesota Conservation Volunteer articles published since 1940 are now online in searchable PDF format. Visit www.mndnr.gov/magazine and click on past issues. Summary “Chirp, Croak, and Snore” surveys
  • Infectious Disease Threats to Amphibian Conservation

    Infectious Disease Threats to Amphibian Conservation

    The Glasgow Naturalist (2018) Volume 27, Supplement. The Amphibians and Reptiles of Scotland Infectious disease threats to amphibian conservation A.A. Cunningham Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London NW1 4RY E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT Amphibian Populations Task Force (DAPTF) to The unexplained decline of amphibian populations investigate if the reported declines of amphibians across the world was first recognised in the late 20th was a true phenomenon and, if so, what was, or were, century. When investigated, most of these the cause(s) of it. The DAPTF brought together “enigmatic” declines have been shown to be due to experts from across the world and from across one of two types of infectious disease: ranavirosis disciplines to promote research into amphibian caused by infection with FV3-like ranavirus or with declines and to collate and evaluate evidence that common midwife toad virus, or chytridiomycosis showed amphibians were undergoing caused by infection with Batrachochytrium unprecedented declines around the world including dendrobatidis or B. salamandrivorans. In all cases in protected areas and in pristine habitats. Indeed, it examined, infection has been via the human- is now known that 41% of known amphibian species mediated introduction of the pathogen to a species are threatened with extinction, which is a much or population in which it has not naturally co- higher percentage than for mammals (25%) and evolved. While ranaviruses and B. salamandrivorans over three times the percentage for birds (13%) have caused regionally localised amphibian (IUCN, 2018). Perhaps just as worrying is that over population declines in Europe, the chytrid fungus, B.
  • Forest Hill FIELD GUIDE

    Forest Hill FIELD GUIDE

    Forest Hill FIELD GUIDE FOREST HILL ALMA COLLEGE GIRESD ii • Forest Hill History • Forest Hill Nature Area www.GratiotConservationDistrict.org Forest Hill Nature Area, located in northern Gratiot County, Michigan, is land that has been set aside for the preservation and appreciation of the natural world. The nature area has walking trails through 90 acres of gently rolling hills, open fields, wetlands, Let children walk with nature. Let them see the beautiful blendings willow thickets, and woodlots. Forest Hill Nature Area is home to a and communions of death and life. Their joys inseparable unity. As variety of wildlife such as white-tailed deer, muskrats, ducks and taught in woods and meadows. Plains and mountains. And turkeys. streams. -John Muir Also, over the years, some farm buildings were demolished while others were renovated. The Nature Area has evolved into an Forest Hill Nature Area: important outdoor educational resource for the school children in Gratiot and Isabella Counties as well as the citizens of Mid- In 1992, the Gratiot County Soil Conservation District acquired a Michigan. Since 1993, thousands of school children and adults 90 acre abandoned farm from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. have participated in field trips and nature programs at Forest Hill In 1993, the District leased the property to the Gratiot-Isabella Nature Area. RESD to develop an outdoor education center. The RESD named the property, the Forest Hill Nature Area and in partnership with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service began a major wetland restoration project. 3 Digital Nature Trail Forest Hill is brimming with biodiversity and all it entails: succession, evolution, adaptation, wildlife and food chains.
  • Cascades Frog Conservation Assessment

    Cascades Frog Conservation Assessment

    D E E P R A U R T LT MENT OF AGRICU United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Pacific Southwest Research Station Cascades Frog General Technical Report PSW-GTR-244 Conservation Assessment March 2014 Karen Pope, Catherine Brown, Marc Hayes, Gregory Green, and Diane Macfarlane The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, employees, and applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability, sex, gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicable, political beliefs, marital status, familial or parental status, sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program, or protected genetic information in employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all prohibited bases will apply to all programs and/or employment activities.) If you wish to file an employment complaint, you must contact your agency’s EEO Counselor (PDF) within 45 days of the date of the alleged discriminatory act, event, or in the case of a personnel action. Additional information can be found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_file.html. If you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form (PDF), found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust. html, or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632-9992 to request the form. You may also write a letter containing all of the information requested in the form. Send your completed complaint form or letter to us by mail at U.S.
  • Kermit the Frog

    Kermit the Frog

    written and illustrated by Mrs. Shellenberger’s First Graders Stony Point School April 2006 We dedicate this book to Jerry Pallotta who wrote the greatest books, Mary Lou Lundgren who helped us with art, research and writing, and to all our friends and families. How We Did It! We were reading the Jerry Pallotta alphabet books, The Yucky Reptile Alphabet Book and The Icky Bug Alphabet Book and wondered about making our own alphabet class book. Maysn brought tadpoles for our class and Ms. Shellenberger thought frogs were really cool. We got books from the library and our own class library and brainstormed a list of all the frogs we could find. We never knew there were so many kinds of frogs. We found out a lot of information from the computer. Ms. Shellenberger made us a special research process log to write and draw in. We drew the red-eyed tree frog with MaryLou Lundgren and figured out all the frog parts. We painted frogs on the computer, too. First, we made the outline and then we colored them. We found a dead dried-up frog in the Japanese Garden. It was interesting to see it up close. We used a magnifying glass. We used the magnifying glass to look at the tadpoles, too, so we could sketch them. The tadpoles grew pretty slow. We took pictures of them for the class web page. After we checked out all the books, we decided which frog we wanted to study more. We drew them on the cover of our process log using colored pencils.