DOCSLIB.ORG

The Influence of Meadow Moisture Levels on Activity of Small Mammal Nest Predators in the Sierra Nevada, California Author(S): M

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Influence of Meadow Moisture Levels on Activity of Small Mammal Nest Predators in the Sierra Nevada, California Author(S): M The Influence of Meadow Moisture Levels on Activity of Small Mammal Nest Predators in the Sierra Nevada, California Author(s): M. Constanza Cocimano, Michael L. Morrison, Heather A. Mathewson, and Lisa M. Vormwald Source: Northwestern Naturalist, 92(1):50-56. 2011. Published By: Society for Northwestern Vertebrate Biology DOI: 10.1898/10-17.1 URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1898/10-17.1 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is an electronic aggregator of bioscience research content, and the online home to over 160 journals and books published by not-for-profit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. NORTHWESTERN NATURALIST 92:50–56 SPRING 2011 THE INFLUENCE OF MEADOW MOISTURE LEVELS ON ACTIVITY OF SMALL MAMMAL NEST PREDATORS IN THE SIERRA NEVADA, CALIFORNIA MCONSTANZA COCIMANO,MICHAEL LMORRISON,HEATHER AMATHEWSON, AND LISA MVORMWALD Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843 ABSTRACT—High nest predation rates are one of the main sources of nesting failure in passerines. Mountain meadows in the Sierra Nevada have been intensively modified, reducing meadow wetness and potentially favoring easy access for mammalian predators to reach nesting areas in the meadow interior. We conducted mammal trapping in wet and dry areas of montane meadows during May through August of 2007 and 2008 to identify the assemblage of potential mammalian nest predators and determine the relationship between activity and meadow wetness. Chipmunk (Tamias spp.) activity was primarily restricted to dry areas. Activity of Yellow-pine Chipmunks (Tamias amoenus) was .90% higher in dry versus wet areas. Deer Mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) were equally active in both site types in 2007, but declined and were only captured in wet areas in 2008. Overall activity was higher in 2007 and 2008 for both wet and dry areas (68% and 52%, respectively). Our results suggest that increasing the proportion of inundated areas in meadows may reduce small mammal activity (for instance Yellow-pine Chipmunks) and potentially reduce nest predation. Key words: California, Empidonax traillii, meadows, passerine, predators wetness, Sierra Nevada, small mammals, Willow Flycatcher Studies in the Sierra Nevada, California, 1993; Jobin and Picman 1997; Cain and others suggested that predation by terrestrial verte- 2003; Fletcher and Koford 2004; Hoover 2006); brates significantly reduced nest success of the thus restoring higher water levels may inhibit California state endangered Willow Flycatcher some predators from accessing nests, increase (Empidonax traillii), and other species such as recruitment and survival of riparian deciduous Yellow Warbler (Dendroica petechia; Cain and shrubs, and improve habitat for passerine prey others 2003) and Dusky Flycatcher (E. oberhol- (wasps, flies, moths, caterpillars, and bees) seri) that nest in riparian areas (Cain and (Erman 1984; Green and others 2003). Morrison 2003). Meadows in the Sierra Nevada Rodents are known nest predators (Liebezeit have been intensively modified by livestock and George 2002; Bradley and Marzluff 2003). grazing, road construction, timber harvesting, Among rodent species, Douglas’ Squirrel (Ta- changes in fire regimes, and recreational activ- miasciurus douglasii), Deer Mice (Peromyscus ities (Ratliff 1982; Green and others 2003; Fites- maniculatus), and chipmunks (Tamias spp.) have Kaufman and others 2007). These activities have been photographed predating abandoned Yel- led to a decrease in meadow wetness (Green low Warbler nests baited with eggs in montane and others 2003), which in turn facilitates the meadows in the Sierra Nevada (Cain and others establishment and expansion of Lodgepole Pine 2003); we have no data on specific rodent (Pinus contorta) farther into meadows (Fites- predators of Willow Flycatcher nests in our Kaufman and others 2007). In the Sierra study region. Based on the work of Cain and Nevada, Cain and others (2003) found that others (2003), we predicted that wet meadows meadow wetness, distance to isolated trees, and would show lower small mammal abundance distance to forest edge were related to predator and activity relative to dry meadows. Our goal, activity. The presence of water may prevent using the same general study areas as Cain and terrestrial mammalian activity in inundated others (2003), was to evaluate the activity and (standing water) areas (Picman and others abundance of small mammals in meadows by: 50 SPRING 2011 COCIMANO AND OTHERS:SMALL MAMMAL ACTIVITY 51 (1) determining the relative abundance, activity, Wetness Conditions and distribution of small mammals in meadows We used the line-intercept method (Bonham of the Sierra Nevada; (2) determining the 1989) to evaluate the wetness conditions of wet influence of meadow wetness on the activity and dry areas in each meadow every 3 m along and abundance of potential nest predators; and the trap lines. We classified soil surface moisture (3) providing management recommendations as dry, saturated, or inundated, and measured for the implementation of restoration practices water depth. We defined soil as inundated soil to improve meadow conditions for passerines where there was standing surface water, as such as the California state endangered Willow saturated soil where water seeped to the surface Flycatcher. after pressing on the ground, and as dry soil where no surface moisture was present or seeped METHODS to the surface when pressed. We calculated the Study Area overall percentage of sampling points with inundated soils, and mean water depth for each Our study sites were part of a long-term wet and dry area in each meadow. demography study of Willow Flycatchers locat- In each meadow we classified wet and dry ed in montane meadows in central Sierra areas, where wet areas were where at least 60% Nevada, California (Bombay 1999; Bombay of the line intercept (described below) was wet and others 2003; Cain and others 2003). The (with saturated and inundated soils). We area presents a mountainous topography and a randomly determined the order in which each naturally fragmented landscape. Meadows meadow would be sampled. Of the approxi- were associated with streams and small head- mately 422 ha of meadows included in our water rivers, pond and lake margins, or spring study, only about 59 ha (14%) were dominated and seeps (Ratliff 1982; Bombay and others by willow (Bombay 1999; Bombay and others 2003). Forests dominated by Lodgepole Pine 2003). Of this willow-covered area, about 30 ha (Pinus contorta) surrounded the meadows, (7%) were excluded from trapping to avoid which predominately consisted of herbaceous disturbing nesting Willow Flycatchers. plants (Carex spp. and Juncus spp.) and willows (Salix lemmonii and S. geyeriana). Willows were Mammal Sampling distributed along streams and in clumps scat- tered throughout the meadows (Bombay and To evaluate mammal abundance and activity others 2003; Cain and others 2006). Meadows in different wetness conditions across the mead- ranged in size from 25 to 103 ha and elevations ows, we live-trapped small mammals in May to ranged from 1900 to 2700 m. Temperatures in August of 2007 and 2008. In each of the wet and the summer ranged from an average overnight dry areas of the meadows, we set Sherman live low of 36C to an average daily high of 266C traps (extra large [7.6 3 9.5 3 30.5 cm] and large 3 3 (Western Regional Climate Center 2008). [7.6 8.9 23.5 cm]) 10 to 15 m apart within willow clumps along trap lines running from the Study Site Selection forest edge to the center of the meadow. We focused on willow because it is the predominate We selected 10 study sites (meadows) that shrub in the meadows we studied, and many presently or historically supported populations meadow-nesting passerines use this substrate for of Willow Flycatchers in the north-central Sierra nest placement and foraging. Although the Nevada (Bombay 1999; Green and others 2003) number of traps we set was proportional to the in the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit and available wet and dry area in a meadow, Tahoe National Forest (El Dorado, Placer, trapping density (about 100 traps/ha) was Nevada, and Sierra counties), and Department approximately equivalent across sites. We set of Fish and Game lands (Warner Valley, Plumas traps $30 m from known Willow Flycatcher County); specific meadows and geographic territories to avoid disturbance. We sampled locations are in Cocimano (2009). Specific each wet and dry area only once each summer, sampling areas (wet and dry, see below) were except Truckee Marsh, which we sampled twice then selected from within each of these mead- (with 1 month separation) in 2008 and consid- ows (8 in 2007, and 7 in 2008). ered the 2 trapping sessions as 1 sample. 52 NORTHWESTERN NATURALIST 92(1) We baited traps with oatmeal and peanut and used Spearman correlations (Zar 1984:318– butter, supplied the traps with polyester filling 320) to examine relationships between the small to provide insulation, and checked traps 2 (or mammal dependent variables (relative abun- occasionally 3) times during 4 consecutive dance and index of activity). Relative abun- nights in each of the wet and dry areas in each dance and activity of small mammals were meadow. The number of trap checks was the highly correlated (rs . 0.5, P , 0.05) for both same for all traps during a 24-h period and was wet and dry areas during 2007 and 2008.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mammal Species Native to the USA and Canada for Which the MIL Has an Image (296) 31 July 2021
    Mammal species native to the USA and Canada for which the MIL has an image (296) 31 July 2021 ARTIODACTYLA (includes CETACEA) (38) ANTILOCAPRIDAE - pronghorns Antilocapra americana - Pronghorn BALAENIDAE - bowheads and right whales 1. Balaena mysticetus – Bowhead Whale BALAENOPTERIDAE -rorqual whales 1. Balaenoptera acutorostrata – Common Minke Whale 2. Balaenoptera borealis - Sei Whale 3. Balaenoptera brydei - Bryde’s Whale 4. Balaenoptera musculus - Blue Whale 5. Balaenoptera physalus - Fin Whale 6. Eschrichtius robustus - Gray Whale 7. Megaptera novaeangliae - Humpback Whale BOVIDAE - cattle, sheep, goats, and antelopes 1. Bos bison - American Bison 2. Oreamnos americanus - Mountain Goat 3. Ovibos moschatus - Muskox 4. Ovis canadensis - Bighorn Sheep 5. Ovis dalli - Thinhorn Sheep CERVIDAE - deer 1. Alces alces - Moose 2. Cervus canadensis - Wapiti (Elk) 3. Odocoileus hemionus - Mule Deer 4. Odocoileus virginianus - White-tailed Deer 5. Rangifer tarandus -Caribou DELPHINIDAE - ocean dolphins 1. Delphinus delphis - Common Dolphin 2. Globicephala macrorhynchus - Short-finned Pilot Whale 3. Grampus griseus - Risso's Dolphin 4. Lagenorhynchus albirostris - White-beaked Dolphin 5. Lissodelphis borealis - Northern Right-whale Dolphin 6. Orcinus orca - Killer Whale 7. Peponocephala electra - Melon-headed Whale 8. Pseudorca crassidens - False Killer Whale 9. Sagmatias obliquidens - Pacific White-sided Dolphin 10. Stenella coeruleoalba - Striped Dolphin 11. Stenella frontalis – Atlantic Spotted Dolphin 12. Steno bredanensis - Rough-toothed Dolphin 13. Tursiops truncatus - Common Bottlenose Dolphin MONODONTIDAE - narwhals, belugas 1. Delphinapterus leucas - Beluga 2. Monodon monoceros - Narwhal PHOCOENIDAE - porpoises 1. Phocoena phocoena - Harbor Porpoise 2. Phocoenoides dalli - Dall’s Porpoise PHYSETERIDAE - sperm whales Physeter macrocephalus – Sperm Whale TAYASSUIDAE - peccaries Dicotyles tajacu - Collared Peccary CARNIVORA (48) CANIDAE - dogs 1. Canis latrans - Coyote 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Mammal Pests
    VERTEBRATE PEST CONT ROL HANDBOOK - MAMMALS Mammal Pests Introduction This section contains methods used to control field rodents and rabbits and is a guide for agricultural commissioner personnel engaged in this work. Most pest mammals are discussed with specific control options. Rodenticides are often recommended. Before rodenticides are used, acceptance tests should be made to indicate the degree of bait acceptance that can be expected. If bait acceptance is good, most of the bait will be quickly consumed by rodents during a 24-hour period. If acceptance is poor, toxic bait should not be used. Too frequent application of acute toxic baits, like zinc phosphide, may cause bait and poison shyness. Unlike insecticides, which are generally applied to the crop itself, rodent baits are commonly placed in rodent burrows or applied to trails or areas where rodents naturally feed. Rodent baits should not be applied in any manner that will contaminate food or feed crops. This would include any application method which would cause the bait to lodge in food plants. Fumigants are applied directly into the rodent burrow and are sealed in by covering the burrow opening with a shovelful of dirt. Identifying Rodents Causing Damage to Crops One of the keys to controlling rodent damage in crops is prompt and accurate determination of which species is causing the damage. To make a positive species identification, survey the area of reported damage and look for signs of rodent activity such as: trails, runs, tracks and tail marks, droppings, burrows, nests and food caches. Also look for cuttings of grass or plant material in trails, runs or near burrow entrances.
    [Show full text]
  • Tamias Ruficaudus Simulans, Red-Tailed Chipmunk
    Conservation Assessment for the Red-Tailed Chipmunk (Tamias ruficaudus simulans) in Washington Jennifer Gervais May 2015 Oregon Wildlife Institute Disclaimer This Conservation Assessment was prepared to compile the published and unpublished information on the red-tailed chipmunk (Tamias ruficaudus simulans). If you have information that will assist in conserving this species or questions concerning this Conservation Assessment, please contact the interagency Conservation Planning Coordinator for Region 6 Forest Service, BLM OR/WA in Portland, Oregon, via the Interagency Special Status and Sensitive Species Program website at http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/sfpnw/issssp/contactus/ U.S.D.A. Forest Service Region 6 and U.S.D.I. Bureau of Land Management Interagency Special Status and Sensitive Species Program Executive Summary Species: Red-tailed chipmunk (Tamias ruficaudus) Taxonomic Group: Mammal Management Status: The red-tailed chipmunk is considered abundant through most of its range in western North America, but it is highly localized in Alberta, British Columbia, and Washington (Jacques 2000, Fig. 1). The species is made up of two fairly distinct subspecies, T. r. simulans in the western half of its range, including Washington, and T. r. ruficaudus in the east (e.g., Good and Sullivan 2001, Hird and Sullivan 2009). In British Columbia, T. r. simulans is listed as Provincial S3 or of conservation concern and is on the provincial Blue List (BC Conservation Data Centre 2014). The Washington Natural Heritage Program lists the red-tailed chipmunk’s global rank as G2, “critically imperiled globally because of extreme rarity or because of some factor(s) making it especially vulnerable to extinction,” and its state status as S2 although the S2 rank is uncertain.
    [Show full text]
  • USGS DDS-43, Status of Terrestrial Vertebrates
    DAVID M. GRABER National Biological Service Sequoia and Kings Canyon Field Station Three Rivers, California 25 Status of Terrestrial Vertebrates ABSTRACT The terrestrial vertebrate wildlife of the Sierra Nevada is represented INTRODUCTION by about 401 regularly occurring species, including three local extir- There are approximately 401 species of terrestrial vertebrates pations in the 20th century. The mountain range includes about two- that use the Sierra Nevada now or in recent times according thirds of the bird and mammal species and about half the reptiles to the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System and amphibians in the State of California. This is principally because (CWHR) (California Department of Fish and Game 1994) (ap- of its great extent, and because its foothill woodlands and chaparral, pendix 25.1). Of these, thirteen are essentially restricted to mid-elevation forests, and alpine vegetation reflect, in structure and the Sierra in California (one of these is an alien; i.e. not native function if not species, habitats found elsewhere in the State. About to the Sierra Nevada); 278 (eight aliens) include the Sierra in 17% of the Sierran vertebrate species are considered at risk by state their principal range; and another 110 (six aliens) use the Si- or federal agencies; this figure is only slightly more than half the spe- erra as a minor portion of their range. Included in the 401 are cies at risk for the state as a whole. This relative security is a function 232 species of birds; 112 species of mammals; thirty-two spe- of the smaller proportion of Sierran habitats that have been exten- cies of reptiles; and twenty-five species of amphibians (ap- sively modified.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 Southern California Trip Report
    Southern California Heteromyid Grandslam Trip Report September 13-22, 2014 Leaders: Fiona Reid and Vladimir Dinets Participants: Paul Carter, Steve Davis, Karen Baker, Phil Telfer, Charles Hood, and Steve Linsley Sea Otter (PT) Prequel. Before the trip, Vladimir and Phil went on a 3-day trip to the Sierra Nevada. We first drove to Lake Tahoe and stopped at Taylor Creek, where we found Long-eared, Yellow-pine and Least Chipmunks, California and Golden-Mantled Ground Squirrels, and Pine (formerly Douglas’) Squirrels. We went a bit up the lakeshore looking for Allen’s Chipmunks, and eventually saw one crossing the road above Emerald Bay. After nightfall we drove up to Sonora Pass looking for carnivores (a small population of Red Fox of the very rare Sierra subsp. has recently been discovered there), but saw only a Coyote and some Deer Mice. We stayed both nights in Bridgeport, where Yuma Myotis can be seen very well as they fly at dusk around Bridgeport Inn. Ten traps set on a rocky slope with piñons and junipers a few miles S of town got 5 Deer Mice and 1 Brush Mouse. Clearly, small mammal populations on the E side of the Sierra were not affected by the drought that decimated those on the W side. We also saw a roadkill Mink in that area. We explored N and S sides of Mono Lake well. The boardwalk at the N side had some Montane Voles near the end (both day and night), as well as Mountain Cottontails. At the southern side, night walks along the boardwalk and drives along a very special side road produced Pygmy Rabbit (we also saw another one on a roadside a few miles N of the lake), Ord’s Kangaroo Rat, Great Basin Pocket Mouse, Black-tailed Jackrabbit, and Desert Cottontail.
    [Show full text]
  • Characterizing the Microhabitats and Ranges of Tamias Alpinus and Tamias Speciosus in Yosemite National Park
    Vickie Wild Ly Microhabitats of T. alpinus and T. speciosus Spring 2012 The Space Between: Characterizing the Microhabitats and Ranges of Tamias alpinus and Tamias speciosus in Yosemite National Park Vickie Ly ABSTRACT Range contraction and expansion are of particular concern for mountaintop species such as Tamias alpinus (Alpine Chipmunk) and Tamias speciosus (Lodgepole Chipmunk). Over the past century, T. alpinus has shown an upward range contraction and is now absent from lower elevation sites. In contrast, the T. speciosus expanded its range at both its upper and lower elevational limits. To understand the mechanisms and processes underlying this shift, this study is the first to quantify and pair microhabitat variables with range maps created from radio- telemetry point data. T. alpinus and T. speciosus habitat use points were significantly different in elevation, height and branching pattern of dominant tree species (ANOVA, p=0.0142, p=0.0003959, p=0.002616). Elevation and slope, height, and canopy cover of dominant tree species explained the most variation between the habitats of T. alpinus and T. speciosus (MFA). The alignment of vegetation and physical characteristics of Tamias microhabitats to telemetry range maps provides fine-scale details to a broader picture of range shifts for focal species and a foundation for future research and conservation efforts for other range-restricted species. KEYWORDS Range shift, niche partitioning, interspecific competition, tree structure, elevation 1 Vickie Wild Ly Microhabitats of T. alpinus and T. speciosus Spring 2012 INTRODUCTION Local and regional climate change has been linked to distributional changes and extinctions across a diverse biota (Parmesan 2006) and is causing severe range contraction for range-restricted species (Rubidge et al.
    [Show full text]
  • List of 28 Orders, 129 Families, 598 Genera and 1121 Species in Mammal Images Library 31 December 2013
    What the American Society of Mammalogists has in the images library LIST OF 28 ORDERS, 129 FAMILIES, 598 GENERA AND 1121 SPECIES IN MAMMAL IMAGES LIBRARY 31 DECEMBER 2013 AFROSORICIDA (5 genera, 5 species) – golden moles and tenrecs CHRYSOCHLORIDAE - golden moles Chrysospalax villosus - Rough-haired Golden Mole TENRECIDAE - tenrecs 1. Echinops telfairi - Lesser Hedgehog Tenrec 2. Hemicentetes semispinosus – Lowland Streaked Tenrec 3. Microgale dobsoni - Dobson’s Shrew Tenrec 4. Tenrec ecaudatus – Tailless Tenrec ARTIODACTYLA (83 genera, 142 species) – paraxonic (mostly even-toed) ungulates ANTILOCAPRIDAE - pronghorns Antilocapra americana - Pronghorn BOVIDAE (46 genera) - cattle, sheep, goats, and antelopes 1. Addax nasomaculatus - Addax 2. Aepyceros melampus - Impala 3. Alcelaphus buselaphus - Hartebeest 4. Alcelaphus caama – Red Hartebeest 5. Ammotragus lervia - Barbary Sheep 6. Antidorcas marsupialis - Springbok 7. Antilope cervicapra – Blackbuck 8. Beatragus hunter – Hunter’s Hartebeest 9. Bison bison - American Bison 10. Bison bonasus - European Bison 11. Bos frontalis - Gaur 12. Bos javanicus - Banteng 13. Bos taurus -Auroch 14. Boselaphus tragocamelus - Nilgai 15. Bubalus bubalis - Water Buffalo 16. Bubalus depressicornis - Anoa 17. Bubalus quarlesi - Mountain Anoa 18. Budorcas taxicolor - Takin 19. Capra caucasica - Tur 20. Capra falconeri - Markhor 21. Capra hircus - Goat 22. Capra nubiana – Nubian Ibex 23. Capra pyrenaica – Spanish Ibex 24. Capricornis crispus – Japanese Serow 25. Cephalophus jentinki - Jentink's Duiker 26. Cephalophus natalensis – Red Duiker 1 What the American Society of Mammalogists has in the images library 27. Cephalophus niger – Black Duiker 28. Cephalophus rufilatus – Red-flanked Duiker 29. Cephalophus silvicultor - Yellow-backed Duiker 30. Cephalophus zebra - Zebra Duiker 31. Connochaetes gnou - Black Wildebeest 32. Connochaetes taurinus - Blue Wildebeest 33. Damaliscus korrigum – Topi 34.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • List of Taxa for Which MIL Has Images
    LIST OF 27 ORDERS, 163 FAMILIES, 887 GENERA, AND 2064 SPECIES IN MAMMAL IMAGES LIBRARY 31 JULY 2021 AFROSORICIDA (9 genera, 12 species) CHRYSOCHLORIDAE - golden moles 1. Amblysomus hottentotus - Hottentot Golden Mole 2. Chrysospalax villosus - Rough-haired Golden Mole 3. Eremitalpa granti - Grant’s Golden Mole TENRECIDAE - tenrecs 1. Echinops telfairi - Lesser Hedgehog Tenrec 2. Hemicentetes semispinosus - Lowland Streaked Tenrec 3. Microgale cf. longicaudata - Lesser Long-tailed Shrew Tenrec 4. Microgale cowani - Cowan’s Shrew Tenrec 5. Microgale mergulus - Web-footed Tenrec 6. Nesogale cf. talazaci - Talazac’s Shrew Tenrec 7. Nesogale dobsoni - Dobson’s Shrew Tenrec 8. Setifer setosus - Greater Hedgehog Tenrec 9. Tenrec ecaudatus - Tailless Tenrec ARTIODACTYLA (127 genera, 308 species) ANTILOCAPRIDAE - pronghorns Antilocapra americana - Pronghorn BALAENIDAE - bowheads and right whales 1. Balaena mysticetus – Bowhead Whale 2. Eubalaena australis - Southern Right Whale 3. Eubalaena glacialis – North Atlantic Right Whale 4. Eubalaena japonica - North Pacific Right Whale BALAENOPTERIDAE -rorqual whales 1. Balaenoptera acutorostrata – Common Minke Whale 2. Balaenoptera borealis - Sei Whale 3. Balaenoptera brydei – Bryde’s Whale 4. Balaenoptera musculus - Blue Whale 5. Balaenoptera physalus - Fin Whale 6. Balaenoptera ricei - Rice’s Whale 7. Eschrichtius robustus - Gray Whale 8. Megaptera novaeangliae - Humpback Whale BOVIDAE (54 genera) - cattle, sheep, goats, and antelopes 1. Addax nasomaculatus - Addax 2. Aepyceros melampus - Common Impala 3. Aepyceros petersi - Black-faced Impala 4. Alcelaphus caama - Red Hartebeest 5. Alcelaphus cokii - Kongoni (Coke’s Hartebeest) 6. Alcelaphus lelwel - Lelwel Hartebeest 7. Alcelaphus swaynei - Swayne’s Hartebeest 8. Ammelaphus australis - Southern Lesser Kudu 9. Ammelaphus imberbis - Northern Lesser Kudu 10. Ammodorcas clarkei - Dibatag 11. Ammotragus lervia - Aoudad (Barbary Sheep) 12.
    [Show full text]
  • FEIS Citation Retrieval System Keywords
    FEIS Citation Retrieval System Keywords 29,958 entries as KEYWORD (PARENT) Descriptive phrase AB (CANADA) Alberta ABEESC (PLANTS) Abelmoschus esculentus, okra ABEGRA (PLANTS) Abelia × grandiflora [chinensis × uniflora], glossy abelia ABERT'S SQUIRREL (MAMMALS) Sciurus alberti ABERT'S TOWHEE (BIRDS) Pipilo aberti ABIABI (BRYOPHYTES) Abietinella abietina, abietinella moss ABIALB (PLANTS) Abies alba, European silver fir ABIAMA (PLANTS) Abies amabilis, Pacific silver fir ABIBAL (PLANTS) Abies balsamea, balsam fir ABIBIF (PLANTS) Abies bifolia, subalpine fir ABIBRA (PLANTS) Abies bracteata, bristlecone fir ABICON (PLANTS) Abies concolor, white fir ABICONC (ABICON) Abies concolor var. concolor, white fir ABICONL (ABICON) Abies concolor var. lowiana, Rocky Mountain white fir ABIDUR (PLANTS) Abies durangensis, Coahuila fir ABIES SPP. (PLANTS) firs ABIETINELLA SPP. (BRYOPHYTES) Abietinella spp., mosses ABIFIR (PLANTS) Abies firma, Japanese fir ABIFRA (PLANTS) Abies fraseri, Fraser fir ABIGRA (PLANTS) Abies grandis, grand fir ABIHOL (PLANTS) Abies holophylla, Manchurian fir ABIHOM (PLANTS) Abies homolepis, Nikko fir ABILAS (PLANTS) Abies lasiocarpa, subalpine fir ABILASA (ABILAS) Abies lasiocarpa var. arizonica, corkbark fir ABILASB (ABILAS) Abies lasiocarpa var. bifolia, subalpine fir ABILASL (ABILAS) Abies lasiocarpa var. lasiocarpa, subalpine fir ABILOW (PLANTS) Abies lowiana, Rocky Mountain white fir ABIMAG (PLANTS) Abies magnifica, California red fir ABIMAGM (ABIMAG) Abies magnifica var. magnifica, California red fir ABIMAGS (ABIMAG) Abies
    [Show full text]
  • Abundances of Small Mammals in Fir Forests in Northeastern California
    ABUNDANCES OF SMALL MAMMALS IN FIR FORESTS IN NORTHEASTERN CALIFORNIA JEFFREY R. WATERS AND CYNTHIA J. ZABEL United States Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, 1700 Bayview Drive, Arcata, CA 95521 We compared abundances of seven species of forest rodents among three types of fir (Abies concolor and A. magnifica) forest: unlogged old-growth, unlogged mature, and shelter- wood-logged old-growth. Small mammals were livetrapped during summers 1991 and 1992 in four grids within each type of forest; grids were located in the Lassen National Forest in northeastern California. Shelterwood-logged forests had been logged 6-7 years previ- ously. Differences in capture rates between unlogged, old-growth and shelterwood-logged, old-growth forests suggest that logging led to significant increases in populations of golden- mantled ground squirrels (Spermophilus lateralis), yellow pine chipmunks (Tamias amoe- nus), and lodgepole chipmunks (Tamias speciosus) but may have led to reduced populations of western red-backed voles (Clethrionomys californicus). Capture rates of Douglas’ squir- rels (Tamiasciurus douglasii), Allen’s chipmunks (Tamias senex), and deer mice (Pero- myscus manicukatus) did not differ significantly between unlogged and shelterwood-logged forests. Capture rate of T. douglasii was significantly greater in mature forests than in old- growth forests in 1992, but we did not detect significant differences between old-growth and mature forests for the other six species. These results illustrate how opening of the canopy and disturbance of the forest floor can lead to significant changes in patterns of abundance of forest rodents. Key words: Clethrionomys californicus, Peromyscus maniculatus, Spermophilus lateralis, Tamias amoenus, Tamias senex, Tamias speciosus, Tamiasciurus douglasii, logging, small mammals Four silvicultural systems traditionally changes in abundances of small mammals have been recognized for harvesting and re- following clearcutting.
    [Show full text]