DOCSLIB.ORG

Small Mammal and Amphibian Communities and Habitat Associations in Red Alder Stands, Central Oregon Coast Range Abstract

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Small Mammal and Amphibian Communities and Habitat Associations in Red Alder Stands, Central Oregon Coast Range Abstract william C. Mccomb, Carol L. Chambers,and MichaelNewton Dep"l.e1lo Foe q.e.e.Oego S"-tl .- lr ao.d \ O -goro/)1 Small Mammaland AmphibianCommunities and HabitatAssociations in Red Alder Stands,Central Oregon Coast Range Abstract lotbeendescribed,sedocurlotedcorlmunitvstrurrurcaldrja.jInaI.j!sso.ijli'ls three red altler stands. Se scrnpled habitat. anphibions. ard smdl mannuls from 0 to 150 m irom slfeams in thft! :[0- ro 50-vcar old rrl ald|r srands in fi( .(i,,tral ilf.g,)d (11)!stHarge. \le did not detect diflerences iP > 0-12) beh{een streamside and upland sitcsjn25ol28|rdl]i|!lch.ru(lc|id;(s.no|j|r(!1u. for Ensatira salanranders lEnsatitld eslLs.hhtzi\ \rere higher in uplrud than ni steanside habihts. Roughstfi neals (Ton.lio grdnxbv,| bridgesshreils(.Jo/.rt.d!6rtd&tl.P.cificshLe$siS.pa.ti.Ln.and\iirginiuopossumsil)ulelphittisniunu\. Crr)LL,nrlt,is lor Jn,i st,e.i.s $ere asso.iated lf > 0.;)with lhe abundaDce of$oodr debLn andtor regetation on the siles. \ine sirecies coplured alorrg"rfarrsidcs anrl lntroduction Lishcdb_v thc National Forcst Nlanrgcmcnt Acl and the Oregon Forest Practices Act (OFP,4.). The Rr-'clalder {Alrar.rruDnr) is a fast-gro*ing, nitnrgen- Ol'l'A protects riparian vegetation along fish- lixing tree that occupies over I million ha of thc bearing strearnsfor anadromous fish and to reduce westenrl nited States(Tarrant er a1. t9tti3). ,A.lder non-point soLrrccpollrLion (Brazier arrd Brown has long bccn considcrcd a lvccd spccics,bul it 1973). The ellects of 0l l'A regulations on terres- is norr receir.inpJrnore attention as an economicdl,v lrial lertebrates are unkno$n. Ho$ever. Bro$'n valrrableresource (DeBell et ol. 1978). AlLhough (1985: appcndir B) indicatcd that 9? spccics o{ 3.i% ofthe timber harest t'as cornposedofhard- terrestrial !erLebrates would breed in r:losed noods in thc 1980s. this will probabll- rise to sapling-pole red alder stands (the most matule tt.,10/ob,v the,vear 2000. mostlv liom red alder standcrrndition he repoltedior red alder)and I l4 (Sessionsl9ll9). spccics usc this stand condition for fccding. Slightly Despite the increasingeconomic imporL:rnce and higher use was predicted lbr closed sapling-pole liclcsprcadocrcurr-cncc of rcrl aldcr in ripariarrand hardwoodand shrubbylietland stanrls (102 breed- upland sites. only (iomez (1992) quantilied small ing. 1,10 leeding). Although the dccuracv ofthese rnamrnal ol amphibian crmmunitics iu thc Oregon predictionshas not becn assessed.managers are CoastRarrge. He frrrrndhigher abundance oi small r,".idel,vusing this information to rnake decisions. mammals and amphibians in rcd aldcr than in oll- grorth Douglas-lir' (P.seudotsugonren:iesii) ibrests Our objectir.es ere to: l) compare habitat (Conez 1992). The imlx)rlanceofstreamsicle hal)- characterislics and abundance of small rnamrnals itat fol maintaining small mammal divctsitv rnd and amphibiansbclwccn strcarnsidcand upland aLLrnclancrein western coniferous lblests has been sites in.10 to SO-vear-old recl alder stands in the habitat describecl in southt'cst Orcgon (Cross l9B5), thr: ccntral Ofegon CoastRange, 2) exarnine relationships ol small mammals and amphibiurs Orcgon Cascadcs(Anth{)nr et al. 1987, Do,vle I990). and the central Oregon (ioast Range in these stands.and 3) cornparcthc spccicsthut $e deterjled in these stands to those predicted in (\ftComb et al. 199i]. Conez 1992).There is con- rclationshipsmodel (Brrxln l9fi5). sirlcrablc gcographic liuiation in rcsponscsofsmall a habitat rnarnmals to riparinn habitat {llnedeke I9BB). StudyArea and Methods \'lanagers need infonnation on re ebrate use of strcansidc and upland habitats"including rcd S'c sclcttcd three,l0- to SO-ycar-oldred aldcr :rlder -"tands.il thel- ale to meet guidelines estab- stands adjacent to or including second-order No hrveslScience, \bl. 67. No. 3. 1993 l8l o 19,ril br rhc Xorrh'.sr S.i.nrill. l$o.iirion. 1! rishts r.scNd nateclbv red alder (basalarca=26 m'z/ha).scat- tered residual Douglas-Iirand western rcdccdar (Thttjo.plicata) (basal arca=5 m2lha) t'ere pres- ent in thc stands. fhc shrub layer t'as dominated by salmonber'ry \Ruhus spet:to.biLis\and thimblc- belrl r/lrhr" ltott iJl,ru.t.H,.rLr,, uu. rogetrtion r,;asmostly svord fern (.Pol\stichum munitunt\ and grasses. Wc samplcd thc \ashville and Alsea stands in 1988 and the Sumner sland in 19{:19.S.c cstab- lished three l0 x 10 sarnplinggrids (135 x 135 m) in each stand such that second-order strearns wcle fl(tacent to or included within each grid (Fig. Figure l Location o{studr ar.asir LhcrcrrtralO,ast Rars(. 2). Points within grids Icrc l5 m apart. Iines of points $'ere parallel to the stream, and thcy ex- tendcd 60-135 m up thc slope.Crids were ) 50 strenms in the central (ioast Range ofOregon (Fig. m lrom edges ol adjacenl stands. W-c clctcrmined 1). .{ll stands contained one or more first-orclcr the sLrudLrreand composition of the habitat at each strcams. Slrcams adjncent to and $,ithiD the studs point bv metsuring habitat characteristicsfrom thc r,".crc0.2-4.0 m wicle.and 0.2-2.0 m deep. These grid point (distancesor basalarea) or in a 5-m ra- standsare trpical oi hunan-induccd (20-30 ha). diLrscirclc aroundthc point (plantcoverages, den- unmdnaged(loast Range alder forests.The north- sities.and log lengths/79m2, Table 1). All foliagc ern stand (Fig. I ) $as about l0 km rvestof Nash- covcr cstim{tcs lrele mrde prior to leal lall. r.ille(45'50' lat.. 12,1o.40' long.)resulting from s.c defined streamside habitat (74-I:tr2 sarn- seconclarvsuccession ftrllol,".ing abandonrncnt of ple points/stand)as ( 10 m of the high-r,ater mark old ficlcls. The other tvo stands, one about l 5 llm of anv permancnt strcam. conespondilg to the southle,.t ofAlsea (,15o,10'lat., I24'40' long.) minimum O!'PA buller strip rvidth for strean-" <4 and about 3 km clsl of Sumncr (43'30' lat.. m wide. Also. n,e included the full lloodplair as l23o l0' long.rrp-ultcJ liorn narLrralfe!encfiri,,n streamsidc habitat on sitcs rvherethe lloodplain ex- lollor,;ing harvcst of Douglas-fir in the tended ) 10 rn lrorn thc strcam (maximum = 35 19,10 l95O's. Although the or,erstorvwas domi- m). Habitat 2 50 m liom streams i!'as considered Stream 1351m I . Pitfalltrap & Shermantrap O Largelive trap l''isure 2. Schemrtic diagram ofthe sarrpling g srsrern us(il i,, th. sLulr. Ia2 Nlc(lornb.(lharnbers, and Ncillon T.{BLE l Aw rase (S[) habitat r:haract.ristics among thr.. hahitar lrpes in three red aldr:r stands. Oreson (i)asL R,nge. l98tl,1]9. DislaDcelo $!t{ r (m) 5.9(2.7) 32.| (2.5) 7 r.2(1.8) 0.0.195 .11.si2.81 43.i i2.8) 'r8.8(5.2) 0.2752 2.0(1.3) 0.2(0.1) 0.3 {0.i1) 0.1264) 1.t t0.9r 1.0 10.51 r.5 {0.s) 0.u2;3 1.611.01 6.4 (2.0) ;.0 d.91 0.2152 l0-l9,im (liuierer 16.;(3.1r 16.r;13.6) 15.9(2-51 0.B2?3 19.19 cm didnir.f :1.:J(l.7) 2.6 {0.9) 3.0(1.0) 0.82;3 50+ rim diameler 1.91l.0) t.;(t).9) 1.9(1.11 0.8273 Toral 22.8A.9) 20.9(5.01 20.9(3.6) 0.827:l 0.5(0. t) 0.r (0.21 0.8 40.2) o.2i52 SLL,rnlrs"> l0 cmi79 nr': 0.8(0.3) 0.9 i0.21 t.t t0.31 0.2152 Der:idurus 25.9lt.21 2s.9(0.7) 27.51:l.9) 0.512; 3.2{0.5) 4-910.71 4.2 t2.5) o. 1266 29.t (1.;l 30.8(1.5) 35.7(il.4) 0.0195 [oodr p]arr.0r,,. (%)r I),linluous 0l m tall 6.6 (0.71 3.0 (0.5) 2., lq.2l 0.190:1 D(trl,r,!s Ll 5 m tall 22.8ll.5) 13.6rl.3) 2t.9 (J.Bl 0.9999 DeciduoL,s> 5mlull 54.0ll..1r 51.?{1.3) 56.1(0.u) 0.9999 Ilrergreen0lrntall 0.r i0.r) 0.r {0.I 1.2i0.2r 0.3537 l'rcrgnen l.l 5 n tall 0.1{0.1) 1.2(0_31 t.2 (0.2) 0.5066 ErersRtn>5nrtall 2.8{0.7) 3.9 (0.81 7.0 (0.6) 0.3B27 Tre densit!i 79 mr l)..i,luous 5 39 cm dhh :J.0(0.81 1.s (0.3) 1.1(0.2) 0.0195 Deciduous ,10-i9 i)n (lbh 0..1(0.21 0.3t0.l) 0.4 (0.2) 0.i12;:l Iirtirluous > 110cn dbh 0.1(0.1) 0.1(0.1) 0.1t0.l) 0.3?5il Elergf.fn 5 jt9 cm dbh 0.1().1r 0.:l10.1) 0.8 (0.3) 0.1266 E!erse.r 10-?9 cm dbh 0.1l0.tl 0.1(0.1) 0.2 (0.rl ().2752 Lrergreer > 80 .m dbh r).r l0.l) 0.1{0.r1 0.1(0.1) 0.2i 52 23.2n.6) 3:l.1(t.9) 36.7I1.0) t).t90.1 r3.8ir.t) 9.2 $.a) '1.9(0.3r 0.0809 3.3 (0.9) it.t (0.71 1.6 (0.2) o.6625 '(loDfaring srfernrside rirh ur,l{n,1.Silcoxor sigr-rank rcsr. 'N'losured with a .li,x)m.ri,r 5 n upslope and rlorvns ope from pl(n , i,,rrr.r.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pacific Water Shrew Sorex Bendirii
    COSEWIC Assessment and Update Status Report on the Pacific Water Shrew Sorex bendirii in Canada ENDANGERED 2006 COSEWIC COSEPAC COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF COMITÉ SUR LA SITUATION ENDANGERED WILDLIFE DES ESPÈCES EN PÉRIL IN CANADA AU CANADA COSEWIC status reports are working documents used in assigning the status of wildlife species suspected of being at risk. This report may be cited as follows: COSEWIC 2006. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the Pacific watershrew Sorex bendirii in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 28 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm). Previous report: Galindo-Leal, C. and J.B. Runciman. 1994. COSEWIC status report on the Pacific water shrew Sorex bendirii in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 1-33 pp. Production note: COSEWIC would like to acknowledge David Nagorsen for writing the update status report on the Pacific water shrew Sorex bendirii, prepared under contract with Environment Canada, and overseen and edited by Mark Brigham, Co-chair (Terrestrial Mammals), COSEWIC Terrestrial Mammals Species Specialist Subcommittee. For additional copies contact: COSEWIC Secretariat c/o Canadian Wildlife Service Environment Canada Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 Tel.: (819) 997-4991 / (819) 953-3215 Fax: (819) 994-3684 E-mail: COSEWIC/[email protected] http://www.cosewic.gc.ca Également disponible en français sous le titre Évaluation et Rapport de situation du COSEPAC sur la musaraigne de Bendire (Sorex bendirii) au Canada – Mise à jour. Cover illustration: Pacific water shrew – by Ron Altig. ©Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada 2006 Catalogue No.
    [Show full text]
  • Tidal Marsh Recovery Plan Habitat Creation Or Enhancement Project Within 5 Miles of OAK
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California California clapper rail Suaeda californica Cirsium hydrophilum Chloropyron molle Salt marsh harvest mouse (Rallus longirostris (California sea-blite) var. hydrophilum ssp. molle (Reithrodontomys obsoletus) (Suisun thistle) (soft bird’s-beak) raviventris) Volume II Appendices Tidal marsh at China Camp State Park. VII. APPENDICES Appendix A Species referred to in this recovery plan……………....…………………….3 Appendix B Recovery Priority Ranking System for Endangered and Threatened Species..........................................................................................................11 Appendix C Species of Concern or Regional Conservation Significance in Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California….......................................13 Appendix D Agencies, organizations, and websites involved with tidal marsh Recovery.................................................................................................... 189 Appendix E Environmental contaminants in San Francisco Bay...................................193 Appendix F Population Persistence Modeling for Recovery Plan for Tidal Marsh Ecosystems of Northern and Central California with Intial Application to California clapper rail …............................................................................209 Appendix G Glossary……………......................................................................………229 Appendix H Summary of Major Public Comments and Service
    [Show full text]
  • Terrestrial Mammal Species of Special Concern in California, Bolster, B.C., Ed., 1998 22
    Terrestrial Mammal Species of Special Concern in California, Bolster, B.C., Ed., 1998 22 Salt marsh wandering shrew, Sorex vagrans halicoetes Paul W. Collins Description: A small to medium sized (100-110 mm TL), dark shrew, sooty seal brown to black above with a relatively long (37-41 mm), unicolored tail; dark brown ventrum; and moderately large high-domed skull (Grinnell 1913). Distinguished from upland S. v. vagrans by its darker dorsum and brown ventrum (silvery brown in vagrans), slightly larger body size, broader rostrum, and longer maxillary tooth-row (Grinnell 1913, Jackson 1928, Findley 1955). Distinguished from S. o. sinuosus by its slightly lighter color, larger size, browner ears, and high, dome-shaped cranium (Grinnell 1913). Weight from 3.1 to 7.2 g (males) and from 2.7 to 7.0 g (females) (Rudd 1955b). Distinguished from upland S. v. vagrans by darker dorsal and ventral pelage (Grinnell 1913). Taxonomic Remarks: The salt-marsh wandering shrew was first described as S. halicoetes Grinnell (1913). Jackson (1928) relegated halicoetes to a subspecies of S. vagrans, a convention followed by subsequent authors (Grinnell 1933, Findley 1955, Hennings and Hoffmann 1977, Junge and Hoffmann 1981, Carraway 1990). The taxonomy of S. vagrans group has had a confusing history (Merriam 1895, Grinnell 1913, Jackson 1928). There is little controversy about the taxonomic status of S. v. halicoetes, although the karyotype from halicoetes was identical to S. v. vagrans from the northern part of the San Francisco Bay region (Brown 1974). This taxon still needs a more thorough biochemical and morphometric analysis to help clarify its phylogenetic and taxonomic relationship to other members of the S.
    [Show full text]
  • Tation in the Winter and Dry Summers. Snowfall Varied from Slight to Trol Unit, a Clearcut Non-Burned Unit, and a Clearcut Slash
    AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF EDWARD FRANK HOOVEN for the DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Name) (Degree) uForest Management presented on N\', 'I ii (Major) ( te) Title: EFFECTS OF CLEARCUTTING A DOUGLAS-FIR STAND UPON SMALL ANIMAL POPUTIONS Ij1 WESTERN OREGON Signature redacted for privacy. Abstract approved: William Wheeler An ecological study of small forest mammals was conducted from 1964 to 1970.The objectives were to obtain chronological infor- mation relative to the effects of current logging practices on vegeta- tional succession and small mammal populations. The locale of the study was in the west-central Cascade Moun- tains of Oregon.The principal timber species was Douglas-fir, Pseudotsuga menziesii. The climate was characterized by heavy precipi- tation in the winter and dry summers. Snowfall varied from slight to heavy.Elevation was 3000 feet. The study areas were composed of a 125-year-old timbered con- trol unit, a clearcut non-burned unit, and a clearcut slash-burned unit. Density and distribution of the small mammals were determined by live-trapping and release of marked animals.Reproductive infor- mation of some species was noted. Home range areas was computed for the more numerous species of rodents. More than 4530 individual small mammals of 23 mammalian species were marked on the three areas during the six years ofthe study.Over 90 percent of the total animals caught consisted of five species: Sorex spp, Eutamias townsendii, Peromyscus maniculatus, and Microtus oregoni. The small mammal densities varied from year to year.They were comparable between units on a monthly basis exceptfor the unburned clearcut unit which differed for a year following logging.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Species Included in ACE-II Native and Harvest Species Richness Counts (Appendix C)
    Appendix C. Species included in native and harvest species richness counts. Animal Species Included in the Range Analysis....... ............................ ................................. C-01 Animal Species with Range Models Not Included in the Analysis......................... ................. C-20 Animal Species without Range Models, therefore not Included in the Analysis......... ............ C-20 Fish Species Included in the Range Analysis.................................................................... ....... C-30 Fish with Ranges not Included in the Analysis because neither Native nor Harvest................ C-33 Native Plants Species Included in the Range Analysis............................................................. C-34 CWHR Species and ACEII hexagon analysis of ranges. Of the 1045 species in the current CWHR species list used in ACE-II, 694 had range models digitized for use. Of those, 688 are included in this hexagon analysis of the state of Cailfornia, with 660 of those classified as native to California. There were no additional species picked up offshore due to the use of hexagon centroid points. Animal species INCLUDED in this analysis. CODE COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME A001 CALIFORNIA TIGER SALAMANDER Ambystoma californiense NATIVE A002 NORTHWESTERN SALAMANDER Ambystoma gracile NATIVE A003 LONG-TOED SALAMANDER Ambystoma macrodactylum NATIVE A047 EASTERN TIGER SALAMANDER Ambystoma tigrinum INTROD A021 CLOUDED SALAMANDER Aneides ferreus NATIVE A020 SPECKLED BLACK SALAMANDER Aneides flavipunctatus NATIVE A022
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico, 1986 J
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Mammalogy Papers: University of Nebraska State Museum, University of Nebraska State Museum 12-12-1986 Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico, 1986 J. Knox Jones Jr. Texas Tech University Dilford C. Carter Texas Tech University Hugh H. Genoways University of Nebraska - Lincoln, [email protected] Robert S. Hoffmann University of Nebraska - Lincoln Dale W. Rice National Museum of Natural History See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/museummammalogy Part of the Biodiversity Commons, Other Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons, and the Zoology Commons Jones, J. Knox Jr.; Carter, Dilford C.; Genoways, Hugh H.; Hoffmann, Robert S.; Rice, Dale W.; and Jones, Clyde, "Revised Checklist of North American Mammals North of Mexico, 1986" (1986). Mammalogy Papers: University of Nebraska State Museum. 266. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/museummammalogy/266 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Museum, University of Nebraska State at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mammalogy Papers: University of Nebraska State Museum by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Authors J. Knox Jones Jr., Dilford C. Carter, Hugh H. Genoways, Robert S. Hoffmann, Dale W. Rice, and Clyde Jones This article is available at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/museummammalogy/ 266 Jones, Carter, Genoways, Hoffmann, Rice & Jones, Occasional Papers of the Museum of Texas Tech University (December 12, 1986) number 107. U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 7 Small Mammal Distribution, Abundance and Habitat Use
    CHAPTER 7 SMALL MAMMAL DISTRIBUTION, ABUNDANCE AND HABITAT USE by Klaus O. Richter and Amanda L. Azous INTRODUCTION Small mammals are an integral component of most ecosystems. In the Northwest the regional distribution of small mammals has been described by Ingles (1965) and Maser et al. (1981). Within unmanaged (e.g., old growth) Douglas-fir forests, small mammals were described in Aubry et al. (1991) by numerous biologists. Mammals in second growth forests under differing cutting practices and intensity of landscaping and development were described by (Stofel 1993). Local small mammal species and distributions in urban parks varying in size of approximately four to 400 ha within urbanizing areas were described by (Gavareski 1976). The distribution and abundance of small mammals, similar to that of macroinvertebrates, amphibians and birds may be indicators of the environmental health of wetlands. They also exhibit the ability to shape wetlands through their influence on soil, water and plants. Several species such as Trowbridge’s shrew, marsh shrew, shrew-mole, western red-backed vole and creeping vole (See Table 7-1 for scientific names) are endemic to the Pacific Northwest (Corn and Bury 1991) and could be expected at pristine wetlands. Our objective in this chapter is to present the relative distribution and abundance of small mammals across the wetlands we studied. We also examine wetland conditions such as size, hydrology and vegetation complexity to gain insight into habitat characteristics important for maintaining diversity and unique species. METHODS We used pitfall and Sherman trap captures during autumn (mid-October to mid- November) as indicators of small mammal distributions.
    [Show full text]
  • Life History Account for Vagrant Shrew
    California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Interagency Wildlife Task Group VAGRANT SHREW Sorex vagrans Family: SORICIDAE Order: INSECTIVORA Class: MAMMALIA M003 Written by: J. Harris Reviewed by: H. Shellhammer Edited by: S. Granholm, R. Duke Updated by: CWHR Program Staff, May 2000 DISTRIBUTION, ABUNDANCE, AND SEASONALITY The vagrant shrew is common to abundant in the Sierra Nevada and Cascades from the Oregon border to northern Inyo Co., and along the coast from the Oregon border to Monterey Bay. Optimal habitats are valley foothill and montane riparian, aspen, wet meadow, annual and perennial grasslands, and fresh and saline emergent wetlands. Also occurs in a variety of chaparral and wooded habitats. Vagrant shrews can be found in California from sea level to 3750 m (12,000 ft) (Findley 1999). SPECIFIC HABITAT REQUIREMENTS Feeding: Feeds mainly on invertebrates: insects, worms, snails, slugs, and spiders. Also eats fungi, small mammals, roots, young shoots, and probably seeds. Forages under litter on moist surfaces, underground, and in moist accumulations of dead plant material. Whitaker et al. (1983) reported it ate more flying insects and caterpillars, and fewer terrestrial insects and worms, when grazing pressure was heavy. Cover: Prefers dense litter or ground cover. Uses vole runways. Reproduction: Makes a nest of dry grass, moss, or other materials under logs, roots, or dense vegetation. (Findley 1999). Water: This species may require water. Clothier (1955) reported that vagrant shrews were not found farther than 180 m (600 ft) from water. Pattern: Prefers patchy, open areas with wet micro-habitats such as damp meadows and streambanks.
    [Show full text]
  • Mammals and Life Zones
    Mount Rainier National Park National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Mammals and Life Zones Just as people have adapted to living in nearly every climate imaginable, our fellow mammals have come to occupy many different life zones around the world. These life zones, like big neighborhoods, provide many different habitats where animals can find food, water, shelter, and space. More than fifty different kinds of mammals live in the life zones found in Mount Rainier National Park. Some are specially adapted to one life zone, while others range through several. Imagine taking a very long walk from the edge of the park up to the summit of the mountain. What kinds of life zones would you see? What kinds of mammals would you find in each one? Looking at life zones can help us better understand and appreciate mammal adaptations and the struggle to survive––a trait all living things share. Mountain goats live in the Alpine Zone Lowland Forest Zone You’re in the lowland forest when you enter the park and find yourself sheltered by giant trees, dense shrubs and brush. The old-growth forests of this zone have trees towering 250 feet (76 m) or more, reaching diameters of 100 inches (2.54 m). Found between 2,000 and 3,000 feet in elevation (610-914 m), this zone is crowded with Douglas fir, western hemlock, and western red cedar. If you pass a pond or a lake, you might see evidence of beavers. Beavers eat tree bark and “girdle” trees which they can later use to make dams and lodges.
    [Show full text]
  • Complete List of Amphibian, Reptile, Bird and Mammal Species in California
    Complete List of Amphibian, Reptile, Bird and Mammal Species in California California Department of Fish and Game Sept. 2008 (updated) This list represents all of the native or introduced amphibian, reptile, bird and mammal species known in California. Introduced species are marked with “I”, harvest species with “HA”, and vagrant species or species with extremely limited distributions with *. The term “introduced”, as used here, represents both accidental and intentional introductions. Subspecies are not included on this list. The most current list of species and subspecies with special management status is available from the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Taxonomy and nomenclature used within the list are the same as those used within both the CNDDB and CWHR software programs and data sets. If a discrepancy exists between this list and the ones produced by CNDDB, the CNDDB list can be presumed to be more accurate as it is updated more frequently than the CWHR data set. ________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ AMPHIBIA (Amphibians) CAUDATA (Salamanders) AMBYSTOMATIDAE (Mole Salamanders and Relatives) Long-toed Salamander Ambystoma macrodactylum Tiger Salamander Ambystoma tigrinum I California Tiger Salamander Ambystoma californiense Northwestern Salamander Ambystoma gracile RHYACOTRITONIDAE (Torrent or Seep Salamanders) Southern Torrent Salamander Rhyacotriton
    [Show full text]
  • SHREWS Robert H
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln The aH ndbook: Prevention and Control of Wildlife Wildlife Damage Management, Internet Center for Damage 1-1-1994 SHREWS Robert H. Schmidt Utah State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmhandbook Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Schmidt, Robert H., "SHREWS" (1994). The Handbook: Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage. 55. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdmhandbook/55 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Wildlife Damage Management, Internet Center for at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in The aH ndbook: Prevention and Control of Wildlife Damage by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Robert H. Schmidt Assistant Professor Department of Fisheries and Wildlife SHREWS Utah State University Logan, Utah 84322-5210 Fig. 1. A masked shrew, Sorex cinereus Identification Damage Prevention and Fumigants The shrew is a small, mouse-sized Control Methods None are registered. mammal with an elongated snout, a Trapping dense fur of uniform color, small eyes, Exclusion and five clawed toes on each foot (Fig. Mouse trap (snap trap). Rodent-proof structures also exclude 1). Its skull, compared to that of shrews. Small box trap. rodents, is long, narrow, and lacks the zygomatic arch on the lateral side Cultural Methods Pit trap. characteristic of rodents. The teeth are Mowing may decrease preferred Shooting small, sharp, and commonly dark- tipped. Pigmentation on the tips of the habitat and food. Not practical. teeth is caused by deposition of iron in Repellents Other Methods the outer enamel.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity and Endemism in Tidal-Marsh Vertebrates
    Studies in Avian Biology No. 32:32-53 DIVERSITY AND ENDEMISM IN TIDAL-MARSH VERTEBRATES RUSSELL GREENBERG AND JESúS E. MALDONADO Abstract. Tidal marshes are distributed patcliily, predominantly along the mid- to high-latitude coasts of the major continents. The greatest extensions of non-arctic tidal marshes are found along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of North America, but local concentrations can be found in Great Britain, northern Europe, northern Japan, northern China, and northern Korea, Argentina-Uruguay-Brazil, Australia, and New Zealand. We tallied the number of terrestrial vertebrate species that regularly occupy tidal marshes in each of these regions, as well as species or subspecies that are largely restricted to tidal marshes. In each of the major coastal areas we found 8-21 species of breeding birds and 13-25 species of terrestrial mammals. The diversity of tidal-marsh birds and mammals is highly inter-correlated, as is the diversity of species restricted to saltmarshes. These values are, in turn, correlated with tidal-marsh area along a coastline. We estimate approximately seven species of turtles occur in brackish or saltmarshes worldwide, but only one species is endemic and it is found in eastern North America. A large number of frogs and snakes occur opportunistically in tidal marshes, primarily in southeastern United States, particularly Florida. Three endemic snake taxa are restricted to tidal marshes of eastern North America as well. Overall, only in North America were we able to find documentation for multiple taxa of terrestrial vertebrates associated with tidal marshes. These include one species of mammal and two species of birds, one species of snake, and one species of turtle.
    [Show full text]