Hualapai Mexican Vole Conservation Status Review

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Hualapai Mexican Vole Conservation Status Review 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
Recommended publications
  • Mineral Resources of the Harquahala Mountains Wilderness Study Area, La Paz and Maricopa Counties, Arizona
    2.SOB nH in ntoiOGIGM. JAN 3 1 1989 Mineral Resources of the Harquahala Mountains Wilderness Study Area, La Paz and Maricopa Counties, Arizona U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1701-C Chapter C Mineral Resources of the Harquahala Mountains Wilderness Study Area, La Paz and Maricopa Counties, Arizona By ED DE WITT, S.M. RICHARD, J.R. HASSEMER, and W.F. HANNA U.S. Geological Survey J.R. THOMPSON U.S. Bureau of Mines U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1701 MINERAL RESOURCES OF WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS- WEST-CENTRAL ARIZONA AND PART OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L Peck, Director UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1988 For sale by the Books and Open-File Reports Section U.S. Geological Survey Federal Center Box 25425 Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publlcatlon Data Mineral resources of the Harquahala Mountains wilderness study area, La Paz and Maricopa counties, Arizona. (Mineral resources of wilderness study areas west-central Arizona and part of San Bernardino County, California ; ch. C) (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1701-C) Bibliography: p. Supt. of Docs, no.: I 19.3:1701-C 1. Mines and mineral resources Arizona Harquahala Mountains Wilderness. 2. Harquahala Mountains (Ariz.) I. DeWitt, Ed. II. Series. III. Series: U.S. Geological Survey bulletin ; 1701. QE75.B9 no. 1701-C 557.3 s [553'.09791'72] 88-600012 [TN24.A6] STUDIES RELATED TO WILDERNESS Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Study Areas The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (Public Law 94-579, October 21, 1976) requires the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Likely to Have Habitat Within Iras That ALLOW Road
    Item 3a - Sensitive Species National Master List By Region and Species Group Not likely to have habitat within IRAs Not likely to have Federal Likely to have habitat that DO NOT ALLOW habitat within IRAs Candidate within IRAs that DO Likely to have habitat road (re)construction that ALLOW road Forest Service Species Under NOT ALLOW road within IRAs that ALLOW but could be (re)construction but Species Scientific Name Common Name Species Group Region ESA (re)construction? road (re)construction? affected? could be affected? Bufo boreas boreas Boreal Western Toad Amphibian 1 No Yes Yes No No Plethodon vandykei idahoensis Coeur D'Alene Salamander Amphibian 1 No Yes Yes No No Rana pipiens Northern Leopard Frog Amphibian 1 No Yes Yes No No Accipiter gentilis Northern Goshawk Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Ammodramus bairdii Baird's Sparrow Bird 1 No No Yes No No Anthus spragueii Sprague's Pipit Bird 1 No No Yes No No Centrocercus urophasianus Sage Grouse Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Cygnus buccinator Trumpeter Swan Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Falco peregrinus anatum American Peregrine Falcon Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Gavia immer Common Loon Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Histrionicus histrionicus Harlequin Duck Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Lanius ludovicianus Loggerhead Shrike Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Oreortyx pictus Mountain Quail Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Otus flammeolus Flammulated Owl Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Picoides albolarvatus White-Headed Woodpecker Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Picoides arcticus Black-Backed Woodpecker Bird 1 No Yes Yes No No Speotyto cunicularia Burrowing
    [Show full text]
  • Mammal Species Native to the USA and Canada for Which the MIL Has an Image (296) 31 July 2021
    Mammal species native to the USA and Canada for which the MIL has an image (296) 31 July 2021 ARTIODACTYLA (includes CETACEA) (38) ANTILOCAPRIDAE - pronghorns Antilocapra americana - Pronghorn BALAENIDAE - bowheads and right whales 1. Balaena mysticetus – Bowhead Whale BALAENOPTERIDAE -rorqual whales 1. Balaenoptera acutorostrata – Common Minke Whale 2. Balaenoptera borealis - Sei Whale 3. Balaenoptera brydei - Bryde’s Whale 4. Balaenoptera musculus - Blue Whale 5. Balaenoptera physalus - Fin Whale 6. Eschrichtius robustus - Gray Whale 7. Megaptera novaeangliae - Humpback Whale BOVIDAE - cattle, sheep, goats, and antelopes 1. Bos bison - American Bison 2. Oreamnos americanus - Mountain Goat 3. Ovibos moschatus - Muskox 4. Ovis canadensis - Bighorn Sheep 5. Ovis dalli - Thinhorn Sheep CERVIDAE - deer 1. Alces alces - Moose 2. Cervus canadensis - Wapiti (Elk) 3. Odocoileus hemionus - Mule Deer 4. Odocoileus virginianus - White-tailed Deer 5. Rangifer tarandus -Caribou DELPHINIDAE - ocean dolphins 1. Delphinus delphis - Common Dolphin 2. Globicephala macrorhynchus - Short-finned Pilot Whale 3. Grampus griseus - Risso's Dolphin 4. Lagenorhynchus albirostris - White-beaked Dolphin 5. Lissodelphis borealis - Northern Right-whale Dolphin 6. Orcinus orca - Killer Whale 7. Peponocephala electra - Melon-headed Whale 8. Pseudorca crassidens - False Killer Whale 9. Sagmatias obliquidens - Pacific White-sided Dolphin 10. Stenella coeruleoalba - Striped Dolphin 11. Stenella frontalis – Atlantic Spotted Dolphin 12. Steno bredanensis - Rough-toothed Dolphin 13. Tursiops truncatus - Common Bottlenose Dolphin MONODONTIDAE - narwhals, belugas 1. Delphinapterus leucas - Beluga 2. Monodon monoceros - Narwhal PHOCOENIDAE - porpoises 1. Phocoena phocoena - Harbor Porpoise 2. Phocoenoides dalli - Dall’s Porpoise PHYSETERIDAE - sperm whales Physeter macrocephalus – Sperm Whale TAYASSUIDAE - peccaries Dicotyles tajacu - Collared Peccary CARNIVORA (48) CANIDAE - dogs 1. Canis latrans - Coyote 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimating the Energy Expenditure of Endotherms at the Species Level
    Canadian Journal of Zoology Estimating the energy expenditure of endotherms at the species level Journal: Canadian Journal of Zoology Manuscript ID cjz-2020-0035 Manuscript Type: Article Date Submitted by the 17-Feb-2020 Author: Complete List of Authors: McNab, Brian; University of Florida, Biology Is your manuscript invited for consideration in a Special Not applicable (regular submission) Issue?: Draft arvicoline rodents, BMR, Anatidae, energy expenditure, endotherms, Keyword: Meliphagidae, Phyllostomidae © The Author(s) or their Institution(s) Page 1 of 42 Canadian Journal of Zoology Estimating the energy expenditure of endotherms at the species level Brian K. McNab B.K. McNab, Department of Biology, University of Florida 32611 Email for correspondence: [email protected] Telephone number: 1-352-392-1178 Fax number: 1-352-392-3704 The author has no conflict of interest Draft © The Author(s) or their Institution(s) Canadian Journal of Zoology Page 2 of 42 McNab, B.K. Estimating the energy expenditure of endotherms at the species level. Abstract The ability to account with precision for the quantitative variation in the basal rate of metabolism (BMR) at the species level is explored in four groups of endotherms, arvicoline rodents, ducks, melaphagid honeyeaters, and phyllostomid bats. An effective analysis requires the inclusion of the factors that distinguish species and their responses to the conditions they encounter in the environment. These factors are implemented by changes in body composition and are responsible for the non-conformity of species to a scaling curve. Two concerns may limit an analysis. The factors correlatedDraft with energy expenditure often correlate with each other, which usually prevents them from being included together in an analysis, thereby preventing a complete analysis, implying the presence of factors other than mass.
    [Show full text]
  • Genus/Species Skull Ht Lt Wt Stage Range Abalosia U.Pliocene S America Abelmoschomys U.Miocene E USA A
    Genus/Species Skull Ht Lt Wt Stage Range Abalosia U.Pliocene S America Abelmoschomys U.Miocene E USA A. simpsoni U.Miocene Florida(US) Abra see Ochotona Abrana see Ochotona Abrocoma U.Miocene-Recent Peru A. oblativa 60 cm? U.Holocene Peru Abromys see Perognathus Abrosomys L.Eocene Asia Abrothrix U.Pleistocene-Recent Argentina A. illuteus living Mouse Lujanian-Recent Tucuman(ARG) Abudhabia U.Miocene Asia Acanthion see Hystrix A. brachyura see Hystrix brachyura Acanthomys see Acomys or Tokudaia or Rattus Acarechimys L-M.Miocene Argentina A. minutissimus Miocene Argentina Acaremys U.Oligocene-L.Miocene Argentina A. cf. Murinus Colhuehuapian Chubut(ARG) A. karaikensis Miocene? Argentina A. messor Miocene? Argentina A. minutissimus see Acarechimys minutissimus Argentina A. minutus Miocene? Argentina A. murinus Miocene? Argentina A. sp. L.Miocene Argentina A. tricarinatus Miocene? Argentina Acodon see Akodon A. angustidens see Akodon angustidens Pleistocene Brazil A. clivigenis see Akodon clivigenis Pleistocene Brazil A. internus see Akodon internus Pleistocene Argentina Acomys L.Pliocene-Recent Africa,Europe,W Asia,Crete A. cahirinus living Spiny Mouse U.Pleistocene-Recent Israel A. gaudryi U.Miocene? Greece Aconaemys see Pithanotomys A. fuscus Pliocene-Recent Argentina A. f. fossilis see Aconaemys fuscus Pliocene Argentina Acondemys see Pithanotomys Acritoparamys U.Paleocene-M.Eocene W USA,Asia A. atavus see Paramys atavus A. atwateri Wasatchian W USA A. cf. Francesi Clarkforkian Wyoming(US) A. francesi(francesci) Wasatchian-Bridgerian Wyoming(US) A. wyomingensis Bridgerian Wyoming(US) Acrorhizomys see Clethrionomys Actenomys L.Pliocene-L.Pleistocene Argentina A. maximus Pliocene Argentina Adelomyarion U.Oligocene France A. vireti U.Oligocene France Adelomys U.Eocene France A.
    [Show full text]
  • Scorpiones: Vaejovidae)
    New Species of Vaejovis from the Whetstone Mountains, Southern Arizona (Scorpiones: Vaejovidae) Richard F. Ayrey & Michael E. Soleglad January 2015 — No. 194 Euscorpius Occasional Publications in Scorpiology EDITOR: Victor Fet, Marshall University, ‘[email protected]’ ASSOCIATE EDITOR: Michael E. Soleglad, ‘[email protected]’ Euscorpius is the first research publication completely devoted to scorpions (Arachnida: Scorpiones). Euscorpius takes advantage of the rapidly evolving medium of quick online publication, at the same time maintaining high research standards for the burgeoning field of scorpion science (scorpiology). Euscorpius is an expedient and viable medium for the publication of serious papers in scorpiology, including (but not limited to): systematics, evolution, ecology, biogeography, and general biology of scorpions. Review papers, descriptions of new taxa, faunistic surveys, lists of museum collections, and book reviews are welcome. Derivatio Nominis The name Euscorpius Thorell, 1876 refers to the most common genus of scorpions in the Mediterranean region and southern Europe (family Euscorpiidae). Euscorpius is located at: http://www.science.marshall.edu/fet/Euscorpius (Marshall University, Huntington, West Virginia 25755-2510, USA) ICZN COMPLIANCE OF ELECTRONIC PUBLICATIONS: Electronic (“e-only”) publications are fully compliant with ICZN (International Code of Zoological Nomenclature) (i.e. for the purposes of new names and new nomenclatural acts) when properly archived and registered. All Euscorpius issues starting from No. 156 (2013) are archived in two electronic archives: Biotaxa, http://biotaxa.org/Euscorpius (ICZN-approved and ZooBank-enabled) Marshall Digital Scholar, http://mds.marshall.edu/euscorpius/. (This website also archives all Euscorpius issues previously published on CD-ROMs.) Between 2000 and 2013, ICZN did not accept online texts as "published work" (Article 9.8).
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PRELIMINARY DEPOSIT-TYPE MAP of NORTHWESTERN MEXICO by Kenneth R
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PRELIMINARY DEPOSIT-TYPE MAP OF NORTHWESTERN MEXICO By Kenneth R. Leonard U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-158 This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with Geological Survey editorial standards and stratigraphic nomenclature. Any use of trade, product, firm, or industry names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Menlo Park, CA 1989 Table of Contents Page Introduction..................................................................................................... i Explanation of Data Fields.......................................................................... i-vi Table 1 Size Categories for Deposits....................................................................... vii References.................................................................................................... viii-xx Site Descriptions........................................................................................... 1-330 Appendix I List of Deposits Sorted by Deposit Type.............................................. A-1 to A-22 Appendix n Site Name Index...................................................................................... B-1 to B-10 Plate 1 Distribution of Mineral Deposits in Northwestern Mexico Insets: Figure 1. Los Gavilanes Tungsten District Figure 2. El Antimonio District Figure 3. Magdalena District Figure 4. Cananea District Preliminary Deposit-Type Map of
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1: Introduction
    Chapter 1. Introduction Community vision meetings during Forest Plan Revision Location The Prescott National Forest (Prescott NF) is one of six national forests in Arizona (figure 1). It covers approximately 1.2 million acres in west-central Arizona and is located in Yavapai and Coconino Counties. The Prescott NF consists of two geographically separate land areas (eastern and western) that are administered as three ranger districts: the Chino Valley Ranger District, which covers the areas east and west of Chino Valley; the Bradshaw Ranger District, which covers the area near Prescott and south into the Bradshaw Mountains; and the Verde Ranger District, which covers the area just north of Jerome and Clarkdale and along the southern side of the Verde Valley. The Prescott NF shares boundaries with: the Coconino, Kaibab, and Tonto National Forests; the Agua Fria National Monument; Bureau of Land Management - Hassayampa Field Office; Arizona State Trust lands; and several communities including Prescott, Camp Verde, and Cottonwood. Role and Contributions of the Planning Area The Prescott NF is located in a comparatively mountainous section of central Arizona between the forested plateaus to the north and the arid desert region to the south. Roughly half of the Prescott NF lies west of the city of Prescott, Arizona, in the Juniper, Santa Maria, Sierra Prieta, and Bradshaw Mountains. The other half of the Prescott NF lies east of Prescott and takes in the Land and Resource Management Plan for the Prescott NF 1 Chapter 1. Introduction terrain of Mingus Mountain, the Black Hills, and Black Mesa. Elevations range between 3,000 feet above sea level along the lower Verde Valley to 7,979 feet at the top of Mount Union, the highest natural feature on the national forest.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona's Wildlife Linkages Assessment
    ARIZONAARIZONA’’SS WILDLIFEWILDLIFE LINKAGESLINKAGES ASSESSMENTASSESSMENT Workgroup Prepared by: The Arizona Wildlife Linkages ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT 2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT Arizona’s Wildlife Linkages Assessment Prepared by: The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup Siobhan E. Nordhaugen, Arizona Department of Transportation, Natural Resources Management Group Evelyn Erlandsen, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Habitat Branch Paul Beier, Northern Arizona University, School of Forestry Bruce D. Eilerts, Arizona Department of Transportation, Natural Resources Management Group Ray Schweinsburg, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Research Branch Terry Brennan, USDA Forest Service, Tonto National Forest Ted Cordery, Bureau of Land Management Norris Dodd, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Research Branch Melissa Maiefski, Arizona Department of Transportation, Environmental Planning Group Janice Przybyl, The Sky Island Alliance Steve Thomas, Federal Highway Administration Kim Vacariu, The Wildlands Project Stuart Wells, US Fish and Wildlife Service 2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT First Printing Date: December, 2006 Copyright © 2006 The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written consent from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written consent of the copyright holder. Additional copies may be obtained by submitting a request to: The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup E-mail: [email protected] 2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup Mission Statement “To identify and promote wildlife habitat connectivity using a collaborative, science based effort to provide safe passage for people and wildlife” 2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT Primary Contacts: Bruce D.
    [Show full text]
  • Viability Analyses for Vascular Plant Species Within Prescott National Forest, Arizona
    Viability analyses for vascular plant species within Prescott National Forest, Arizona Marc Baker Draft 4 January 2011 1 Part 1. Description of Ecological Context (Adapted from: Ecological Sustainability Report, Prescott National Forest, Prescott, Arizona, April 2009) Description of the Planning Unit Prescott National Forest (PNF) includes mostly mountains and associated grassy valleys of central Arizona that lie between the forested plateaus to the north and the arid desert region to the south. Elevations range between 3,000 feet above sea level along the lower Verde Valley to 7,979 feet at the top of Mount Union, the highest natural feature on the Forest. Roughly half of the PNF occurs west of the city of Prescott, Arizona, in the Juniper, Santa Maria, Sierra Prieta, and Bradshaw Mountains. The other half of the PNF lies east of Prescott and takes in the terrain of Mingus Mountain, the Black Hills, and Black Mesa. The rugged topography of the PNF provides important watersheds for both the Verde and Colorado Rivers. Within these watersheds are many important continuously or seasonally flowing stream courses and drainages. A portion of the Verde River has been designated as part of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. Vegetation within PNF is complex and diverse: Sonoran Desert, dominated by saguaro cacti and paloverde trees, occurs to the south of Bradshaw Mountains; and cool mountain forests with conifer and aspen trees occur within as few as 10 miles upslope from the desert . In between, there are a variety of plant and animal habitats including grasslands, hot steppe shrub, chaparral, pinyon-juniper woodlands, and ponderosa pine forests.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Evaluation of the Aquarius Cliffs Weather Station Project in Mohave County, Arizona
    Biological Evaluation of the Aquarius Cliffs Weather Station Project in Mohave County, Arizona Prepared for Mohave County Prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants January 2011 BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF THE AQUARIUS CLIFFS WEATHER STATION PROJECT IN MOHAVE COUNTY, ARIZONA For submittal to Bureau of Land Management Kingman Field Office 2755 Mission Boulevard Kingman, Arizona 86401 Attn: Andy Whitefield (928) 718-3700 On behalf of Mohave County Flood Control District P.O. Box 7000 3250 East Kino Avenue Kingman, Arizona 86402 Attn: David West Prepared by SWCA Environmental Consultants 114 N San Francisco Street, Suite 100 Flagstaff, Arizona 86001 928-774-5500 www.swca.com SWCA Project No. 17067 January 2011 1.0 INTRODUCTION SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) was selected by Mohave County to complete a biological evaluation (BE) for the Aquarius Cliffs Weather Station Project, which is located southeast of Kingman in Mohave County, Arizona (Figure 1). The project area is located on lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) within the boundaries of the Kingman Field Office (KFO) in the northwest quarter of Section 21, Township 16½ North, Range 11 West. The purpose of this BE is to address the regulations of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, and management regulations of the BLM. The scope of work for this BE included: review of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) species list for Mohave County; review of the BLM sensitive species list for the KFO; review of the Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) online occurrence records for special-status species near the project area; survey for noxious weeds; field reconnaissance of the property; and evaluation of the potential for the species listed in this report to occur in the project area.
    [Show full text]
  • List of 28 Orders, 129 Families, 598 Genera and 1121 Species in Mammal Images Library 31 December 2013
    What the American Society of Mammalogists has in the images library LIST OF 28 ORDERS, 129 FAMILIES, 598 GENERA AND 1121 SPECIES IN MAMMAL IMAGES LIBRARY 31 DECEMBER 2013 AFROSORICIDA (5 genera, 5 species) – golden moles and tenrecs CHRYSOCHLORIDAE - golden moles Chrysospalax villosus - Rough-haired Golden Mole TENRECIDAE - tenrecs 1. Echinops telfairi - Lesser Hedgehog Tenrec 2. Hemicentetes semispinosus – Lowland Streaked Tenrec 3. Microgale dobsoni - Dobson’s Shrew Tenrec 4. Tenrec ecaudatus – Tailless Tenrec ARTIODACTYLA (83 genera, 142 species) – paraxonic (mostly even-toed) ungulates ANTILOCAPRIDAE - pronghorns Antilocapra americana - Pronghorn BOVIDAE (46 genera) - cattle, sheep, goats, and antelopes 1. Addax nasomaculatus - Addax 2. Aepyceros melampus - Impala 3. Alcelaphus buselaphus - Hartebeest 4. Alcelaphus caama – Red Hartebeest 5. Ammotragus lervia - Barbary Sheep 6. Antidorcas marsupialis - Springbok 7. Antilope cervicapra – Blackbuck 8. Beatragus hunter – Hunter’s Hartebeest 9. Bison bison - American Bison 10. Bison bonasus - European Bison 11. Bos frontalis - Gaur 12. Bos javanicus - Banteng 13. Bos taurus -Auroch 14. Boselaphus tragocamelus - Nilgai 15. Bubalus bubalis - Water Buffalo 16. Bubalus depressicornis - Anoa 17. Bubalus quarlesi - Mountain Anoa 18. Budorcas taxicolor - Takin 19. Capra caucasica - Tur 20. Capra falconeri - Markhor 21. Capra hircus - Goat 22. Capra nubiana – Nubian Ibex 23. Capra pyrenaica – Spanish Ibex 24. Capricornis crispus – Japanese Serow 25. Cephalophus jentinki - Jentink's Duiker 26. Cephalophus natalensis – Red Duiker 1 What the American Society of Mammalogists has in the images library 27. Cephalophus niger – Black Duiker 28. Cephalophus rufilatus – Red-flanked Duiker 29. Cephalophus silvicultor - Yellow-backed Duiker 30. Cephalophus zebra - Zebra Duiker 31. Connochaetes gnou - Black Wildebeest 32. Connochaetes taurinus - Blue Wildebeest 33. Damaliscus korrigum – Topi 34.
    [Show full text]