August 02, 2015
Hualapai Mexican Vole Conservation Status Review
PREPARED BY
Amanda Aurora, C.W.B . Eleanor Gladding Regional Scientist / Project Manager Senior Biologist/Project Manager SWCA Environmental Consultants - Austin SWCA Environmental Consultants - Tucson 4407 Monterey Oaks Boulevard, Building 1, Suite 110 343 West Franklin Street Austin, Texas 78749 Tucson, Arizona 85701 [email protected] [email protected]
Introduction The Hualapai Mexican vole or Hualapai vole ( Microtus mexicanus hualpaiensis ) is a cinnamon-brown, small mammal in the Cricetidae Family. In January of 1987, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) proposed to list the Hualapai Mexican vole as endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and published the final listing rule in October 1987 (USFWS 1987a; USFWS 1987b). At that time, the species was considered “extremely rare and has among the most restricted habitats of any North American mammal” (USFWS 1987b). The USFWS in the final listing rule identified up to 14 locations in the Hualapai Mountains of west-central Arizona where the Hualapai Mexican vole (or its sign) had been observed (USFWS 1987b) (Figure 1). The USFWS also noted that “from 1923 to the present, only 15 specimens are known to have been captured in the Hualapai Mountains” (USFWS 1987b). This subspecies was differentiated by morphological characteristics from the other subspecies of Microtus mexicanus that occur in Arizona, including M. mexicanus mogollonensis and M. mexicanus navaho . The primary morphological differences differentiating the Hualapai Mexican vole from the other subspecies include: slightly longer body, longer tail, and longer and broader skull (compared to M. mexicanus navaho ) and a longer body, shorter tail, and a longer and narrower skull (compared to M. mexicanus mogollonensis ) (USFWS 2015).
In 2004, the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) submitted a petition to the USFWS requesting that the federal agency delist the Hualapai Mexican vole. In the petition, AGFD presented data to support their assertions that: (1) the subspecies occurs over a much greater area and in higher numbers than previously known; (2) it is likely that all populations referred to as Microtus mexicanus hualpaiensis , along with other populations of the species in Arizona, should be referred to as a single subspecies; and (3) the threats faced by this more widespread taxon do not indicate that listing under the ESA is warranted (AGFD 2004).
In 2008, the USFWS published a 90-Day Finding on the AGFD’s 2004 petition to delist the Hualapai Mexican vole. In its finding, the USFWS determined that AGFD presented “reliable and accurate information” in its 2004 petition indicating that the endangered Hualapai Mexican vole, under the
1 August 02, 2015
Known Range at Listing
2 August 02, 2015
scientific name of Microtus mexicanus hualpaiensis , may not be a valid taxon or, if it is valid, then the listed subspecies occurs across a greater range than previously known (USFWS 2008). However, the USFWS was unable at that time to ascertain the correct taxonomic interpretation of the group due to disagreements among peer reviewers on the most recent taxonomic research. Ultimately, the USFWS concluded that “We find that the petition presents substantial information indicating that delisting this mammal may be warranted. We are initiating a status review to determine if delisting this subspecies is warranted” (USFWS 2008).
Subsequently on June 4, 2015, the USFWS issued a joint 12-Month Finding on the 2004 delisting petition and a Proposed Rule to delist the Hualapai Mexican vole on the basis that “the currently listed subspecies is not a valid taxonomic entity” (USFWS 2015). In the proposed delisting rule, the USFWS acknowledged that “based on morphological measurements, the Hualapai Mexican vole was previously considered one of three subspecies of Mexican voles ( Microtus mexicanus ) in Arizona,” along with M. mexicanus navaho and M. mexicanus mogollonensis . While USFWS recognized that taxonomic studies completed to date “offer different conclusions about which populations may or may not be Hualapai Mexican voles,” the agency stated that “there is sufficient evidence to indicate that the currently listed entity for the Hualapai Mexican vole [which USFWS notes is limited in distribution to the Hualapai Mountains of west-central Arizona] is no longer a valid taxonomic subspecies” (USFWS 2015).
In the proposed delisting rule, the USFWS requested additional information on “the conservation status of Hualapai Mexican voles and Mexican voles in general” and “new information on the historical and current status, range, distribution, and population size of Hualapai Mexican voles, including the locations of any additional populations” (USFWS 2015). In response to their request, this report provides information documenting the current conservation status of the Hualapai Mexican vole and its likely synonymous populations, as well as an evaluation of potential threats to the larger, taxonomically valid species.
Taxonomy USFWS (2015) summarized the findings of the various taxonomic studies conducted on Mexican voles in Arizona and the southwestern United States (Table 1). While these various taxonomic studies did not involve specimens from the same locations or distributions, USFWS (2015) recognizes this body of work to be the best scientific information available. The USFWS (2015) notes that five of seven peer reviewers of the most recent taxonomic study by Busch et al. (2001) supported the finding that genetic data do not support the separation of vole populations in Arizona into three subspecies.
3 August 02, 2015
Table 1. Taxonomic studies of Mexican voles in Arizona and the southwest United States.
Year and Source Methods and Study Key Findings Distribution of Population Populations Synonymous with Hualapai Mexican Vole* 1987 Morphological variation M. mexicanus hualpaiensis is Hualapai Mountains Final Listing Rule a morphologically distinct (USFWS 1987b) subspecies 1989 Morphological variation Specimens from the Hualapai Mountains; Frey (1989) across the range of M. Bradshaw Mountains, AZ, Bradshaw Mountains mexicanus in the U.S. and should be reassigned from M. Mexico mexicanus mogollonensis to M. mexicanus hualpaiensis 1993 Genetic analysis based on Specimens in Hualapai Hualapai Mountains; Frey and Yates (1993) protein electrophoresis and Mountains, Hualapai Indian Hualapai Indian Reservation; mitochondrial DNA from 13 Reservation, and Music Music Mountains populations across AZ and 1 Mountains are closely related population in Mexico and distinct from other populations in AZ and may be considered to be M. mexicanus hualpaiensis 1995 Genetic analysis based on Specimens from six Hualapai Mountains; Frey and Yates (1995) protein electrophoresis and populations may be M. Hualapai Indian Reservation; mitochondrial DNA from 26 mexicanus hualpaiensis, with Music Mountains; populations across AZ, NM, two other populations Aubrey Cliffs/Chino Wash; UT, and Mexico suspected to be M. Santa Maria Mountains; mexicanus hualpaiensis on Bradshaw Mountains the basis of geographic proximity Possibly also: Round Mountain; Sierra Prieta 2001 Genetic analysis based on Study did not support the Hualapai Mountains; Busch et al. (2001) nuclear markers from 6 separation of Mexican voles Hualapai Indian Reservation; populations in northwest AZ into three distinct Aubrey Cliffs; and mitochondrial DNA from subspecies; specimens Bradshaw Mountains; 13 populations across AZ referred to as M. mexicanus Watson Woods; navaho or M. mexicanus Sierra Prieta; mogollonensis were Navaho Mountain; genetically similar to Minus Mountain; specimens from locations San Francisco Peaks; previously identified as Grand Canyon South Rim containing M. mexicanus Mogollon Rim; hualpaiensis ; only 1 Chuska Mountains; subspecies of Mexican vole White Mountains occurs in AZ *General locations are shown on Figure 1.
As presented and discussed in the AGFD’s petition (AGFD 2004) and acknowledged in the USFWS 90-Day and 12-Month Findings (USFWS 2008; USFWS 2015), there is some uncertainty regarding the correct
4 August 02, 2015
taxonomic assignment of Microtus populations in Arizona and elsewhere in the southwest. For context on this issue, the current edition of the Mammals of the World states “Critical overhaul of the mexicanus complex is needed. . . . A phylogeographic approach, integrating morphological and genetic variation across the collective range of these taxa, would offer a firmer basis for delineating species limits and diagnosing them” (Wilson and Reeder 2005). Nonetheless, as summarized by USFWS (2015), the majority of the experts who have reviewed this species complex and the supporting data agree that there is not enough evidence to support the delineation of three subspecies of Microtus mexicanus in Arizona.
While most of the research conducted in recent years continues to use the current taxonomic nomenclature of Microtus mexicanus complex of subspecies (including the name M. mexicanus hualpaiensis ), the AGFD and other Microtus researchers believe that the Microtus mexicanus populations in Mexico should retain the name Microtus mexicanus and the populations in the U.S. should be reclassified as Microtus mogollonensis (AGFD 2004). This proposed separation of the two species is already noted on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) database (Álvarez- Castañeda and Reid 2008) and the split is also supported by genetic analysis reported by Frey (2009). Further, the AGFD states in its petition that it believes all 14 Arizona populations of “Mexican vole” should more correctly be referred to as Microtus mogollonensis mogollonensis (AGFD 2004).
Therefore, the taxon currently known as Microtus mexicanus hualpaiensis may be reclassified to be either: (1) an indistinguishable part of Microtus mexicanus , with a distribution that includes populations in the southwestern U.S. and Mexico; (2) an indistinguishable part of Microtus mogollonensis, with a distribution that includes the southwestern U.S. (including Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Utah); or (3) Microtus mogollonensis mogollonensis, with a distribution that includes at least 14 different locations across Arizona.
Consequently, in our review of the best scientific and commercial information available, we have included data for all likely synonyms of the Hualapai Mexican vole that are present in various published studies and databases, i.e., Microtus mexicanus hualpaiensis , Microtus mexicanus mogollonensis , Microtus mexicanus navaho, Microtus mexicanus , Microtus mogollonensis , Microtus mogollonensis mogollonensis , and Microtus navajo.
Microtus Populations in Arizona and Adjacent States The AGFD conducted extensive surveys of known and new locations of Mexican voles in Arizona and Utah between 1991 and 1995 (AGFD 2004). Based on their research, the AGFD believes that “there are at least seven populations of M. mexicanus hualpaiensis in Arizona but it is likely that all 14 populations (including one in Utah) are a single species, M. mogollonensis mogollonensis …” (AGFD 2004:9). These locations are depicted in Figure 1 and additional information for each site is presented in Table 2. From their survey efforts, the AGFD has demonstrated that the species is not as rare as when the entity was first listed under the ESA. In fact, they state: “From 1991-1995, 66 voles from 14 locations within the
5 August 02, 2015
Hualapai Mountains, and 94 voles from nine areas outside the mountain range were trapped or observed” (AGFD 2004).
Table 2. Location and land ownership data for the 14 Mexican vole populations surveyed by AGFD.
Location Name General Location * Land Ownership * Hualapai Mountains NW AZ ( Mohave County ) BLM; County; Private; State Music Mountains NW AZ (Mohave County ) BIA; BLM; Private; State Hualapai Indian Reservation NW AZ (Coconino County ) BIA; Private; State Aubrey Cliffs and Chino Wash NW AZ (Coconino County ) Private; State Santa Maria Mountains NW Central AZ (Yavapai County ) USFS; Private Sierra Prieta NW Central AZ (Yavapai County ) BIA; BLM; DOD; USFS; Private; State Bradshaw Mountains and NW Central AZ (Yavapai County ) USFS; Private Watson Woods Mingus Mountain NW Central AZ (Yavapai County ) BIA; USFS; NPS; Private; State Mogollon Rim NE Central AZ (Coconino and Gila USFS; Private Counties) White Mountains W Central AZ ( Apache and BIA; USFS; Private; State Greenlee Counties) E Central NM (Catron County) Grand Canyon South Rim N AZ (Coconino County ) USFS; NPS; Private San Francisco Peaks N AZ (Coconino County ) USFS; Private; State Chuska Mountains NE AZ (Apache County) BIA; NPS NW NM (San Juan County) Navajo Mountain SE UT (San Juan County ) BIA NE AZ (Coconino and Navajo Counties) *These locations were based on the map provided in Appendix 1 of the AGFD petition (2004). Land ownership was assessed using ASLD land ownership data (ASLD 2013) through a GIS analysis to match the buffers on the AGFD map, i.e., sites were buffered by 6 miles; thus, the circles are 12 miles in diameter. The only outlier was for the White Mountains, where it is buffered by 6 miles, then grouped together.
BLM=Bureau of Land Management; DOD=Department of Defense; USFS=U.S. Forest Service; NPS=National Park Service; and BIA=Bureau of Indian Affairs
In addition to the information presented in the 2004 AGFD petition, SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) reviewed available literature on the U.S. population of the Mexican vole and also acquired data from the AGFD’s Heritage Data Management System (HMDS), which stores data on species’ locations from survey efforts by the AGFD and other researchers in Arizona. Both of these efforts revealed a large
6 August 02, 2015
amount of survey data with additional locations of Mexican voles in Arizona, Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado.
A review of other land management agency reports that were available on the internet revealed additional information, which is summarized below and depicted on Figure 2:
• Small mammal surveys at Garland and Government Prairies located to the south and northeast of the City of Parks, Coconino County in north central Arizona : Researchers trapped small mammals between August 11 and September 26, 2008. Results included 138 total captures, including 78 individual animals in 5,501 trap nights. The researchers noted that “Capture rates were low and variable among transects. S pecies composition of small mammal communities was simple, with only 2–3 species represented on individual transects. Mogollon voles ( Microtus mogollonensis , n = 22 individuals) were captured on 9 grids (33.3%) representing 5 transects (83.3%)” (Ganey and Chambers 2011:154). • Gila National Forest in southern Catron, northern Grant, western Sierra, and extreme northeastern Hidalgo Counties in southwestern New Mexico : The USFS species checklist for the forest classifies wildlife as “C – Common, U – Uncommon, F – Fairly Common, X – Extirpated, or R – Rare.” The Mexican Vole (Microtus mexicanus ) is listed as Common on the forest (USFS 2015a). • Tonto National Forest in portions of Yavapai, Gila, Maricopa, and Pinal Counties in north- central Arizona: The USFS species checklist for the forest lists wildlife as “C – Common, U – Uncommon, F – Fairly Common, X – Extirpated, or R – Rare.” The Mexican vole ( Microtus mexicanus ) is listed as Uncommon on the forest (USFS 2015b). • Walnut Canyon National Monument in Coconino County in northeastern Arizona: The National Park Service (NPS) publication Inventory of Mammals at Walnut Canyon, Wupatki, and Sunset Crater National Monuments (Drost 2009) stated “We documented the Mogollon vole (Microtus mogollonensis ; also called the Mexican vole, M. mexicanus ) at WACA [Walnut Canyon] during this study” (Drost 2009:29). This study including random-stratified and targeted sampling techniques from 2002 through 2004 using Sherman live traps for a total of 1,490 trap nights (Drost 2009). • Salinas Pueblo Missions National Monument, Torrance County in central New Mexico: The NPS mammal inventory conducted for several parks in the Southern Colorado Plateau Network using random-stratified and targeted small mammal sampling techniques from 2001 through 2003 documented the presence of the Mogollon vole (Microtus mogollonensis ) in 2003 (n=14) (Bogan et al. 2007). • Yucca House National Monument, Montezuma County in southwestern Colorado: The NPS mammal inventory conducted for several parks in the Southern Colorado Plateau Network using random-stratified and targeted small mammal sampling techniques from 2001 through 2003 documented the presence of the Mogollon vole ( Microtus mogollonensis ) in 2003 (n=1) (Bogan et al. 2007). The author states “Two species had not been documented previously: the montane
7 August 02, 2015
vole ( Microtus montanus ) and Mogollon vole. The captures of M. mexicanus represent one of the northernmost records of this species in its distribution” (Bogan et al. 2007:25). • El Morro National Monument, Cibola County in western New Mexico: The NPS mammal inventory conducted for several parks in the Southern Colorado Plateau Network using random- stratified and targeted small mammal sampling techniques from 2001 through 2003 documented the presence of the Mogollon vole ( Microtus mogollonensis ) in 2003 (n=1) (Bogan et al. 2007). • El Malpaís National Monument, Cibola County in west-central New Mexico: The NPS mammal inventory conducted for several parks in the Southern Colorado Plateau Network using random- stratified and targeted small mammal sampling techniques from 2001 through 2003 documented the presence of the Mogollon vole ( Microtus mogollonensis ) in 2003 through 2004 (n=6) (Bogan et al. 2007). • Four Corners Region, including Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, and Colorado: Microtus experts, Frey and LaRue (1993) published a paper reporting new findings on the distribution of the Mogollon vole ( Microtus mogollonensis ), which they specify as being distinct from the Microtus mexicanus taxon in Mexico. They present 10 new locations of the vole, some of which are included in the 2004 AGFD petition, but also included others: Gallinas Mountains, Lincoln County, New Mexico in the Cibola National Forest; Jicarilla Mountains, Lincoln County, New Mexico in the Lincoln National Forest; Black Range, Sierra and Grant Counties, New Mexico in the Gila National Forest; Pinos Altos Range, Grant County, New Mexico, in the Gila National Forest; Defiance Plateau, Apache County, Arizona, and San Juan and McKinley Counties, New Mexico on NPS and BIA (Navajo) lands, and Black Mesa, Navajo County, Arizona on Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) (Hopi and Navajo) lands (Frey and LaRue 1993).
The HDMS records obtained from AGFD included the extensive survey data for the Hualapai Mexican vole collected by AGFD between 1991 and 1995, as well as other data submitted to AGFD between 1995 and 2011 for all subspecies of Mexican voles in the state. The HDMS records not discussed in the 2004 AGFD petition are summarized in Table 3 below and are also depicted on Figure 2. However, this database does not represent a complete record of all observations of Mexican voles in Arizona.
8 August 02, 2015
9 August 02, 2015
this page intentionally left blank
10 August 02, 2015
Table 3. Additional HDMS data for locations of the Mexican vole in Arizona.
Date Location Data Record 9/15/1995 North Side of Round Mountain along the 1995 -09 -15: 1 subadult male trapped and border of Arizona and New Mexico, near deposited at msb. Duncan, Greenlee County, Arizona 8/5/1998 North of San Francisco Mountain , south 1998 -08 -05: 1 female found dead in trap. of Indian Flat on the Coconino National Forest near Flagstaff, Coconino County, Arizona 7/20/1999 Hualapai Mountains , south of New Years 1999 -07 -20 -- 24: 1 animal captured. Cabin Spring near Kingman, Mohave County, Arizona 8/3/1999 Vicinity of Walnut Canyon in Coconino 1999 -08 -03 -- 05: 1 animal observed. County in northeastern Arizona 8/15/2000 Northwest of Flagstaff , east of A -1 2000 -08 -15: 1 captured and released. 2000 - Mountain, Coconino County, Arizona 09-01: 1 captured and released. 7/26/2003 Garland Prairie , Bellmont near Parks, 2003 -07 -26 -- 07 -30: Total of 13 voles Coconino County, Arizona observed over 5 days at first source feature, and 1 vole observed on 07-27 at second source feature. 9/5/2011 Apache National Fore st , east of Mexican 2011 -09 -05: 2 individuals caught and Hay Lake near the White Mountains in released alive. Eagar, Apache County, Arizona 2011 Bradshaw Mountains , southwest of 2011 -sum: 45 total individuals seen and Watson Lake, Yavapai County, Arizona released alive during surveys and trapping between April and September. Source: Personal communication, emails from Sabra Tonn, HDMS Program Coordinator, AGFD, to Eleanor Gladding, SWCA, July 6-8, 2015
The AGFD HDMS did not provide any specific location information about Mexican vole occurrences on tribal lands, which could represent a significant data gap since approximately 25% of the State of Arizona and approximately 20% of the area included in the 14 Mexican vole populations (Table 4) is located on Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) lands.
In addition, the AGFD maintains a Point Observation Database (POD) of occurrences that is currently made up mostly of data submitted through Scientific Collection Permits post-2004. The results for Mexican vole are summarized below and also included in Table A-1 of Appendix A:
• From 1985 through 2011, the POD database includes 657 records of observations for the Hualapai Mexican vole. • Of those 657 records in the POD database, 359 contained location data. The observations of the Hualapai Mexican vole are from 6 counties, including Coconino (n=261), Yavapai (n=1), Navajo (n=1), Apache (74), Greenlee (n=11), and Mohave (n=11).
11 August 02, 2015
• Of those 657 records in the POD database, 351 contained data on the sex observed, including female (n=113), male (n=112), and unknown (n=26). • Of those 657 records in the POD database, 180 contained data on the age observed, including adult (n=142), subadult (n=3), and juvenile (n=35).
Therefore, the readily available survey data indicates a much larger current range of the Mexican vole – both across Arizona itself and into adjacent states – that is well beyond what was known at the time of listing in 1987. In fact, our review has documented that Mexican vole populations in the southwestern U.S. occur at 17 Arizona locations, 8 New Mexico locations, 1 Colorado location, 2 locations that include both Arizona and New Mexico, and 1 location that includes both Arizona and Utah. Further, the survey data also demonstrates that the species is readily being found post-1995, after the AGFD surveys were completed and reported.
Listing Factors Analysis The USFWS originally determined that the Hualapai Mexican vole was in danger of extinction on the basis of its presumed extreme rarity, restricted distribution, and vulnerability to threats. The USFWS identified threats to the subspecies as including livestock grazing, human recreation (camping and off- road vehicle activity), predation by native species and feral cats, the vulnerability of small and isolated populations to artificial or natural disturbances, and drought (since the subspecies was presumed to be associated with mesic habitats) (USFWS 1987b). However, many of the presumptions made in the original listing rule have been shown to be in error. For example, neither the Arizona population nor the greater U.S. population of the Mexican vole appears to be rare, they are not restricted to isolated habitats at a small number of sites, and they are not even restricted to the moist grass/sedge (and presumably fragile) habitat type described in the original listing rule.
Listing Factor A (the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range) Since the 1987 listing of the Hualapai Mexican vole, the AGFD has clearly demonstrated that the population of Mexican voles in the Hualapai Mountains of Arizona is not a distinct subspecies and that the greater population of synonymous Mexican voles occurs throughout a much larger range than previously known. AGFD (2004) states:
…trapping efforts in the historical range, the Hualapai Mountains, identified 66 voles in 1798 trap nights (Kime et al. 1995). This success demonstrated that M. m. hualpaiensis is more numerous and widely distributed in this mountain range than once thought. Many age classes were represented in the captures, indicating a reproductive population throughout the mountain range (Kime et al. 1995). Trapping efforts outside of the Hualapai Mountains identified 94 M. mexicanus in 3873 trap nights (Kime et al. 1995).
12 August 02, 2015
This report not only provided evidence to support AGFD’s delisting petition, but also provides additional information to document that the taxon including the Hualapai Mexican vole is present throughout the mountains ranges of Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, and Colorado.
SWCA was able to assess the land ownership of the 14 populations of the Mexican vole (Figure 1) described by the AGFD in their 2004 petition. Table 4 presents the acreage calculations of these 14 populations and the respective land owners. The majority land owner within the range of the Hualapai Mexican vole in Arizona and Utah is the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) with 48%. The USFS manages the national forests and resources lands using a multiple-use approach to sustain healthy terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems (USFS 2015c) and their mission is “to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the nation’s forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations” (USFS 2015d). Thus, Mexican vole populations on USFS-managed lands are likely to benefit from the USFS’s management policies and although some populations could be affected by resource uses approved by the USFS, the overall management strategy of preserving natural ecosystems will likely maintain adequate habitat to support the species. In addition, other owners of Mexican vole habitat in Arizona, such as the NPS, have ecosystem management plans that also preserve and protect natural habitats.
Table 4. Land ownership data for the 14 Mexican vole populations referenced in AGFD (2004).
Location BIA BLM DOD USFS NPS State County Private TOTAL Name (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) Aubrey Cliffs 67,921 155,786 223,708 and Chino Wash Bradshaw 85,157 5,056 90,212 Mountains and Watson Woods Chuska 70,096 2,363 72,459 Mountains Grand Canyon 109,126 10,374 1,256 120,755 South Rim Hualapai 185,429 1,981 3,398 190,808 Indian Reservation Hualapai 219,109 15,969 2,262 21,445 258,785 Mountains Mingus 31 89,096 19 2,340 25,102 116,588 Mountain Mogollon Rim 91,612 2,220 93,832 Music 28,552 40,344 300 3,185 72,381 Mountains Navajo 72,381 72,381 Mountain San Francisco 69,578 157 2,647 72,381 Peaks Santa Maria 119,539 15,146 134,685
13 August 02, 2015
Mountains Sierra Prieta 396 1,895 140 51,850 2,059 16,042 72,381 White 47,164 352,615 6,765 19,771 426,315 Mountains TOTAL 404,049 261,349 140 968,572 12,756 97,492 2,262 271,055 2,017,673 % OF TOTAL 20.03% 12.95% 0.01% 48.00% 0.63% 4.83% 0.11% 13.43% *These locations were based on the map provided in Appendix 1 of the AGFD petition (2004), and land ownership was assessed using ASLD land ownership data (ASLD 2013) through a GIS analysis to match the buffers on the AGFD map, i.e., sites were buffered by 6 miles; thus, the circles are 12 miles in diameter. The only outlier was for the White Mountains, where it is buffered by 6 miles, then grouped together. BLM=Bureau of Land Management; DOD=Department of Defense; USFS=U.S. Forest Service, NPS=National Park Service, and BIA=Bureau of Indian Affairs
Furthermore, data from reconnaissance surveys suggest that Mexican voles in Arizona and adjacent states are not difficult to capture. Thus, future surveys are likely to confirm the persistence of the species throughout is range in areas of appropriate habitat. One researcher’s comments speak to this (Ganey and Chambers 2011):
Small mammal communities appeared to be simple in these prairies, at least during the short period in which we trapped. This is consistent with general knowledge of small mammal communities in structurally simple ecosystems, such as grasslands, that contain voles (Rose and Birney 1985). Our capture rates also were similar to capture rates in other studies of grasslands in this area (Yarborough and Chambers 2007).
Ganey and Chambers (2011) also state that:
Mogollon voles also were widely distributed within these prairies, but they were captured in smaller numbers at fewer grids than deer mice. Voles were positively associated with shrub and litter cover and negatively associated with bare ground …, consistent with previous studies relating abundance and distribution of Mogollon voles (and/or Mexican voles [ Microtus mexicanus ]) to vegetation cover (Ward 2001, Yarborough and Chambers 2007).
Other threats to habitat identified in the 1987 listing that are no longer relevant because more information is known about the species include grazing and human recreation. Grazing was identified as a threat in the final listing rule because cattle are attracted to spring and seep areas that were the then- presumed mesic habitat preferred by the voles. However, the AGFD research has identified that Mexican voles actually occur in a wider range of habitat types that includes xeric and mesic areas (AGFD 2004). Further, the AGFD discovered that the species is actually a habitat generalist and once they expanded their survey focus areas to other vegetation types, the voles were readily captured (personal communication, email from Bill Van Pelt, AGFD, to Eleanor Gladding, SWCA, July 28, 2015). Recreation
14 August 02, 2015
activities were only considered a threat due to the presence of the subspecies in Hualapai Mountain Park, which at the time was one of the few known sites within the Hualapai Mountains to contain the subspecies. However, recreation should no longer be considered a threat since the range of the species is much broader than initially realized and includes many sites that do not support recreation activities.
Listing Factor B (overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes) In the 90-Day Finding, the USFWS maintained that overutilization was not a threat to the Mexican vole. However, USFWS did indicate that due to the numerous genetic studies, which have collected tissue samples of this species, intensive efforts could affect the species. Even so, USFWS acknowledged that overutilization was not likely a threat since the AGFD monitors how many permits are issued to collect tissue samples of the species. I n fact, the AGFD stated in their petition that “Numbers of individuals that were historically taken for this purpose [for genetic analysis] were a small proportion relative to the number of voles captured” (AGFD 2004:9). Thus, the overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes would not be a range-wide, high-threat level to the Hualapai Mexican vole or affect the species’ resilience.
Listing Factor C (disease or predation) Diseases potentially affecting Hualapai Mexican vole populations have not been identified or considered a threat in past assessments of the species, and our analysis did not identify any information to the contrary. As for predation, voles are an essential part of the food chain in ecosystems; thus, natural predation does occur. However, the predator-prey relationship of ecosystems is a fluctuating system of balance and is highly unlikely to become out of balance enough to threaten a population over the long- term, especially since approximately 1,340,168 acres of the 14 Mexican vole populations identified by the AGFD in Arizona alone are located within public lands managed by federal or state agencies (USFS, NPS, BLM, and AGFD) that strive to conserve and preserve natural ecosystems, as much as possible.
The domestic cat ( Felis catus ) was identified as a threat in the original listing rule for a portion of the Mexican vole population in the Hualapai Mountains, due to the presence of feral cats in the Mohave County-owned Hualapai Mountain Park. However, the AGFD clarified that “domestic felines have rarely been observed in Hualapai Mountain Park” (AGFD 2004:9). Thus, this can now be discounted as a threat to the entire species. The types of land ownership and management and the lack of feral cat colonies in the majority of the species’ expanded range would preclude this factor from having range-wide significance that would affect the resilience of the species.
Listing Factor D (the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms) If delisted, the Mexican vole would no longer be afforded regulatory protection under the ESA. However, the lack of ESA protection is unlikely to threaten the continued existence of this species in the wild given its multi-state range with a variety of land ownerships; most of which have management strategies designed to preserve natural ecosystems that would continue to protect the majority of its habitat. Further, other Mexican vole populations, currently identified as different subspecies from the Hualapai Mexican vole, have not been afforded ESA protections. There does not appear to be any
15 August 02, 2015
evidence to suggest these “unlisted” populations are declining or experiencing high levels of threats. Moreover, the AGFD’s hunting regulations prohibit hunting and trapping of the species, and also the AGFD has the authority to deny Scientific Collection Permit applications requesting to collect the species; thus, the species would still have adequate regulatory protections.
Listing Factor E (other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence) Climate change, natural and through man-made factors, has increasingly become a concern for listed species. In the southwestern U.S., the collocation of the region’s numerous landscape types (i.e., mountains, canyons, valleys, plains, and plateaus) is likely to moderate the response of natural systems to any such changes in climate. A recent report by the Southwest Climate Alliance, predicts the following trends in regards to climate change in the southwest: (1) average annual temperatures will increase; (2) seasonal temperatures will increase; (3) freeze-free season length will increase; (4) heat waves will increase; (5) cold snaps will decrease; (6) average annual precipitation will decrease; (7) spring precipitation will decrease; (8) extreme daily precipitation will increase; (9) mountain snowpack will decrease; (10) snowmelt and stream-flow timing will occur earlier; (11) flooding will increase; and (12) drought severity will increase (Overpeck et al. 2013). These trends, if they come to pass, may affect the Mexican vole through life cycle changes (i.e., changes in reproduction timing); range shifts, expansions, and/or contractions due to ecosystem changes; and also habitat modifications, such as drought decreasing available forage or wildfire effects to the landscape.
The AGFD’s opinion is that “the normal and regular occurrence of drought likely allowed this species to adapt to drier conditions” (AGFD 2004:7), and the USFWS has subsequently acknowledged that drought is not likely to be a threat factor since populations have persisted through drought conditions at many locations. In addition, it is probable that the voles will be able to adapt sufficiently to these modifications to their habitat and life history since Microtus populations have persisted since their origination around 0.5–2 million years ago and speciation rates are 60-100 higher in Microtus than in other vertebrates (Triant and DeWoody 2005). “Taken at face value, this means a new Microtus species evolves every 30,000 years” (Triant and DeWoody 2005:2). Further, post-Pleistocene dispersal in recent decades has already been documented; thus, the species may already be adapting to global changes (Davis and Callahan 1992). Moreover, scientific literature reviewed for this report indicates that small mammal populations have and are continuing to exhibit range changes as well as life history changes in response to the environmental variations (Réale et al. 2003).
Summary and Conclusions In reviewing the scientific and commercially available information on the conservation status of the Hualapai Mexican vole and its synonyms, it is clear that the species does not warrant protection under the ESA. Since listing in 1987, a substantial amount of new scientific information has become available that demonstrates that the species is not at risk of extinction. The Hualapai Mexican vole and its synonyms inhabit a significant known geographical range covering four southwestern states: Arizona,
16 August 02, 2015
Utah, New Mexico, and Colorado. The known distribution of the Hualapai Mexican vole and its synonyms provides representative and redundant populations over a broad area. This redundancy of populations also establishes the species’ ability to withstand stochastic events at any particular locality. Furthermore, as presented in this report, voles are an extremely plastic group from an evolutionary perspective and evolve at a fast pace, thereby providing a high level of resiliency to withstand threats from environmental change, such as transformations that may occur with any presumed global climate change.
We have presented in this paper significant information to show that the populations of the Hualapai Mexican vole and its synonyms are viable and not subject to threats of an extent or magnitude that would indicate a trends towards extinction in the foreseeable future. Thus, the species status may be considered apparently secure. We encourage the USFWS to continue forward with its proposed rule to delist the Hualapai Mexican vole and incorporate this additional information to expand the rationale for delisting beyond the initial conclusion that “the currently listed subspecies is not a valid taxonomic entity” (USFWS 2015).
Literature Cited Arizona State Land Department (ASLD). 2013. Arizona Land Resource Information System. Available at: https://land.az.gov/mapping-services/arizona-land-resource-information-system . Accessed July 2015. Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD). 2004. Status Review and Petition to Delist the Hualapai Mexican Vole (Microtus mexicanus hualpaiensis ). Unpublished manuscript. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, Arizona. 9pp + attachments. Álvarez-Castañeda, S.T. & Reid, F. 2008. Microtus mexicanus . The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2015.2.
17 August 02, 2015
Frey, J.K. 2009. Genetics of Allopatric Populations of the Montane Vole ( Microtus montanus ) and Mogollon Vole (Microtus mogollonensis ) in the American Southwest. Western North American Naturalist. 62(2):215-222. Frey, J.K., and C.T. LaRue. 1993. Notes on The Distribution of the Mogollon Vole ( Microtus mogollonensis ) in New Mexico and Arizona. The Southwestern Naturalist. 38(2):176-178. Frey, J.K., and T.L. Yates. 1993. Hualapai Mexican Vole ( Microtus mexicanus hualpaiensis ) Genetic Analysis. Division of Mammals, Museum of Southwestern Biology and Department of Biology, University of New Mexico. Final Report to Arizona Game and Fish Department. 26 pp. Frey, J.K., and T.L. Yates. 1995. Hualapai Mexican Vole ( Microtus mogollonensis hualpaiensis ) Genetic Analysis. Division of Mammals, Museum of Southwestern Biology. Final Report to Arizona Game and Fish Department. Ganey, J.L. and C.L. Chambers. 2011. A Reconnaissance of Small Mammal Communities in Garland and Government Prairies, Arizona. Western North American Naturalist 71(2):151–157. Overpeck, J., G. Garfin, A. Jardine, D. E. Busch, D. Cayan, M. Dettinger, E. Fleishman,A. Gershunov, G. MacDonald, K. T. Redmond, W. R. Travis, and B. Udall. 2013. “Summary for Decision Makers.” In Assessment of Climate Change in the Southwest United States: A Report Prepared for the National Climate Assessment, edited by G. Garfin, A. Jardine, R. Merideth, M. Black, and S. LeRoy, 1–20. A report by the Southwest Climate Alliance. Washington, DC: Island Press. Réale, D., A.G. McAdam, S. Boutin, and D. Berteaux. Genetic and plastic responses of a northern mammal to climate change. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 270: 591– 596. Triant, D.A. and J.A. DeWoody. 2005. Accelerated molecular evolution in Microtus (Rodentia) as assessed via complete mitochondrial genome sequences. Genetica 2005:1–14. USFWS. 2015. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removing the Hualapai Mexican Vole From the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. June 4, 2015. Federal Register 80(107):31875-31880. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1987a. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Determination of Endangered Status for the Hualapai Vole. January 5, 1987. Federal Register 52(2): 306-309. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1987b. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Endangered Status for the Hualapai Vole. October 1, 1987. Federal Register 52(190): 36776-36779. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2008. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on Petition to Delist the Hualapai Mexican vole (Microtus mexicanus hualpaiensis). May 15, 2008. Federal Register 73(95): 28094-28097. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1991. Hualapai Mexican vole ( Microtus mexicanus hualpaiensis ) Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 28 pp. U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 2015a. Fish, Amphibians, Reptiles and Mammals … A Species Checklist for the Gila National Forest. Available at: http://www.nps.gov/gicl/planyourvisit/upload/Fish- Amphibians-Reptiles-and-Mammals.pdf . Accessed: July 2015.
18 August 02, 2015
U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 2015b. Mammals of the Tonto National Forest. Available at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/tonto/landmanagement/resourcemanagement/?cid=fsbdev3_01 8781 . Accessed: July 2015. U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 2015c. The U.S. Forest Service -An Overview. Available at: http://www.fs.fed.us/documents/USFS_An_Overview_0106MJS.pdf . Accessed: July 2015. U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 2015d. About the Agency. Available at: http://www.fs.fed.us/about-agency . Accessed July 2015. Wilson, D.E. and D.M. Reeder (editors). 2005. Mammal Species of the World. A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference (3rd ed), Johns Hopkins University Press. 2,142 pp.
19 August 02, 2015
APPENDIX A
Microtus Records from the AGFD Point Observation Database
20 August 02, 2015
Table A-1. Microtus records in the AGFD Point of Observation Database from 1985 through 2011.
ObsDate ObsDate2 Species Count Life Stage Sex County Directions 1985 -01 -01 1985 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus 3 Apache Sheep Springs 1986 -01 -01 1986 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus 2 Apache Sheep Springs 1988 -01 -01 1988 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus 4 Apache Sheep Springs 1991 -01 -01 1991 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus 6 Coconino Coconino NF - Bar M & Woods Canyon Watersheds - Gash Mt site 1991 -01 -01 1991 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus 5 Coconino Coconino NF - Bar M & Woods Canyon Watersheds - Lee Butte site
1991 -01 -01 1991 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus 5 Coconino Coconino NF - Bar M & Woods Canyon Watersheds - Rock Top site
1992 -01 -01 1992 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus 1 Coconino Coconino NF - Bar M & Woods Canyon Watersheds - Rock Top site
1992 -08 -07 Microtus mexicanus 3 Coconino Coyote Springs 1992 -08 -07 Microtus mexicanus 3 Coconino Buck Springs Meadow 1992 -08 -07 Microtus mexicanus 15 Coconino Buck Springs Meadow 1992 -08 -07 Microtus mexicanus 7 Coconino Yeager Canyon 1992 -08 -14 Microtus mexicanus 20 Coconino E Clear Creek 1992 -09 -06 1992 -09 -07 Microtus mexicanus 5 Apache Sheep Springs 1992 -09 -06 1992 -09 -07 Microtus mexicanus 5 Apache Sheep Springs 1994 -09 -03 1994 -09 -05 Microtus mexicanus 6 Apache Sheep Springs 1995 -07 -01 1995 -08 -31 Microtus mexicanus 1 Navajo 5 Miles NE (NW?) of Heber off Junction of FS 504 and 228, Mud Tanks Study Area
1997 -07 -22 Microtus mogollonensis 14 mogollonensis 1997 -09 -01 1997 -09 -02 Microtus mexicanus 2 Apache Sheep Springs 1998 -07 -25 Microtus mexicanus 1 S F Coconino 1998 -08 -05 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino 1998 -09 -05 1998 -09 -06 Microtus mexicanus 2 Apache Sheep Springs 1998 -09 -05 1998 -09 -06 Microtus mexicanus 10 Apache Sheep Springs
i August 02, 2015
ObsDate ObsDate2 Species Count Life Stage Sex County Directions 1999 -06 -01 1999 -06 -30 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Mohave Hualapai Mts hualpaiensis 1999 -06 -01 1999 -06 -30 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Mohave Hualapai Mts hualpaiensis 1999 -07 -01 1999 -07 -31 Microtus mexicanus 4 A F Mohave Hualapai Mts hualpaiensis 1999 -07 -01 1999 -07 -31 Microtus mexicanus 1 J F Mohave Hualapai Mts hualpaiensis 1999 -07 -01 1999 -07 -31 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Mohave Hualapai Mts hualpaiensis 1999 -07 -01 1999 -07 -31 Microtus mexicanus 5 A F Mohave Hualapai Mts hualpaiensis 1999 -07 -01 1999 -07 -31 Microtus mexicanus 1 SA F Mohave Hualapai Mts hualpaiensis 1999 -07 -01 1999 -07 -31 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Mohave Hualapai Mts hualpaiensis 1999 -07 -01 1999 -07 -31 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Mohave Hualapai Mts hualpaiensis 1999 -08 -01 1999 -08 -31 Microtus mexicanus 3 Mohave Hualapai Mts hualpaiensis 1999 -08 -01 1999 -08 -31 Microtus mexicanus 3 Mohave Hualapai Mts hualpaiensis 2000 -02 -01 2000 -02 -28 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Dick Hart Draw 2000 -02 -01 2000 -02 -28 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Merritt Springs 2000 -02 -01 2000 -02 -28 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Houston Springs 2000 -02 -01 2000 -02 -28 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Clark Springs 2000 -08 -01 2000 -08 -31 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Grand Canyon National Park South Rim 2000 -08 -01 2000 -08 -31 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Grand Canyon National Park South Rim 2000 -08 -01 2000 -08 -31 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Grand Canyon National Park South Rim 2000 -08 -15 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino 2000 -09 -01 Microtus mexicanus 1 Coconino 2001 -01 -01 2001 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Dick Hart Draw 2001 -01 -01 2001 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Merritt Springs 2001 -01 -01 2001 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Hoxworth Springs 2001 -01 -01 2001 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Hoxworth Springs
ii August 02, 2015
ObsDate ObsDate2 Species Count Life Stage Sex County Directions 2001 -01 -01 2001 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Hoxworth Springs 2001 -01 -01 2001 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Hoxworth Springs 2001 -01 -01 2001 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Houston Springs 2001 -01 -01 2001 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus Coconino Clark Springs 2002 -01 -01 2002 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus 5 F Coconino 2002 -01 -01 2002 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus 17 M Coconino 2002 -01 -01 2002 -12 -31 Microtus mexicanus 7 Coconino 2002 -04 -19 Microtus mexicanus 2 F Coconino Tusayan 2002 -08 -07 Microtus mexicanus 5 F Coconino Tusayan 2002 -08 -08 Microtus mexicanus 1 F Coconino Tusayan 2002 -08 -15 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Camp Navajo 2002 -08 -16 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Camp Navajo 2002 -09 -06 Microtus mexicanus 1 F Coconino Tusayan 2002 -09 -06 Microtus mexicanus 1 M Coconino Tusayan 2002 -09 -07 Microtus mexicanus 5 F Coconino Tusayan 2002 -09 -07 Microtus mexicanus 2 M Coconino Tusayan 2002 -10 -11 Microtus mexicanus 1 F Coconino Tusayan 2002 -10 -12 Microtus mexicanus 2 F Coconino Tusayan 2002 -10 -12 Microtus mexicanus 2 M Coconino Tusayan 2002 -10 -13 Microtus mexicanus 5 F Coconino Tusayan 2002 -11 -08 Microtus mexicanus 2 F Coconino Tusayan 2002 -11 -08 Microtus mexicanus 1 M Coconino Tusayan 2002 -11 -09 Microtus mexicanus 1 F Coconino Tusayan 2002 -11 -09 Microtus mexicanus 3 M Coconino Tusayan 2002 -11 -09 Microtus mexicanus 1 A Coconino Camp Navajo 2002 -11 -09 Microtus mexicanus 1 A Coconino Camp Navajo 2002 -11 -09 Microtus mexicanus 1 J Coconino Camp Navajo 2002 -11 -09 Microtus mexicanus 1 A Coconino Camp Navajo
iii August 02, 2015
ObsDate ObsDate2 Species Count Life Stage Sex County Directions 2002 -11 -09 Microtus mexicanus 1 A Coconino Camp Navajo 2002 -11 -09 Microtus mexicanus 1 A Coconino Camp Navajo 2002 -12 -06 Microtus mexicanus 2 F Coconino Tusayan 2002 -12 -06 Microtus mexicanus 1 M Coconino Tusayan 2002 -12 -07 Microtus mexicanus 2 F Coconino Tusayan 2002 -12 -07 Microtus mexicanus 2 M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -02 -08 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -04 -06 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -05 -01 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -05 -01 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -05 -02 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis 2 SA M Coconino Twin Tanks 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis 1 J M Coconino Twin Tanks 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis Coconino Dick Hart Draw 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis Coconino Merritt Springs 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis Coconino Hoxworth Springs 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis Coconino Hoxworth Springs 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis Coconino Hoxworth Springs 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis Coconino Hoxworth Springs 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis Coconino Houston Springs 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis Coconino Clark Springs 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis Coconino Coleman Lake, Kaibab National Forest 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis Coconino Coleman Lake, Kaibab National Forest 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis Coconino Summit Mtn 2003 -06 -01 2003 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis Coconino Summit Mtn 2003 -06 -03 Microtus mexicanus 2 J F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -06 -03 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -06 -04 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan
iv August 02, 2015
ObsDate ObsDate2 Species Count Life Stage Sex County Directions 2003 -06 -04 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -07 -01 2003 -07 -31 Microtus mogollonensis 1 M Coconino Mud Spring (Tank?) 2003 -07 -02 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -07 -02 Microtus mexicanus 1 J F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -07 -02 Microtus mexicanus 3 A M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -07 -03 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -07 -03 Microtus mexicanus 3 A M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -07 -26 Microtus mexicanus 4 Coconino 2003 -07 -27 Microtus mexicanus 5 Coconino 2003 -07 -27 Microtus mexicanus 1 Coconino 2003 -07 -29 Microtus mexicanus 1 Coconino 2003 -07 -30 Microtus mexicanus 2 Coconino 2003 -08 -02 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -08 -02 Microtus mexicanus 1 M Coconino 2003 -08 -03 Microtus mexicanus 2 A F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -08 -03 Microtus mexicanus 1 J F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -08 -03 Microtus mexicanus 6 A M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -08 -03 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino 2003 -08 -05 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino 2003 -09 -01 Microtus mexicanus 4 A F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -09 -01 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -09 -01 Microtus mogollonensis 1 M 2003 -09 -01 Microtus mogollonensis 1 M Apache 2003 -09 -02 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -09 -03 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -09 -03 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -10 -03 Microtus mexicanus 5 A F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -10 -03 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan
v August 02, 2015
ObsDate ObsDate2 Species Count Life Stage Sex County Directions 2003 -10 -04 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -10 -04 Microtus mexicanus 3 A M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -11 -20 Microtus mexicanus 2 A F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -11 -20 Microtus mexicanus 3 A M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -11 -21 Microtus mexicanus 3 A F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -11 -21 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2003 -11 -22 Microtus mexicanus 2 A F Coconino Tusayan 2003 -11 -22 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -01 -16 Microtus mexicanus 4 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -01 -16 Microtus mexicanus 8 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -01 -17 Microtus mexicanus 2 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -01 -17 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -01 -18 Microtus mexicanus 3 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -03 -20 Microtus mexicanus 2 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -03 -20 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -03 -21 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -03 -21 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -04 -17 Microtus mexicanus 2 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -05 -20 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -05 -20 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -05 -21 Microtus mexicanus 3 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -05 -21 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -05 -22 Microtus mexicanus 2 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -05 -22 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -06 -18 Microtus mexicanus 4 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -06 -19 Microtus mexicanus 2 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -06 -19 Microtus mexicanus 2 J F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -06 -19 Microtus mexicanus 4 A M Coconino Tusayan
vi August 02, 2015
ObsDate ObsDate2 Species Count Life Stage Sex County Directions 2004 -06 -20 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -06 -20 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -06 -20 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -07 -15 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -07 -16 Microtus mexicanus 3 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -07 -16 Microtus mexicanus 3 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -07 -16 Microtus mexicanus 4 J M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -08 -12 Microtus mexicanus 2 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -08 -12 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -08 -13 Microtus mexicanus 4 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -08 -13 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -08 -13 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -08 -14 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -09 -10 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -09 -10 Microtus mexicanus 3 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -09 -11 Microtus mexicanus 2 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -09 -11 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -09 -11 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -10 -15 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -10 -15 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -10 -16 Microtus mexicanus 4 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -10 -16 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -10 -17 Microtus mexicanus 2 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -10 -17 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -11 -11 Microtus mexicanus 5 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -11 -11 Microtus mexicanus 4 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -11 -12 Microtus mexicanus 4 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -11 -12 Microtus mexicanus 2 J F Coconino Tusayan
vii August 02, 2015
ObsDate ObsDate2 Species Count Life Stage Sex County Directions 2004 -11 -12 Microtus mexicanus 7 A M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -11 -12 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2004 -11 -13 Microtus mexicanus 3 A F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -11 -13 Microtus mexicanus 1 J F Coconino Tusayan 2004 -11 -13 Microtus mexicanus 8 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -02 -05 Microtus mexicanus 2 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -02 -05 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -02 -06 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -02 -06 Microtus mexicanus 7 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -03 -11 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -03 -12 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -03 -13 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -03 -13 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -04 -07 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -04 -08 Microtus mexicanus 5 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -04 -08 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -04 -09 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -04 -09 Microtus mexicanus 1 J F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -04 -09 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -05 -05 Microtus mexicanus 4 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -05 -05 Microtus mexicanus 1 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -05 -06 Microtus mexicanus 2 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -05 -06 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -05 -06 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -05 -07 Microtus mexicanus 3 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -05 -07 Microtus mexicanus 3 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -06 -01 Microtus mexicanus 4 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -06 -01 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan
viii August 02, 2015
ObsDate ObsDate2 Species Count Life Stage Sex County Directions 2005 -06 -01 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -06 -02 Microtus mexicanus 7 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -06 -02 Microtus mexicanus 4 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -06 -02 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -06 -03 Microtus mexicanus 1 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -06 -03 Microtus mexicanus 1 J F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -06 -03 Microtus mexicanus 2 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -06 -03 Microtus mexicanus 2 J M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -07 -06 Microtus mexicanus 3 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -07 -06 Microtus mexicanus 3 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -07 -07 Microtus mexicanus 6 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -07 -07 Microtus mexicanus 2 J F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -07 -07 Microtus mexicanus 4 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -07 -08 Microtus mexicanus 7 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -07 -08 Microtus mexicanus 8 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -08 -04 Microtus mexicanus 4 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -08 -04 Microtus mexicanus 9 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -08 -05 Microtus mexicanus 5 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -08 -05 Microtus mexicanus 1 J F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -08 -05 Microtus mexicanus 9 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -08 -05 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -08 -06 Microtus mexicanus 6 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -08 -06 Microtus mexicanus 2 J F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -08 -06 Microtus mexicanus 6 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -08 -06 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -09 -04 Microtus mogollonensis 1 M 2005 -09 -04 Microtus mogollonensis 3 F 2005 -09 -04 Microtus mogollonensis 1 M
ix August 02, 2015
ObsDate ObsDate2 Species Count Life Stage Sex County Directions 2005 -09 -04 Microtus mogollonensis 1 M Apache 2005 -09 -04 Microtus mogollonensis 3 F Apache 2005 -09 -04 Microtus mogollonensis 1 M Apache 2005 -09 -05 Microtus mogollonensis 1 M 2005 -09 -05 Microtus mogollonensis 1 F 2005 -09 -05 Microtus mogollonensis 1 M Apache 2005 -09 -05 Microtus mogollonensis 1 F Apache 2005 -09 -08 Microtus mexicanus 9 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -09 -08 Microtus mexicanus 6 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -09 -09 Microtus mexicanus 8 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -09 -09 Microtus mexicanus 9 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -09 -09 Microtus mexicanus 1 J M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -09 -10 Microtus mexicanus 7 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -09 -10 Microtus mexicanus 1 J F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -09 -10 Microtus mexicanus 13 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -10 -01 Microtus mexicanus 6 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -10 -01 Microtus mexicanus 7 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -10 -01 Microtus mexicanus 2 J M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -10 -02 Microtus mexicanus 6 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -10 -02 Microtus mexicanus 14 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -10 -03 Microtus mexicanus 4 A F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -10 -03 Microtus mexicanus 2 J F Coconino Tusayan 2005 -10 -03 Microtus mexicanus 6 A M Coconino Tusayan 2005 -10 -03 Microtus mexicanus 3 J M Coconino Tusayan 2006 -07 -21 Microtus mogollonensis 1 Coconino 2006 -07 -21 Microtus mogollonensis 1 Coconino 2006 -07 -22 Microtus mogollonensis 1 Coconino 2006 -07 -23 Microtus mogollonensis 1 Coconino
x August 02, 2015
ObsDate ObsDate2 Species Count Life Stage Sex County Directions 2006 -07 -23 Microtus mogollonensis 1 Coconino 2006 -07 -25 Microtus mogollonensis 2 Coconino 2006 -07 -25 Microtus mogollonensis 1 Coconino 2006 -08 -05 Microtus mogollonensis 1 Coconino 2006 -08 -05 Microtus mogollonensis 1 Coconino 2006 -08 -06 Microtus mogollonensis 1 Coconino 2007 -07 -17 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U 2007 -07 -18 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U 2007 -07 -19 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U 2007 -07 -25 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U 2007 -07 -31 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U 2007 -08 -01 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U 2007 -08 -02 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U 2007 -08 -02 Microtus mogollonensis 2 U 2007 -08 -08 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U 2007 -08 -14 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U 2007 -08 -15 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U 2007 -08 -16 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U 2007 -08 -21 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U 2007 -08 -23 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U 2008 -07 -01 2008 -07 -31 Microtus mogollonensis 1 Apache Boggy Creek at jct FS Rd 25 2008 -08 -01 2008 -08 -31 Microtus mogollonensis 2 Greenlee Campbell Blue Creek 2008 -08 -01 2008 -08 -31 Microtus mogollonensis 2 Greenlee Campbell Blue Creek at confluence Turkey Creek. 2008 -08 -01 2008 -08 -31 Microtus mogollonensis 4 Greenlee Campbell Blue Creek 2008 -08 -01 2008 -08 -31 Microtus mogollonensis 10 Greenlee Campbell Blue Creek 2009 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis 2 U Coconino 2009 -06 -30 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U Coconino 2009 -07 -01 2009/07/31 Microtus mogollonensis 1 Apache Rudd Creek, Sipe White Mountain Wildlife Area
xi August 02, 2015
ObsDate ObsDate2 Species Count Life Stage Sex County Directions 2009 -07 -01 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U Coconino 2009 -07 -01 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U Coconino 2009 -07 -02 Microtus mogollonensis 1 F Coconino 2009 -07 -02 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U Coconino 2009 -07 -02 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U Coconino 2009 -07 -09 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U Coconino 2009 -07 -21 Microtus mogollonensis 1 M Coconino 2009 -07 -22 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U Coconino 2009 -07 -22 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U Coconino 2009 -07 -23 Microtus mogollonensis 1 U Coconino 2009 -07 -29 Microtus mogollonensis 2 U Coconino 2009 -08 -12 Microtus mogollonensis 1 M Coconino 2009 -09 -01 2009/09/30 Microtus mogollonensis 1 Apache Little Colorado River, Wenima Wildlife Area 2009 -09 -06 Microtus mexicanus 1 F Apache White Mountains 2009 -09 -06 Microtus mexicanus 1 M Apache White Mountains 2010 -01 -01 2010 -12 -21 Microtus mexicanus 1 Coconino 2011 -04 -01 2011 -09 -30 Microtus mexicanus 45 Yavapai Watson Woods Preserve, Prescott 2011 -09 -05 Microtus mexicanus 2 Apache Source: Personal communication, emails from Sabra Tonn, HDMS Program Coordinator, AGFD, to Eleanor Gladding, SWCA, July 6-8, 2015
xii