DOCSLIB.ORG

Arroyo Toad (Anaxyrus Californicus) Life History, Population Status, Population

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arroyo Toad (Anaxyrus Californicus) Life History, Population Status, Population Arroyo Toad (Anaxyrus californicus) Life History, Population Status, Population Threats, and Habitat Assessment of Conditions at Fort Hunter Liggett, Monterey County, California A Thesis presented to the Faculty of California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Biology by Jacquelyn Petrasich Hancock December 2009 © 2009 Jacquelyn Petrasich Hancock ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP TITLE: Arroyo Toad (Anaxyrus californicus) Life History, Population Status, Population Threats, and Habitat Assessment of Conditions at Fort Hunter Liggett, Monterey County, California AUTHOR: Jacquelyn Petrasich Hancock DATE SUBMITTED: December 2009 COMMITTEE CHAIR: David Pilliod, PhD COMMITTEE MEMBER: Emily Taylor, PhD COMMITTEE MEMBER: Scott Steinmaus, PhD iii Abstract Arroyo Toad (Anaxyrus californicus) Life History, Population Status, Population Threats, and Habitat Assessment of Conditions at Fort Hunter Liggett, Monterey County, California Jacquelyn Petrasich Hancock The arroyo toad (Anaxyrus californicus) is a federally endangered species found on Fort Hunter Liggett, Monterey County, California. The species was discovered in 1996 and was determined to occupy 26.7 km of the San Antonio River from approximately 2.4 km northwest of the San Antonio Mission de Padua, to the river delta above the San Antonio Reservoir. The construction of the San Antonio Reservoir dam in 1963 isolated this northern population of arroyo toads. Through time, the Fort Hunter Liggett landscape has changed drastically. The land was heavily grazed by cattle until 1991, which considerably reduced vegetation in riparian areas. Military training following acquisition of the land in 1940 far exceeded current allowable training. Fire was used extensively to reduce unfavorable vegetation, and as a result, extreme tree loss occurred through the ranges. Today cattle grazing is prohibited and military activity is restricted from riparian corridors. While riparian vegetation continues to recover in the San Antonio River, habitat for breeding arroyo toads has become less suitable. To improve conservation efforts and management of this endangered species, I have provided a thorough assessment of the life history of arroyo toads specific to Fort Hunter Liggett and identified the status and current threats to the population on the installation. I have also prepared a habitat assessment of the San Antonio River in the arroyo toad range, quantified habitat conversion, and identified areas that may no longer provide suitable breeding habitat for the species. The research conducted for this report is preliminary to restoration efforts that are inevitable to ensure recovery of the endangered species at Fort Hunter Liggett. Keywords: arroyo toad, life history, habitat assessment, breeding habitat, restoration, Fort Hunter Liggett, San Antonio River. iv Acknowledgments This research could not have been possible without the help and support of my friends, family, coworkers, and committee members. I would like to thank Darlene Woodbury, Kimberly Guilliam, and Jason Bachiero, Albion Environmental, Inc. wildlife biologists, for assisting in data collection, Liz Clark, Department of Defense Wildlife Biologist, and Wally Haussamen, Department of Defense Natural Resource Manager, for providing installation documents and personal support, Laura Eliassen, Fort Hunter Liggett Range and Training Lands Assessment Coordinator, and Tom Mastin, California Polytechnic State University professor, for guiding me through the technical aspects of GIS analysis and software use, and my committee members, Dr. David Pilliod, Dr. Emily Taylor, and Dr. Scott Steinmaus, for helping me focus my work in such a way that the final product may ultimately benefit conservation of the endangered arroyo toad. I cannot begin to describe my deepest gratitude for the constant encouragement and guidance that my committee advisor, Dr. David Pilliod, provided throughout this experience. This work may never have been completed if I hadn’t introduced him to the arroyo toads at Fort Hunter Liggett. v Table of Contents List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ viii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... viii CHAPTER 1: Description of Target Species, Study Area, and Goals for the Study ......... 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 Species Account ............................................................................................................................... 3 Study Area ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Investigations ................................................................................................................................... 6 References ........................................................................................................................................ 8 CHAPTER 2: Arroyo Toad Life History, Status, and Population Threats Specific to Fort Hunter Liggett, California ............................................................................................................. 9 Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ 9 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Study Area ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Methods ......................................................................................................................................... 13 Results ............................................................................................................................................ 17 Habitat Features ......................................................................................................................... 17 Adult Activity and Behavior ...................................................................................................... 19 Larval Development ................................................................................................................... 21 Juvenile Activity ........................................................................................................................ 24 Population Status and Current Threats....................................................................................... 25 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 27 Management Implications .............................................................................................................. 33 References ...................................................................................................................................... 35 CHAPTER 3: Loss of Arroyo Toad Breeding Habitat at Fort Hunter Liggett and Investigation of Potential Environmental and Anthropogenic Influences Accelerating Habitat Conversion ..................................................................................................................... 37 Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... 37 vi Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 37 Study Area ..................................................................................................................................... 39 Methods ......................................................................................................................................... 42 Aerial Imagery Analysis ............................................................................................................ 42 Satellite Data Analysis ............................................................................................................... 42 Environmental and Anthropogenic Influences .......................................................................... 45 Results ............................................................................................................................................ 47 Aerial Imagery Analysis ............................................................................................................ 47 Satellite Data Analysis ............................................................................................................... 49 Environmental and Anthropogenic Influences .......................................................................... 53 Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 60 Management Implications .............................................................................................................. 64 References .....................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biological Conservation 228 (2018) 310–318
    Biological Conservation 228 (2018) 310–318 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon Multi-scale effects of land cover and urbanization on the habitat suitability of an endangered toad T ⁎ Michael L. Tregliaa, , Adam C. Landonb,c,1, Robert N. Fisherd, Gerard Kyleb, Lee A. Fitzgeralda a Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Biodiversity Research and Teaching Collections, Applied Biodiversity Science Program, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2258, USA b Human Dimensions of Natural Resources Lab, Department of Recreation, Parks, and Tourism Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2261, USA c Water Management and Hydrological Science Program, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-3408, USA d U.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, San Diego Field Station, San Diego, CA, USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Habitat degradation, entwined with land cover change, is a major driver of biodiversity loss. Effects of land cover Watersheds change on species can be direct (when habitat is converted to alternative land cover types) or indirect (when Structural equation model land outside of the species habitat is altered). Hydrologic and ecological connections between terrestrial and California aquatic systems are well understood, exemplifying how spatially disparate land cover conditions may influence Arroyo toad aquatic habitats, but are rarely examined. We sought to quantify relative effects of land cover at two different but Anaxyrus californicus interacting scales on habitat suitability for the endangered arroyo toad (Anaxyrus californicus). Based on an Anthropogenic development ff Riparian areas existing distribution model for the arroyo toad and available land cover data, we estimated e ects of land cover along streams and within entire watersheds on habitat suitability using structural equation modeling.
    [Show full text]
  • Anaxyrus Californicus) from the Desert Region of Southern California Edward L
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Occidental College Scholar Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences Volume 112 | Issue 3 Article 4 2013 Correction of Locality Records for the Endangered Arroyo Toad (Anaxyrus californicus) from the Desert Region of Southern California Edward L. Ervin Merkel & Associates, Inc., [email protected] Kent R. Beaman Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County Robert N. Fisher U.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, San Diego Field Station Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.oxy.edu/scas Part of the Biodiversity Commons, Biology Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons, and the Zoology Commons Recommended Citation Ervin, Edward L.; Beaman, Kent R.; and Fisher, Robert N. (2013) "Correction of Locality Records for the Endangered Arroyo Toad (Anaxyrus californicus) from the Desert Region of Southern California," Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences: Vol. 112: Iss. 3. Available at: https://scholar.oxy.edu/scas/vol112/iss3/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by OxyScholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences by an authorized editor of OxyScholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Ervin et al.: Correction of Locality Records for the Arroyo Toad Bull. Southern California Acad. Sci. 112(3), 2013, pp. 197–205 E Southern California Academy of Sciences, 2013 Correction of Locality Records for the Endangered Arroyo Toad (Anaxyrus californicus) from the Desert Region of Southern California Edward L.
    [Show full text]
  • MCB Camp Pendleton Arroyo Toad (Bufo Californicus) Monitoring Results, 2003
    MCB Camp Pendleton Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus) Monitoring Results, 2003 Annual Report Prepared for: Wildlife Management Branch AC/S Environmental Security Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WESTERN ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH CENTER MCB Camp Pendleton Arroyo Toad Monitoring Results, 2003 By Cheryl S. Brehme, Andrea J. Atkinson, and Robert N. Fisher U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WESTERN ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH CENTER Annual Report Prepared for: Wildlife Management Branch AC/S Environmental Security Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton San Diego Field Station USGS Western Ecological Research Center 5745 Kearny Villa Road, Suite M San Diego, CA 92123 Sacramento, California 2004 ii U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GALE A. NORTON, SECRETARY U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director The use of firm, trade, or brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. For additional information, contact: Center Director USGS Western Ecological Research Center 3020 State University Drive East Modoc Hall, Room 3006 Sacramento, CA 95819 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................. 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... 3 The Arroyo Toad..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Baseline Surveys for the Arroyo Toad (Bufo Californicus) in the Sweetwater River Channel, San
    Baseline Surveys for the Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus) in the Sweetwater River Channel, San Diego County, California. Draft Final Report 10/05/05 Prepared for: Sweetwater Authority U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WESTERN ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH CENTER Baseline Surveys for the Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus) in the Sweetwater River Channel, San Diego County, California. By Melanie C. Madden-Smith1, Edward L. Ervin2 and Robert N. Fisher1 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WESTERN ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH CENTER Final Report Prepared for: Sweetwater Authority 1San Diego Field Station USGS Western Ecological Research Center 5745 Kearny Villa Road, Suite M San Diego, CA 92123 2Current address: Merkel & Associates, Inc. 5434 Ruffin Rd. San Diego, CA 92123 Sacramento, California 2005 ii U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GALE A. NORTON, SECRETARY U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director The use of firm, trade, or brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. For additional information, contact: Center Director Western Ecological Research Center U.S. Geological Survey 3020 State University Drive East Modoc Hall, Room 3006 Sacramento, CA 95819 iii Table of Contents ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................... 1 1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 2 2. STUDY
    [Show full text]
  • Standard Common and Current Scientific Names for North American Amphibians, Turtles, Reptiles & Crocodilians
    STANDARD COMMON AND CURRENT SCIENTIFIC NAMES FOR NORTH AMERICAN AMPHIBIANS, TURTLES, REPTILES & CROCODILIANS Sixth Edition Joseph T. Collins TraVis W. TAGGart The Center for North American Herpetology THE CEN T ER FOR NOR T H AMERI ca N HERPE T OLOGY www.cnah.org Joseph T. Collins, Director The Center for North American Herpetology 1502 Medinah Circle Lawrence, Kansas 66047 (785) 393-4757 Single copies of this publication are available gratis from The Center for North American Herpetology, 1502 Medinah Circle, Lawrence, Kansas 66047 USA; within the United States and Canada, please send a self-addressed 7x10-inch manila envelope with sufficient U.S. first class postage affixed for four ounces. Individuals outside the United States and Canada should contact CNAH via email before requesting a copy. A list of previous editions of this title is printed on the inside back cover. THE CEN T ER FOR NOR T H AMERI ca N HERPE T OLOGY BO A RD OF DIRE ct ORS Joseph T. Collins Suzanne L. Collins Kansas Biological Survey The Center for The University of Kansas North American Herpetology 2021 Constant Avenue 1502 Medinah Circle Lawrence, Kansas 66047 Lawrence, Kansas 66047 Kelly J. Irwin James L. Knight Arkansas Game & Fish South Carolina Commission State Museum 915 East Sevier Street P. O. Box 100107 Benton, Arkansas 72015 Columbia, South Carolina 29202 Walter E. Meshaka, Jr. Robert Powell Section of Zoology Department of Biology State Museum of Pennsylvania Avila University 300 North Street 11901 Wornall Road Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Kansas City, Missouri 64145 Travis W. Taggart Sternberg Museum of Natural History Fort Hays State University 3000 Sternberg Drive Hays, Kansas 67601 Front cover images of an Eastern Collared Lizard (Crotaphytus collaris) and Cajun Chorus Frog (Pseudacris fouquettei) by Suzanne L.
    [Show full text]
  • Frequently Asked Questions About Critical Habitat for the Endangered Arroyo Toad
    Frequently Asked Questions about Critical Habitat for the Endangered Arroyo Toad Q. What is the arroyo toad? The arroyo toad (Bufo californicus) is a small, light greenish-grey or buff-colored toad with dark-spotted, warty skin. Arroyo toads were historically found in streams and river basins in California from San Luis Obispo County to San Diego County, and south to Baja California, Mexico. Within the United States, populations of the arroyo toad are currently found in river basins in Monterey, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego counties. On December 16, 1994, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) listed the species as endangered, under the Endangered Species Act (Act). Q. What habitats does the arroyo toad need? Arroyo toads prefer shallow pools and open, sandy stream terraces with cottonwoods, oaks, or willows. They breed in streams that have enough water from late March to mid-June to support the tadpoles until they change into toads. Females lay eggs in shallow, slow moving portions of streams that have little or no vegetation. Juveniles and adults forage for insects on sand and gravel bars with little or no grass or other low-growing cover. Subadult and adult arroyo toads excavate shallow burrows on sand bars, stream side terraces or in the uplands where they shelter during the day when the surface is damp, or for longer intervals during the dry season. Because arroyo toad habitats are favored sites for water storage reservoirs, flood control structures, roads, agriculture, urban development, and recreational facilities such as campgrounds and off-highway vehicle parks, many arroyo toad populations were reduced in size or eliminated due to extensive habitat loss from 1920 into the 1990s.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Habitat for the Arroyo Toad; Final Rule
    Wednesday, February 7, 2001 Part II Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Designation of Critical Habitat for the Arroyo Toad; Final Rule VerDate 11<MAY>2000 18:55 Feb 06, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\07FER2.SGM pfrm10 PsN: 07FER2 9414 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 7, 2001 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Section 4 of the Act requires us to venter (underside) is white or buff and consider economic and other relevant without dark blotches or spots. A light- Fish and Wildlife Service impacts of specifying any particular area colored, V-shaped stripe crosses the as critical habitat. Section 7 of the Act head and eyelids, and the anterior 50 CFR Part 17 prohibits destruction or adverse portion of the oval parotoid glands (just RIN 1018—AG15 modification of critical habitat by any behind the eyes) are pale. There is activity funded, authorized, or carried usually a light area on each side of the Endangered and Threatened Wildlife out by any Federal agency. We solicited sacral (pelvic) hump and in the middle and Plants; Final Designation of data and comments from the public on of the back. The arroyo toad generally Critical Habitat for the Arroyo Toad all aspects of the proposal, including does not have a middorsal stripe, but if data on the economic and other impacts one is present, it extends only partway AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, of designation and our approaches for along the back.
    [Show full text]
  • Arroyo Toad (Bufo Californicus (=Microscaphus))
    Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus (=microscaphus)) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus) Photo by permission of Will Flaxington U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office Ventura, California August 2009 5-YEAR REVIEW Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus (=microscaphus)) I. GENERAL INFORMATION Purpose of 5-Year Reviews: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is required by section 4(c)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act) to conduct a status review of each listed species at least once every 5 years. The purpose of a 5-year review is to evaluate whether or not the species’ status has changed since it was listed (or since the most recent 5-year review). Based on the 5-year review, we recommend whether the species should be removed from the list of endangered and threatened species, be changed in status from endangered to threatened, or be changed in status from threatened to endangered. Our original listing of a species as endangered or threatened is based on the existence of threats attributable to one or more of the five threat factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act, and we must consider these same five factors in any subsequent consideration of reclassification or delisting of a species. In the 5-year review, we consider the best available scientific and commercial data on the species, and focus on new information available since the species was listed or last reviewed. If we recommend a change in listing status based on the results of the 5-year review, we must propose to do so through a separate rule-making process defined in the Act that includes public review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey Results for the Arroyo Toad (Bufo Californicus) in the San Bernardino National Forest, 2001
    Survey Results for the Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus) in the San Bernardino National Forest, 2001 Final Report Arroyo Toad Metamorph, Little Horsethief Canyon Prepared for: U.S. Department of Agriculture U.S. Forest Service Steve Loe U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WESTERN ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH CENTER Survey results for the Arroyo Toad (Bufo californicus) in the San Bernardino National Forest, 2001 By Chris Brown1 and Robert Fisher1 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WESTERN ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH CENTER Final Report Prepared for: U.S. Department of Agriculture U.S. Forest Service Steve Loe 1San Diego Field Station USGS Western Ecological Research Center 5745 Kearny Villa Road, Suite M San Diego, CA 92123 Sacramento, California [2002] U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GALE A. NORTON, SECRETARY U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director The use of firm, trade, or brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. For additional information, contact: Center Director Western Ecological Research Center U.S. Geological Survey 7801 Folsom Blvd., Suite 101 Sacramento, CA 95826 CONTENTS Introduction 5 Methods 5 Results and Discussion 6 Summary 19 Literature Cited 21 Tables Table 1—Summary of Sites 22 Table 2—Site Coordinates 23 Table 3—Arroyo Toad Observations 24 Figures Fig. 1—San Bernardino NF Study Sites 25 Fig. 2a—Bautista Canyon 26 Fig. 2b—Bautista Canyon 27 Fig. 3a—Cajon Wash and Lone Pine Valley 28 Fig. 3b—Lone Pine Valley and Cajon Wash 29 Fig. 3c—Cajon Wash below Blue Cut 29 Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Invasive Species of the Mid-Atlantic Education Guide
    The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: Aquatic Invasive Species of the Mid-Atlantic Education Guide December 2015 Introduction to the Project Each year, billions of dollars and millions of hours are spent dealing with invasive species around the globe. Invasive species, by definition, are non-native species that cause economic, environmental, and/or human health related harm. Invasive species can be plants, animals, and/or pathogens like West Nile Virus. These species typically grow and reproduce rapidly and often lack predators and pathogens in their introduced environments, allowing their populations to explode. Historic invasive species like Chestnut Blight and Smallpox have shaped our landscapes today while others have just begun to impact our environment. Invasive species management can be costly and time consuming. However, proper education on invasive species can prevent invasions from occurring in the first place. Strong education and outreach efforts can increase public awareness while also promoting prevention. Due to the need for comprehensive invasive species education, this toolkit was developed to tell the story of invasive species in the eastern United States through 5 distinct units: 1. History of Invasive Species 2. Introduction and Spread of Invasive Species 3. Impacts to Natural Areas 4. Impacts to Students’ Lives 5. Student and Community Action The goal of this project is to raise awareness about invasive species and to turn that awareness into action to prevent and to manage current and future invasions. This project was generously funded by the Mid-Atlantic Panel on Aquatic Invasive Species (SA7528131-C) and was completed by staff with the Maryland Department of Natural Resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Withdrawal of Proposed Rule to Reclassify the Arroyo Toad As
    Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 246 / Wednesday, December 23, 2015 / Proposed Rules 79805 proposals listed in Appendix F at this DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Previous Federal Actions time. Rather, this document seeks Please refer to the proposed Fish and Wildlife Service additional recommendations regarding reclassification rule for the arroyo toad the development of new or modified (79 FR 17106; March 27, 2014) for a 50 CFR Part 17 safe harbor regulations and new Special detailed description of the Federal Fraud Alerts beyond those summarized [Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2014–0007; actions concerning this species that in Appendix F. FXES11130900000–156–FF09E42000] occurred prior to publication of the A detailed explanation of RIN 1018–AY82 proposed reclassification rule. We justifications for, or empirical data accepted submission of new information supporting, a suggestion for a safe Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and comments on the proposed harbor or Special Fraud Alert would be and Plants; Withdrawal of Proposed reclassification for a 60-day comment helpful and should, if possible, be Rule To Reclassify the Arroyo Toad as period, ending May 27, 2014. In order included in any response to this Threatened to ensure that the public had an solicitation. adequate opportunity to review and AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, comment on our proposed rule, we A. Criteria for Modifying and Interior. reopened the comment period for an Establishing Safe Harbor Provisions ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. additional 30 days on October 17, 2014 SUMMARY: (79 FR 62408). In accordance with section 205 of We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), withdraw the HIPAA, we will consider a number of Background proposed rule to reclassify the arroyo factors in reviewing proposals for new A scientific analysis was completed toad (Anaxyrus californicus) as or modified safe harbor provisions, such and presented in detail within the threatened under the Endangered arroyo toad species report (Service 2014, as the extent to which the proposals Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
    [Show full text]
  • Jennings and Hayes 1994.Pdf
    AMPHIBIAN AND REPTILE SPECIES OF SPECIAL CONCERN IN CALIFORNIA Mark R. Jennings Research Associate Department of Herpetology, California Academy of Sciences Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, CA 94118-9961 and Marc P. Hayes Research Associate Department of Biology, Portland State University P.O. Box 751, Portland, OR 97207-0751 and Research Section, Animal Management Division, Metro Washington Park Zoo 4001 Canyon Road, Portland, OR 97221-2799 The California Department of Fish and Game commissioned this study as part of the Inland Fisheries Division Endangered Species Project. Specific recommendations from this study and in this report are made as options by the authors for the Department to consider. These recommendations do not necessarily represent the findings, opinions, or policies of the Department. FINAL REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME INLAND FISHERIES DIVISION 1701 NIMBUS ROAD RANCHO CORDOVA, CA 95701 UNDER CONTRACT NUMBER 8023 1994 Jennings and Hayes: Species of Special Concern i Date of Submission: December 8, 1993 Date of Publication: November 1, 1994 Jennings and Hayes: Species of Special Concern ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT . 1 PREFACE . 3 INTRODUCTION . 4 METHODS . 5 RESULTS . 11 CALIFORNIA TIGER SALAMANDER . 12 INYO MOUNTAINS SALAMANDER . 16 RELICTUAL SLENDER SALAMANDER . 18 BRECKENRIDGE MOUNTAIN SLENDER SALAMANDER . 20 YELLOW-BLOTCHED SALAMANDER . 22 LARGE-BLOTCHED SALAMANDER . 26 MOUNT LYELL SALAMANDER . 28 OWENS VALLEY WEB-TOED SALAMANDER . 30 DEL NORTE SALAMANDER . 32 SOUTHERN SEEP SALAMANDER . 36 COAST RANGE NEWT . 40 TAILED FROG . 44 COLORADO RIVER TOAD . 48 YOSEMITE TOAD . 50 ARROYO TOAD . 54 NORTHERN RED-LEGGED FROG . 58 CALIFORNIA RED-LEGGED FROG . 62 FOOTHILL YELLOW-LEGGED FROG .
    [Show full text]