DOCSLIB.ORG

Mammal SGCN Conservation Reports Vermont’S Wildlife Action Plan 2015

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mammal SGCN Conservation Reports Vermont’S Wildlife Action Plan 2015 Appendix A5 Mammal SGCN Conservation Reports Vermont’s Wildlife Action Plan 2015 Species ........................................ page Species ......................................... page Masked Shrew..................................... 2 Southern Flying Squirrel .................... 73 Water Shrew ....................................... 6 Northern Flying Squirrel .................... 76 Smoky Shrew ...................................... 9 Rock Vole ......................................... 80 Long-tailed or Rock Shrew ................. 13 Woodland Vole ................................. 85 Pygmy Shrew .................................... 17 Muskrat ............................................ 88 Hairy-tailed Mole ............................... 20 Southern Bog Lemming ..................... 92 Little Brown Bat/Myotis ...................... 23 Northern bog lemming ...................... 97 Indiana Bat ....................................... 27 Wolf ................................................ 100 Small-footed Bat ............................... 32 Gray Fox ......................................... 107 Northern Long-eared Bat ................... 37 American Marten ............................. 113 Silver-haired Bat................................ 43 Long-tailed Weasel .......................... 118 Tri-colored bat .................................. 48 Northern River Otter ........................ 121 Big Brown Bat ................................... 52 Canada Lynx .................................... 124 Eastern Red Bat ................................ 57 Bobcat ............................................ 129 Hoary Bat ......................................... 62 Eastern Mountain Lion ...................... 133 New England Cottontail ..................... 67 Snowshoe Hare ................................. 70 Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Action Plan - Revision 2015 Species Conservation Report Common Name: Cinereus or Masked Shrew Scientific Name: Sorex cinereus Species Group: Mammal Conservation Assessment Final Assessment: Medium Priority Global Rank: G5 Global Trend: State Rank: S5 State Trend: Unknown Extirpated in VT? NA Regional SGCN? no Assessment Narrative: The trend of the cinereus (masked) shrew in Vermont is unknown. Historic records indicate a widespread distribution of the species in the state. Since 2008, during an effort to develop a small mammal atlas, the masked shrew was verified at 28 sites in Vermont further supporting the belief that the species continues to be widely distributed throughout the state. Although it may be the most common of the small shrews, it is still believed to be relatively rare at most locations and there is insufficient data on this species in Vermont to fully assess its status. The masked shrew may be more common at higher elevations but the overall role of elevation on the species distribution remains unclear. It is believed that masked shrews are more common in old growth or late successional forests. Distribution Considered rare though broadly distributed. Distribution by Biophysical Region: Champlain Valley Confident Southern VT Piedmont Confident Champlain Hills Confident Vermont Valley Confident Northern Green Mtns Confident Southern Green Mtns Confident Northern VT Piedmont Confident Taconic Mtns Confident Northeastern Highlands Confident Distribution by Watershed: Habitat Description Habitat Information is based on the following: Limited Local Knowledge Extensive Local Knowledge Regional Literature General Literature Masked shrews are know to favor cool mesic deciduous and coniferous forests often at higher elevations. They are sometimes found in mixed habitat types such as edges of bogs and other cool and wet sites (seeps). The masked shrew uses grasses, rocks, and logs or stumps for cover. They are primarily carnivorous and insectivorous consuming worms, spiders, snails, slugs, and small amounts of vegetable matter. Dampsness of site and depth of leaf litter, seems to be critical factors in determining habitat use. The species is known to utilize down woody debris. Its home range is understood to be less than 0.5ha. A5 p. 2 Vermont's Wildlife Action Plan 2015 A5. Mammal SGCN Conservation Reports Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Action Plan - Revision 2015 Species Conservation Report Common Name: Cinereus or Masked Shrew Scientific Name: Sorex cinereus Species Group: Mammal Habitat Types: Upland Shores Outcrops and Alpine Cliffs and Talus Spruce Fir Northern Hardwood Northern Hardwood Oak-Pine Northern Hardwood Floodplain Forests Hardwood Swamps Softwood Swamps Seeps and Pools Open Peatlands Wet Shores Shrub Swamps Early Succession Boreal Conifers Early Succession Boreal Hardwoods Early Succession Spruce-Fir Early Succession Pine and Hemlock Early Succession Northern Hardwoods Early Succession Upland Oak Early Succession Other Types Grasslands, Hedgerows, Old Field, Shrub, or Orchards Aquatic: Fluvial Aquatic: Lower CT River Aquatic: Large Lake Champlain Tribs Below Falls Current Threats Habitat Threats: Conversion of Habitat Energy Infrastructure and Development Habitat Alteration Climate Change Description of habitat threat(s): Climate changes, habitat alterations/degradations, and/or habitat conversions resulting in overall drier conditions may significantly limit the species in Vermont. Although it is speculated that the direct impacts of energy infrastructure development (e.g. industrial wind power projects) could result in the reduction of upper elevation spruce fir habitats used by this species, more A5. Mammal SGCN Conservation Reports Vermont's Wildlife Action Plan 2015 A5 p. 3 Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Action Plan - Revision 2015 Species Conservation Report Common Name: Cinereus or Masked Shrew Scientific Name: Sorex cinereus Species Group: Mammal research is needed to determine just how severe this impact would be on Vermont’s population of maksed shrews. Non-Habitat Threats: Competition Pollution Loss of Prey Base Description of non-habitat threat(s): Previous studies indicate that competition from other shrews may pose a significant risk to masked shrews. Furthermore, there is concern that acid rain could alter the ecology of soil invertebrates resulting in adverse impacts to the prey prey base upon which this species depends. Research and Monitoring Needs Type Need Priority Description Research Habitat Requirements Medium Attempt to narrow down habitat requirements and determine critical habitat needs of the masked shrew. Research Basic Life History Low Determine basic life history and population demographics Research Distribution and Medium Determine distribution and abundance of the masked shrew and Abundance maintain a database of known locations. Monitoring Population Change Medium Analyze habitat conditions and local populations prior to construction of upper elevation wind generating faciiities Monitoring Monitor Threats Medium Monitor know populations, e.g. Camels Hump spruce-fir zone, to detect any significant population changes related to climate change Species Strategies Potential Strategy Strategy Strategy Performance Potential Funding Type Priority Description Measure Partners Sources Research High Conduct research to determine impact Amount of forest UVM, SWG of warming, especially as it relates to habitat protected Middlebury, drying of habitats Johnson State College Compatible High Minimize habitat fragmentation Amount of forest VFPR, EQIP, SWG Resource Use habitat protected from GMP, UVM, development TNC Standards Medium Minimize fragmentation (the Number of travel UVM, SWG permanent conversion of habitat as a corridors identified Middlebury, result of development) between and protected Johnson populations in core habitats. Maintain State habitat mosaic College Standards Medium Determine appropriate management Number of habitats VFPR, SWG strategies to improve and conserve identified and USFS, habitat protected. Coverts A5 p. 4 Vermont's Wildlife Action Plan 2015 A5. Mammal SGCN Conservation Reports Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Action Plan - Revision 2015 Species Conservation Report Common Name: Cinereus or Masked Shrew Scientific Name: Sorex cinereus Species Group: Mammal Bibliography Buckner, C.h. 1966. Populations and eclogical relationships of shrews in tamarack bogs of southeastern Manitoba. Journal of Mammalogy 47: 181-194. Brannon, M.P. 2000. Niche relationships of two syntopic species of shres, Sorex fumeus and S. cinereus in the southern Appalachian Mountains. Journal of Mammalogy, 81:1053-1061. DeGraaf, Richard M. and Yamasaki, Mariko. New England Wildlife: Habitat, Natural History, and Distribution. University Press of New England, Hanover, NH, 2001. Doucet, J.G., and RlJl Bider. 1974. The effects of weather on the activity of the masked shrew. Journal of Mammalogy, 55:348- 363. Godin, A.J. 1977. Wild Mammals of New England. Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore. MD. 303pp. Hamilton, W.J., Jr. 1930. The food of soricidae. Journal of Mammalogy, 11:26-39. Innes, D.G.L., J.F. Bendall, and B.J. Naylor. 1990. High densities of the maked shrew, Sorex cinereus, in Jack pine plantations in northern Ontario. Kilpatrick, C. W., and J. Benoit. 2011. Small mammal project. University of Vermont/NorthWoods Stewardship Center, final report submitted to Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department Kirk, George L. 1916. The mammals of Vermont, Joint Bulletin No. 2 Vermont botanical and Bird Club 2: 28-34. Kirkland, G.L. Jr. and D.F. Schmidt. 1982. Abundance, habitat,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MAMMALS of OHIO F I E L D G U I D E DIVISION of WILDLIFE Below Are Some Helpful Symbols for Quick Comparisons and Identfication
    MAMMALS OF OHIO f i e l d g u i d e DIVISION OF WILDLIFE Below are some helpful symbols for quick comparisons and identfication. They are located in the same place for each species throughout this publication. Definitions for About this Book the scientific terms used in this publication can be found at the end in the glossary. Activity Method of Feeding Diurnal • Most active during the day Carnivore • Feeds primarily on meat Nocturnal • Most active at night Herbivore • Feeds primarily on plants Crepuscular • Most active at dawn and dusk Insectivore • Feeds primarily on insects A word about diurnal and nocturnal classifications. Omnivore • Feeds on both plants and meat In nature, it is virtually impossible to apply hard and fast categories. There can be a large amount of overlap among species, and for individuals within species, in terms of daily and/or seasonal behavior habits. It is possible for the activity patterns of mammals to change due to variations in weather, food availability or human disturbances. The Raccoon designation of diurnal or nocturnal represent the description Gray or black in color with a pale most common activity patterns of each species. gray underneath. The black mask is rimmed on top and bottom with CARNIVORA white. The raccoon’s tail has four to six black or dark brown rings. habitat Raccoons live in wooded areas with Tracks & Skulls big trees and water close by. reproduction Many mammals can be elusive to sighting, leaving Raccoons mate from February through March in Ohio. Typically only one litter is produced each year, only a trail of clues that they were present.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonomic Status and Biogeography of the Southern Bog Lemming, Synaptomys Cooperi, on the Central Great Plains Author(S): Gregory M
    American Society of Mammalogists Taxonomic Status and Biogeography of the Southern Bog Lemming, Synaptomys cooperi, on the Central Great Plains Author(s): Gregory M. Wilson and Jerry R. Choate Source: Journal of Mammalogy, Vol. 78, No. 2 (May, 1997), pp. 444-458 Published by: American Society of Mammalogists Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1382897 . Accessed: 11/08/2011 18:26 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Society of Mammalogists is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Mammalogy. http://www.jstor.org TAXONOMIC STATUS AND BIOGEOGRAPHY OF THE SOUTHERN BOG LEMMING, SYNAPTOMYS COOPERI, ON THE CENTRAL GREAT PLAINS GREGORY M. WILSON AND JERRY R. CHOATE Present address of GMW: Department of Zoology, 430 Life Sciences West, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078 Sternberg Museum of Natural History, Fort Hays State University, Hays, KS 67601 We assessed geographic and nongeographic variation among populations of the southern bog lemming (Synaptomys cooperi) in Arkansas, Iowa, Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and South Dakota based on morphological data. Univariate and multivariate analyses of 15 cranial characters revealed no consistent sexual dimorphism. Geographic variation in cra- nial morphology of adults varied clinally, with individuals increasing in size from north to south and east to west.
    [Show full text]
  • Tree Communities, Microhabitat Characteristics, and Small Mammals Associated with the Endangered Rock Vole, Microtus Chrotorrhinus, in Virginia
    2003SOUTHEASTERN NATURALIST 2(4):547–558 TREE COMMUNITIES, MICROHABITAT CHARACTERISTICS, AND SMALL MAMMALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ENDANGERED ROCK VOLE, MICROTUS CHROTORRHINUS, IN VIRGINIA 1,2,* 1 JOHN L. ORROCK AND JOHN F. PAGELS ABSTRACT - We located the endangered rock vole, Microtus chrotorrhinus, at 3 of 59 sites in mixed mesophytic forests in the southern Appalachians. Rock voles were always found within mixed mesophytic habitats characterized by yellow birch, Betula alleghaniensis, rather than mixed mesophytic habitats dominated by other tree species. We compared the tree communities, microhabi- tat features, and small mammals found within three groups of habitats: sites where M. chrotorrhinus was found, yellow birch habitats where M. chrotorrhinus was not found, and other mixed mesophytic habitats where M. chrotorrhinus was not found. Sites occupied by M. chrotorrhinus had greater amounts of large, rocky substrate, greater incidence of moss, and a more north- west aspect than yellow birch and other mixed mesophytic sites without M. chrotorrhinus. Moreover, sites with rock voles had larger trees and were signifi- cantly older than sites without M. chrotorrhinus. Red-backed voles, Clethrionomys gapperi, are readily sampled by live-trap methods and were significantly more abundant at sites with M. chrotorrhinus, and may thus be a promising indicator species. Our results suggest that mixed mesophytic forests, especially older stands dominated by yellow birch and rocky substrate, should be managed with care to preserve M. chrotorrhinus habitat. INTRODUCTION The rock vole, Microtus chrotorrhinus, is an endangered species in Virginia (Roble 2001). Microtus chrotorrhinus is a boreal rodent whose geographic distribution extends from eastern Canada south along the Appalachians to North Carolina and Tennessee (Kirkland and Jannett 1982).
    [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]
  • Controlled Animals
    Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Fish and Wildlife Policy Division Controlled Animals Wildlife Regulation, Schedule 5, Part 1-4: Controlled Animals Subject to the Wildlife Act, a person must not be in possession of a wildlife or controlled animal unless authorized by a permit to do so, the animal was lawfully acquired, was lawfully exported from a jurisdiction outside of Alberta and was lawfully imported into Alberta. NOTES: 1 Animals listed in this Schedule, as a general rule, are described in the left hand column by reference to common or descriptive names and in the right hand column by reference to scientific names. But, in the event of any conflict as to the kind of animals that are listed, a scientific name in the right hand column prevails over the corresponding common or descriptive name in the left hand column. 2 Also included in this Schedule is any animal that is the hybrid offspring resulting from the crossing, whether before or after the commencement of this Schedule, of 2 animals at least one of which is or was an animal of a kind that is a controlled animal by virtue of this Schedule. 3 This Schedule excludes all wildlife animals, and therefore if a wildlife animal would, but for this Note, be included in this Schedule, it is hereby excluded from being a controlled animal. Part 1 Mammals (Class Mammalia) 1. AMERICAN OPOSSUMS (Family Didelphidae) Virginia Opossum Didelphis virginiana 2. SHREWS (Family Soricidae) Long-tailed Shrews Genus Sorex Arboreal Brown-toothed Shrew Episoriculus macrurus North American Least Shrew Cryptotis parva Old World Water Shrews Genus Neomys Ussuri White-toothed Shrew Crocidura lasiura Greater White-toothed Shrew Crocidura russula Siberian Shrew Crocidura sibirica Piebald Shrew Diplomesodon pulchellum 3.
    [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]
  • Rock Vole (Microtus Chrotorrhinus)
    Rock Vole (Microtus chrotorrhinus) RANGE: Cape Breton Island and e. Quebec w. tone. Min- HOMERANGE: Unknown. nesota. The mountains of n. New England, s, in the Ap- palachians to North Carolina. FOOD HABITS:Bunchberry, wavy-leafed thread moss, blackberry seeds (Martin 1971). May browse on RELATIVEABUNDANCE IN NEW ENGLAND:Unknown, possi- blueberry bushes (twigs and leaves), mushrooms, and bly rare, but may be locally common in appropriate hab- Clinton's lily. A captive subadult ate insects (Timm et al. itat. 1977). Seems to be diurnal with greatest feeding activity taking place in morning (Martin 1971). Less active in HABITAT:Coniferous and mixed forests at higher eleva- afternoon in northern Minnesota (Timm et al. 1977). tions. Favors cool, damp, moss-covered rocks and talus slopes in vicinity of streams. Kirkland (1977a) captured COMMENTS:Occurs locally in small colonies throughout rock voles in clearcuts in West Virginia, habitat not pre- its range. Natural history information is lacking for this viously reported for this species. Timm and others (1977) species. Habitat preferences seem to vary geographi- found voles using edge between boulder field and ma- cally. ture forest in Minnesota. They have been taken at a new low elevation (1,509 feet, 460 m) in the Adirondacks KEY REFERENCES:Banfield 1974, Burt 1957, Kirkland (Kirkland and Knipe 1979). l97?a, Martin 1971, Timm et al. 1977. SPECIALHABITAT REQUIREMENTS: Cool, moist, rocky woodlands with herbaceous groundcover and flowing water. REPRODUCTION: Age at sexual maturity: Females and males are mature when body length exceeds 140 mm and 150 mm, respectively, and total body weight exceeds 30 g for both sexes (Martin 1971).
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Bog Lemming, Synaptomys Cooperi,Andthe Mammals: Their Natural History, Classification, and Meadow Vole, Microtus Pennsylvanicus,Invirginia
    Synaptomys cooperi (Baird, 1858) SBLE W. Mark Ford and Joshua Laerm CONTENT AND TAXONOMIC COMMENTS There are eight subspecies of the southern bog lem- ming (Synaptomys cooperi) recognized, four of which occur in the South: S. c. gossii, S. c. helaletes, S. c. kentucki, and S. c. stonei (Wetzel 1955, Barbour 1956, Hall 1981, Linzey 1983, Long 1987). However, Whitaker and Hamilton (1998) indicate that S. c. gossii, S. c. kentucki, and S. c. stonei could be referable to S. c. cooperi.The literature was reviewed by Linzey (1983). DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS The southern bog lemming is a robust, short-tailed vole with a broad head, small ears, and small eyes. Its measurements are: total length, 119–154 mm; tail, 13–25 mm; hind foot, 16–24 mm; ear, 8–14 mm; weight, 20–50 g. The dental formula for this species is: I 1/1, C 0/0, P 0/0, M 3/3 = 16 (Figure 1). The pel- age is bright chestnut to dark grizzled brown dor- sally, grading into silver grayish white ventrally, with gray to brown feet and tail. The southern bog lemming readily is distinguished from other voles by its short tail (usually less than hind foot length), pres- ence of a shallow longitudinal groove along upper incisors, and deep reentrant angles on molars. See keys for details. CONSERVATION STATUS The southern bog lemming has a global rank of Secure (NatureServe 2007). It is listed as Secure in Virginia and Apparently Secure in Kentucky and Tennessee. It is listed as Vulnerable in North Carolina, Imperiled in Arkansas, and Critically Imperiled in Georgia.
    [Show full text]
  • Effectiveness of Lure in Capturing Northern Bog Lemmings on Trail Cameras Keely Benson [email protected]
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Undergraduate Theses and Professional Papers 2019 Effectiveness of Lure in Capturing Northern Bog Lemmings on Trail Cameras Keely Benson [email protected] Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy . Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/utpp Part of the Other Animal Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Benson, Keely, "Effectiveness of Lure in Capturing Northern Bog Lemmings on Trail Cameras" (2019). Undergraduate Theses and Professional Papers. 248. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/utpp/248 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Undergraduate Theses and Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Effectiveness of Lure in Capturing Northern Bog Lemmings on Trail Cameras Keely Benson Wildlife Biology Program University of Montana Senior Thesis Project Graduating May 4, 2019 with a Bachelor of Science in Wildlife Biology Thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements of a Senior Honors Thesis WILD499/HONR499 Wildlife Biology Program The University of Montana Missoula, Montana Approved by: Committee Chair: Dr. Mark Hebblewhite, Wildlife Biology Program, University of Montana Committee Members: Dr. Mike Mitchell, Montana Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, University of Montana Dr. Chad Bishop, Wildlife Biology Program University of Montana 1 Effectiveness of Lure in Capturing Northern Bog Lemmings on Trail Cameras Keely Benson Abstract Fens and bogs are unique wetlands that support a diversity of small mammals and many other rare species.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Shrew & Endangered Species Sorex Palustris
    Natural Heritage Water Shrew & Endangered Species Sorex palustris Program State Status: Special Concern www.mass.gov/nhesp Federal Status: None Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife DESCRIPTION: The Water Shrew is the largest long- tailed shrew in New England. It measures 144-158 mm (5.7-6.2 in) in length, with its long tail accounting for more than half of its total length, and weighs from 10-16 g (approximately 1/3 oz). The unique feature of the Water Shrew is its big “feathered” hind foot. The third and fourth toes of the Water Shrew’s hind feet are slightly webbed, and all toes as well as the foot itself have conspicuous stiff hairs along the sides. Both the webbing and the fringe of hairs increase the Water Shrew’s swimming efficiency. The male and female Water Shrew are colored alike, Illustration from DeGraaf and Rudis, 1986. equal in size, and show slight seasonal color variation. In winter, the Water Shrew is glossy, gray-black above tipped with silver, and silvery buff below, becoming adults. The Water Shrew is slender with a long, narrow lighter on the throat and chin. It has whitish hands and snout that is highly movable and incessantly rotating. Its feet, and a long, bicolored (i.e., lighter beneath, darker eyes are minute but visible, and its ears are small and above) tail covered with short, brown bristles. In hidden in velvety fur. Females have six mammae. summer, its pelage (fur) is more brownish above and slightly paler below, with a less frosted appearance. This species is especially adapted for semi-aquatic life.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Mammal Survey of the Nulhegan Basin Division of the Silvio 0
    Small Mammal Survey of the Nulhegan Basin Division of the Silvio 0. Conte NFWR and the State of Vermont's West Mountain Wildlife Management Area, Essex County Vermont • Final Report March 15, 2001 C. William Kilpatrick Department of Biology University of Vermont Burlington, Vermont 05405-0086 A total of 19 species of small mammals were documented from the Nulhegan Basin Division of the Silvio 0. Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge (NFWR) and the West Mountain Wildlife Management Area Seventeen of these species had previously been documented from Essex County, but specimens of the little brown bat (Jr{yotis lucifugu.s) and the northern long-eared bat (M septentrionalis) represent new records for this county. Although no threatened or endangered species were found in this survey, specimens of two rare species were captured including a water shrew (Sorex palustris) and yellow-nosed voles (Microtus chrotorrhinus). Population densities were relatively low as reflected in a mean trap success of 7 %, and the number of captures of two species, the short-tailed shrew (Blarina brevicauda) and the deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), were noticeably low. Low population densities were observed in northern hardwood forests, a lowland spruce-fir forest, a black spruce/dwarf shrub bog, and most clear-cuts, whereas the high population densities were found along talus slopes, in a mixed hardwood forest with some • rock ledges, and in a black spruce swamp. The highest species diversity was found in a montane yellow birch-red spruce forest, a black spruce swamp, a beaver/sedge meadow, and a talus slope within a mixed forest.
    [Show full text]