DOCSLIB.ORG

MILTON LOGISTICS HUB - Technical Data Report Terrestrial (Appendix E.16)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
MILTON LOGISTICS HUB - Technical Data Report Terrestrial (Appendix E.16) MILTON LOGISTICS HUB - Technical Data Report Terrestrial (Appendix E.16) Prepared for: Canadian National Railway Company 935 de La Gauchetière Street W Montreal, Quebec, H3B 2M9 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 70 Southgate Drive, Suite 1 Guelph, Ontario, N1G 4P5 File No. 160960844 December 7, 2015 MILTON LOGISTICS HUB - TECHNICAL DATA REPORT TERRESTRIAL (APPENDIX E.16) Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... I ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................................................... III GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................................ V 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................... 1 1.2 STUDY OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................ 2 1.3 OVERVIEW OF SPECIES AT RISK LEGISLATION ................................................................. 3 1.3.1 Federal Species at Risk Act ........................................................................... 3 1.3.2 Provincial Endangered Species Act ............................................................ 3 2.0 REGIONAL SETTING ....................................................................................................... 5 3.0 STUDY AND ASSESSMENT AREAS .................................................................................. 7 3.1 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AREA ....................................................................................... 7 3.2 LOCAL ASSESSMENT AREA ............................................................................................... 7 3.3 REGIONAL ASSESSMENT AREA ......................................................................................... 7 4.0 METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 9 4.1 DESKTOP REVIEW AND DATA SOURCES ......................................................................... 9 4.2 FIELD SURVEYS.................................................................................................................... 9 4.3 LAND USE AND VEGETATION COMMUNITIES ............................................................... 12 4.3.1 Botanical Inventory ...................................................................................... 12 4.4 AMPHIBIAN SURVEYS ....................................................................................................... 13 4.4.1 Frog and Toad Calling Surveys ................................................................... 13 4.4.2 Salamanders ................................................................................................. 13 4.5 BREEDING BIRDS SURVEYS .............................................................................................. 14 4.6 TURTLE SURVEYS ............................................................................................................... 14 4.7 BAT SURVEYS .................................................................................................................... 15 4.7.1 Bat Habitat Assessment – Maternity Roosts............................................... 15 4.7.2 Bat Maternity Roost Surveys – Acoustic Monitoring ................................. 15 4.8 SNAKE SURVEYS ............................................................................................................... 16 5.0 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................ 17 5.1 BACKGROUND REVIEW .................................................................................................. 17 5.1.1 Natural Heritage Features ........................................................................... 17 5.1.2 Species ........................................................................................................... 18 5.2 LAND USE AND VEGETATION COMMUNITIES ............................................................... 20 5.2.1 Botanical Inventory ...................................................................................... 23 5.3 AMPHIBIANS ..................................................................................................................... 24 5.3.1 Frog and Toad Calling Surveys ................................................................... 24 5.3.2 Salamanders ................................................................................................. 29 File No 160960844 MILTON LOGISTICS HUB - TECHNICAL DATA REPORT TERRESTRIAL (APPENDIX E.16) 5.4 BREEDING BIRDS .............................................................................................................. 29 5.5 TURTLE SURVEYS ............................................................................................................... 35 5.6 BAT SURVEYS .................................................................................................................... 36 5.6.1 Bat Habitat Assessment ............................................................................... 36 5.6.2 Bat Acoustic Surveys .................................................................................... 37 5.7 SNAKE HABITAT ASSESSMENT AND AREA SEARCHES ................................................... 37 6.0 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................. 39 7.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 41 LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1: Survey Dates, Times, and Weather – Field Surveys (AECOM and Stantec) .................................................................................................................. 10 Table 4.2: Bat Detector Settings ............................................................................................ 16 Table 5.1: Species at Risk Potentially Found in the RAA ..................................................... 18 Table 5.2: ELC Vegetation Communities Found in the LAA .............................................. 21 Table 5.3: Amphibian Calling Survey Results ....................................................................... 24 Table 5.4: Western Chorus Frog Critical Habitat Assessment ............................................ 27 Table 5.5: Salamander Habitat Characteristics .................................................................. 29 Table 5.6: Breeding Bird Survey Summary ............................................................................ 30 Table 5.7: Summary of Breeding Bird Densities of 20 Most Common Species Observed in each Habitat Type, as Measured by the Point Count Surveys. .................................................................................................................... 33 Table 5.8: Turtle Survey Results ............................................................................................... 35 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A FIGURES Figure 1: Background Review Figure 2: Stantec Field Survey Locations Figure 3: Aecom Field Survey Locations Figure 4: Ecological Land Classification Figure 5: Migratory Bird and Species At Risk Habitat APPENDIX B BOTANICAL LIST APPENDIX C WILDLIFE LIST File No. 160960844 MILTON LOGISTICS HUB - TECHNICAL DATA REPORT TERRESTRIAL (APPENDIX E.16) Executive Summary Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was retained by the Canadian National Railway Company (CN) to conduct the terrestrial and wildlife existing conditions assessment in the vicinity of the proposed Milton Logistics Hub (the Project) within the Town of Milton in the Regional Municipality of Halton, Ontario. The information contained in this report is based on assessments completed by AECOM in 2013 and by Stantec in 2014 and 2015. The following surveys were completed: • Ecological Land Classification (ELC) and spring/summer botanical surveys; • Amphibian call surveys; • Salamander egg mass surveys; • Bat habitat assessments and acoustic surveys; • Snake habitat assessments and area searches; • Turtle overwintering and nesting surveys; and, • Breeding bird surveys. Species at Risk (SAR) observed during these surveys included Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica), Bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus), and Eastern Meadowlark (Sturnella magna), all of which are classified as threatened under the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). These species may be added in the future to the Species at Risk Act (SARA). It is noted for information and reference purpose only that these species are also classified as threatened under the Endangered Species Act of Ontario (ESA), which is often a precursor to recognition under SARA. The Little Brown Myotis (Myotis lucifugus), which is listed as endangered under SARA and the ESA, was identified as occurring in the area. Eastern Wood-Pewee (Contopus virens) and Snapping Turtle (Chelydra serpentine), classified as special concern under COSEWIC (Eastern Wood-Pewee has not been added to the SARA schedule; Snapping Turtle is ranked special concern under SARA) and ESA were also observed in the area. The habitat locations for these species were identified
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wood Frog (Rana Sylvatica): a Technical Conservation Assessment
    Wood Frog (Rana sylvatica): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project March 24, 2005 Erin Muths1, Suzanne Rittmann1, Jason Irwin2, Doug Keinath3, Rick Scherer4 1 U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, 2150 Centre Ave. Bldg C, Fort Collins, CO 80526 2 Department of Biology, Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA 17837 3 Wyoming Natural Diversity Database, University of Wyoming, P.O. Box 3381, Laramie, WY 82072 4 Colorado State University, GDPE, Fort Collins, CO 80524 Peer Review Administered by Society for Conservation Biology Muths, E., S. Rittman, J. Irwin, D. Keinath, and R. Scherer. (2005, March 24). Wood Frog (Rana sylvatica): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/woodfrog.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge the help of the many people who contributed time and answered questions during our review of the literature. AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES Dr. Erin Muths is a Zoologist with the U.S. Geological Survey – Fort Collins Science Center. She has been studying amphibians in Colorado and the Rocky Mountain Region for the last 10 years. Her research focuses on demographics of boreal toads, wood frogs and chorus frogs and methods research. She is a principle investigator for the USDOI Amphibian Research and Monitoring Initiative and is an Associate Editor for the Northwestern Naturalist. Dr. Muths earned a B.S. in Wildlife Ecology from the University of Wisconsin, Madison (1986); a M.S. in Biology (Systematics and Ecology) from Kansas State University (1990) and a Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Status of the Illinois Chorus Frog
    ILLINOI S UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN PRODUCTION NOTE University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library Large-scale Digitization Project, 2007. Population status of the Illinois chorus frog (Pseudacris streckeri illinoensis) in Madison County, Illinois: Results of 1994 surveys IDOT CONTRACT 1-5-90179 FINAL REPORT ON 1994 RESULTS John K. Tucker Center for Aquatic Ecology Illinois Natural History Survey 4134 Alby Street Alton, Illinois 62002 and David P. Philipp Center for Aquatic Ecology Illinois Natural History Survey 607 E. Peabody Champaign, Illinois 61781 December 1995 J. K. Tucker Dr. David P. Philipp Co-Principal Investigator Co-Principal Investigator Center for Aquatic Ecology Center for Aquatic Ecology Illinois Natural History Survey Illinois Natural History Survey DISCLAIMER The findings, conclusions, and views expressed herein are those of the researchers and should not be considered as the official position of the Illinois Department of Transportation. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SUPPORT This research (contract number 1-5-90179) was funded by the Illinois Department of Transportation. ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A study of the biology of the Illinois chorus frog, Pseudacris streckeri illinoensis, is reported. Surveys of Madison County for choruses of the frogs located seven choruses. Choruses previously reported at Granite City and South Roxana were not relocated and are thought to be extirpated. We estimated population size to be 420 frogs in April 1994 with a juvenile survivorship of 4.5%. Mean distance for 20 recaptured frogs from point of initial capture was 0.52 km with a range of 0 to 0.9 km. Habitat preference for 48 frogs found on roads appeared to be for old field habitats in preference to areas of agriculture or lawns.
    [Show full text]
  • AMPHIBIANS of OHIO F I E L D G U I D E DIVISION of WILDLIFE INTRODUCTION
    AMPHIBIANS OF OHIO f i e l d g u i d e DIVISION OF WILDLIFE INTRODUCTION Amphibians are typically shy, secre- Unlike reptiles, their skin is not scaly. Amphibian eggs must remain moist if tive animals. While a few amphibians Nor do they have claws on their toes. they are to hatch. The eggs do not have are relatively large, most are small, deli- Most amphibians prefer to come out at shells but rather are covered with a jelly- cately attractive, and brightly colored. night. like substance. Amphibians lay eggs sin- That some of these more vulnerable spe- gly, in masses, or in strings in the water The young undergo what is known cies survive at all is cause for wonder. or in some other moist place. as metamorphosis. They pass through Nearly 200 million years ago, amphib- a larval, usually aquatic, stage before As with all Ohio wildlife, the only ians were the first creatures to emerge drastically changing form and becoming real threat to their continued existence from the seas to begin life on land. The adults. is habitat degradation and destruction. term amphibian comes from the Greek Only by conserving suitable habitat to- Ohio is fortunate in having many spe- amphi, which means dual, and bios, day will we enable future generations to cies of amphibians. Although generally meaning life. While it is true that many study and enjoy Ohio’s amphibians. inconspicuous most of the year, during amphibians live a double life — spend- the breeding season, especially follow- ing part of their lives in water and the ing a warm, early spring rain, amphib- rest on land — some never go into the ians appear in great numbers seemingly water and others never leave it.
    [Show full text]
  • Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris Triseriata), Great Lakes/ St
    PROPOSED Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series Recovery Strategy for the Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata), Great Lakes/ St. Lawrence – Canadian Shield Population, in Canada Western Chorus Frog 2014 1 Recommended citation: Environment Canada. 2014. Recovery Strategy for the Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata), Great Lakes / St. Lawrence – Canadian Shield Population, in Canada [Proposed], Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series, Environment Canada, Ottawa, v + 46 pp For copies of the recovery strategy, or for additional information on species at risk, including COSEWIC Status Reports, residence descriptions, action plans and other related recovery documents, please visit the Species at Risk (SAR) Public Registry (www.sararegistry.gc.ca). Cover illustration: © Raymond Belhumeur Également disponible en français sous le titre « Programme de rétablissement de la rainette faux-grillon de l’Ouest (Pseudacris triseriata), population des Grands Lacs et Saint-Laurent et du Bouclier canadien, au Canada [Proposition] » © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada represented by the Minister of the Environment, 2014. All rights reserved. ISBN Catalogue no. Content (excluding the illustrations) may be used without permission, with appropriate credit to the source. Recovery Strategy for the Western Chorus Frog 2014 (Great Lakes / St. Lawrence – Canadian Shield Population) PREFACE The federal, provincial, and territorial government signatories under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk (1996) agreed to establish complementary legislation and programs that provide for effective protection of species at risk throughout Canada. Under the Species at Risk Act (S.C. 2002, c.29) (SARA), the federal competent ministers are responsible for the preparation of recovery strategies for listed Extirpated, Endangered, and Threatened species and are required to report on progress within five years of the publication of the final document on the Species at Risk Public Registry.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Hill FIELD GUIDE
    Forest Hill FIELD GUIDE FOREST HILL ALMA COLLEGE GIRESD ii • Forest Hill History • Forest Hill Nature Area www.GratiotConservationDistrict.org Forest Hill Nature Area, located in northern Gratiot County, Michigan, is land that has been set aside for the preservation and appreciation of the natural world. The nature area has walking trails through 90 acres of gently rolling hills, open fields, wetlands, Let children walk with nature. Let them see the beautiful blendings willow thickets, and woodlots. Forest Hill Nature Area is home to a and communions of death and life. Their joys inseparable unity. As variety of wildlife such as white-tailed deer, muskrats, ducks and taught in woods and meadows. Plains and mountains. And turkeys. streams. -John Muir Also, over the years, some farm buildings were demolished while others were renovated. The Nature Area has evolved into an Forest Hill Nature Area: important outdoor educational resource for the school children in Gratiot and Isabella Counties as well as the citizens of Mid- In 1992, the Gratiot County Soil Conservation District acquired a Michigan. Since 1993, thousands of school children and adults 90 acre abandoned farm from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. have participated in field trips and nature programs at Forest Hill In 1993, the District leased the property to the Gratiot-Isabella Nature Area. RESD to develop an outdoor education center. The RESD named the property, the Forest Hill Nature Area and in partnership with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service began a major wetland restoration project. 3 Digital Nature Trail Forest Hill is brimming with biodiversity and all it entails: succession, evolution, adaptation, wildlife and food chains.
    [Show full text]
  • Upland Chorus Frog
    Upland Chorus Frog Upland Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata feriarum) - Pl.33 Identification: 3/4" - 1 1/2". The ground color of the feriarum subspecies of Western Chorus Frog varies from brown to gray. Key characteristics are a light stripe on the upper lip and a dark stripe through the eye that runs down the flank to the groin. In addition, three thin dark stripes or rows of small spots down the back are usually present, but this feature is variable. There is usually a dark triangle between the eyes, but it may be faint. There are usually dark flecks on the otherwise cream-colored breast. Toe discs are small. Where to find them: Variety of habitats. Breeds in swamps and vernal pools. When to find them: Breeds from February to May. Voice: Regularly repeated creaking sound, like someone running their nails over the teeth of a comb. Range: Northern Region: Sussex, Warren, Hunterdon, Morris, northwestern Bergen, and western Somerset and Passaic Counties. Note: The Upland Chorus Frog and New Jersey Chorus Frog are currently considered to be subspecies of the Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata). They are best distinguished from each other by the region of the state in which they are found, and by the thickness and continuity of the three stripes on the back. Upland Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata feriarum) - text pg. 41 Key Features - Brown or gray in color. - Dark stripe runs from snout to groin through eye. - Three dark stripes present down back. - Dark Triangle may be present between eyes. New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife ~ 2002 Excerpt from: “Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of New Jersey” Order the complete guide at - http://www.state.nj.us/dep/fgw/products.htm.
    [Show full text]
  • Herpetological Diversity of Stemler Cave Nature Preserve, St. Clair County, Illinois
    Transactions of the Illinois State Academy of Science received 1/9/16 (2016) Volume 109, pp. 19-23 accepted 2/19/16 Herpetological Diversity of Stemler Cave Nature Preserve, St. Clair County, Illinois Robert G. Weck Southwestern Illinois College, 2500 Carlyle Ave, Belleville IL 62221 [email protected] ABSTRACT Stemler Cave is a biologically diverse ecosystem located in southwestern St. Clair County, IL. The primary entrance to the cave and the surrounding wooded sinkhole is a dedicated Illinois nature preserve. Here I report the results of ten years of observations on the herpeto- logical diversity of Stemler Cave Nature Preserve, which include 26 species of amphibians and reptiles. Seventeen species were recorded from the entrance or interior of the cave. The most diverse group were frogs and toads with 11 documented species. Two salamander species, four turtle species, one lizard species, and eight species of snakes were recorded in Stemler Cave Nature Preserve. INTRODUCTION Figure 1. Topographic map showing Stemler Cave Nature Preserve (SCNP) is a the Stemler Karst Natural Area (black privately-owned, dedicated Illinois nature boundary), which is defined by the wa- preserve in southwestern St. Clair County. tershed boundary of Stemler Cave. The Located in the larger Stemler Karst Illinois location of Stemler Cave Nature Preserve Natural Areas Inventory site (Figure 1) of is indicated by the black square. Inset southwestern Illinois, the preserve consists aerial photo shows the preserve bound- of an approximately 0.35 ha steep-sided ary in black. The wooded area south of wooded sinkhole that includes the prima- SCNP is Stemler Cave Woods Nature ry entrance to Stemler Cave and a short Preserve.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography of the Anurans of the United States and Canada. Version 2, Updated and Covering the Period 1709 – 2012
    January 2018 Open Access Publishing Volume 13, Monograph 7 A female Western Toad (Anaxyrus boreas) from Garibaldi Provincial Park, British Columbia, Canada. This large bufonid occurs throughout much of Western North America. The IUCN lists it as Near Threatened because it is probably in significant decline (> 30% over 10 years) due to disease.(Photographed by C. Kenneth Dodd). Bibliography of the Anurans of the United States and Canada. Version 2, Updated and Covering the Period 1709 – 2012. Monograph 7. C. Kenneth Dodd, Jr. ISSN: 1931-7603 Indexed by: Zoological Record, Scopus, Current Contents / Agriculture, Biology & Environmental Sciences, Journal Citation Reports, Science Citation Index Extended, EMBiology, Biology Browser, Wildlife Review Abstracts, Google Scholar, and is in the Directory of Open Access Journals. BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE ANURANS OF THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA. VERSION 2, UPDATED AND COVERING THE PERIOD 1709 – 2012. MONOGRAPH 7. C. KENNETH DODD, JR. Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA 32611. Copyright © 2018. C. Kenneth Dodd, Jr. All Rights Reserved. Please cite this monograph as follows: Dodd, C. Kenneth, Jr. 2018. Bibliography of the anurans of the United States and Canada. Version 2, Updated and Covering the Period 1709 - 2012. Herpetological Conservation and Biology 13(Monograph 7):1-328. Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS i PREFACE ii ABSTRACT 1 COMPOSITE BIBLIOGRAPHIC TRIVIA 1 LITERATURE CITED 2 BIBLIOGRAPHY 2 FOOTNOTES 325 IDENTICAL TEXTS 325 CATALOGUE OF NORTH AMERICAN AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES 326 ADDITIONAL ANURAN-INCLUSIVE BIBLIOGRAPHIES 326 AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY 328 i Preface to Version 2: An Expanded and Detailed Resource. MALCOLM L.
    [Show full text]
  • Differential Host Susceptibility to Batrachochytrium Dendrobatidis, an Emerging Amphibian Pathogen
    Contributed Paper Differential Host Susceptibility to Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis, an Emerging Amphibian Pathogen C. 1. SEARLE,*§ S. S. GERVASI,* ].HUA,#]. I. HAl\1MOND,# R.A. REL YRA..,# D. H. OLSON,t A.c�D A.R. BLAUSTEIN* *Depart.'1lent of Zoology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, U.S.A. #Department of Biological Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, U.S.A. tUnited States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Corvallis, OR 97331, U.S.A. Abstract: The amphibian fungal pathogen Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (Bd) has received considerable attention due to its role in amphibian population declines worldwide. Although many amphibian species appear to be affected by Bd, there is little information on species-specific dijJerences in susceptibility to this pathogen. We used a comparative experimental approach to examine Bd susceptibility in 6 amphibian species from the United States. We exposed postmetamorphic animals to Bd for 30 days and monitored mortality, feeding rates, and infection levels. In all species tested, Ed-exposed animals had higher rates of mortality than unexposed (control) animals. However, we found dijJerences in mortality rates among species even though the amount of Ed detected on the dijJerent species' bodies did not dijJer. Of the species tested, southern toads (Anaxyrusterrestris) and wood frogs (lithobates sylvaticus) had the highest rates of Ed-related mortality. Within species, we detected lower levels of Ed on individuals that survived longer and found that the relationship between body size and infection levels dijJered among species. Our results indicate that, even under identical conditions, amphibian species dijJer in susceptibility to Ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Illinois Frogs and Toads Poster
    I l l i n o i s Frogs & Toads Photographs by Michael Redmer©. Key Frogs and toads are not shown in equal proportion to actual size. This poster was made possible by: rogs and toads are the most conspicuous members of a very 1. wood frog, Rana sylvatica 1 5 2. northern leopard frog, Rana pipiens Illinois Department of Natural Resources secretive group of animals called amphibians. Frogs and toads are 3. chorus frog complex, Pseudacris triseriata-maculata* Division of Education 2 4 4. Fowler’s toad, Bufo fowleri Illinois Natural History Survey 3 well known for their mating call and long, insect-catching tongue. 5. green treefrog, Hyla cinerea Illinois State Museum F 6. green frog, Rana clamitans They are excellent gauges of environmental health because of their close 6 8 10 7. spring peeper, Pseudacris crucifer 7 8. gray treefrog complex, Hyla chrysoscelis-versicolor* contact with aquatic, wetland, and terrestrial* environments. They have moist, 9 9. cricket frog, Acris crepitans 11 10. southern leopard frog, Rana sphenocephala sensitive skin that allows chemicals in the environment to pass into their Illinois Department of Transportation 13 11. American toad, Bufo americanus 12 12. plains leopard frog, Rana blairi bodies. Furthermore, their eggs lack a hard shell so their developing young 14 13. bullfrog, Rana catesbeiana also are directly exposed to the environment. The puzzling disappearance 17 14. eastern spadefoot, Scaphiopus holbrookii 15 16 15. eastern narrowmouth toad, Gastrophryne carolinensis of some frog and toad species in remote, pristine parts of the world has 16. Illinois chorus frog, Pseudacris streckeri illinoensis 17.
    [Show full text]
  • Illinois Chorus Frog
    Conservation Guidance for Illinois Chorus Frog Pseudacris illinoensis Smith, 1951 IL status: Threatened Species information Characteristics US status: The Illinois chorus frog (ICF) Under review is a small (1.4 to 1.75 in. and 0.2 oz.) tan to gray frog2. Its Global rank: body is stout and toad-like 1 Vulnerable with robust forearms. Its skin is granular rather than Trend: smooth. It has dark brown or Declining1 black lines on its back with a white belly. It has a Family: characteristic dark mask- Hylidae like stripe from snout to shoulder, a dark spot under 6 Habitat: each eye, and a V- or Y- Adult Illinois chorus frog. Photo by John Tucker shaped mark between the Sand prairie, sandy old eyes. The throat (vocal pouch) of the male ICF darkens during the breeding fields, ephemeral pools, season. ICF tadpoles can be distinguished from other tadpoles by their round ditches, flooded shape, large size, forward attachment point of the tail, and large tail height. depressions, marshes Once they develop two functioning limbs, they also develop other ICF markings including the dark “Y” between the eyes3. Similar species: Upland chorus frog, ICF are rarely seen because they spend most of their lives underground, Western chorus frog emerging only during the breeding season. The males’ breeding call is a series of high-pitched, rapid, birdlike whistles that can be heard as much as 1.3 mile Seasonal Cycle away4. Listen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaBUvAsHc00. Jan Feb Habitat Mar ICF is fossorial, spending around 85% of its life burrowed underground in Apr sparsely vegetated areas with sandy soil, near ephemeral (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Western Chorus Frog Pseudacris Triseriata Taxa: Amphibian SE-GAP Spp Code: Awcfr Order: ITIS Species Code: 173525 Family: Natureserve Element Code: AAABC05070
    Western Chorus Frog Pseudacris triseriata Taxa: Amphibian SE-GAP Spp Code: aWCFR Order: ITIS Species Code: 173525 Family: NatureServe Element Code: AAABC05070 KNOWN RANGE: PREDICTED HABITAT: P:\Proj1\SEGap P:\Proj1\SEGap Range Map Link: http://www.basic.ncsu.edu/segap/datazip/maps/SE_Range_aWCFR.pdf Predicted Habitat Map Link: http://www.basic.ncsu.edu/segap/datazip/maps/SE_Dist_aWCFR.pdf GAP Online Tool Link: http://www.gapserve.ncsu.edu/segap/segap/index2.php?species=aWCFR Data Download: http://www.basic.ncsu.edu/segap/datazip/region/vert/aWCFR_se00.zip PROTECTION STATUS: Reported on March 14, 2011 Federal Status: --- State Status: --- NS Global Rank: --- NS State Rank: --- aWCFR Page 1 of 5 SUMMARY OF PREDICTED HABITAT BY MANAGMENT AND GAP PROTECTION STATUS: US FWS US Forest Service Tenn. Valley Author. US DOD/ACOE ha % ha % ha % ha % Status 1 5,579.9 < 1 4,253.5 < 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 Status 2 25,236.9 < 1 6,747.8 < 1 0.0 0 1,354.1 < 1 Status 3 576.4 < 1 114,033.0 2 13,580.2 < 1 34,382.1 < 1 Status 4 4.6 < 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.3 < 1 Total 31,397.8 < 1 125,034.2 2 13,580.2 < 1 35,736.5 < 1 US Dept. of Energy US Nat. Park Service NOAA Other Federal Lands ha % ha % ha % ha % Status 1 0.0 0 12,449.6 < 1 9.5 < 1 0.0 0 Status 2 0.0 0 78.9 < 1 506.3 < 1 0.0 0 Status 3 11,481.4 < 1 7,044.5 < 1 0.0 0 39.8 < 1 Status 4 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 Total 11,481.4 < 1 19,573.0 < 1 515.8 < 1 39.8 < 1 Native Am.
    [Show full text]