DOCSLIB.ORG

Mazama Pocket Gopher Recovery Plan and Periodic Status Review

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mazama Pocket Gopher Recovery Plan and Periodic Status Review STATE OF WASHINGTON August 2020 Mazama Pocket Gopher Recovery Plan and Periodic Status Review Derek W. Stinson Washington Department of FISH AND WILDLIFE Wildlife Program In 1990, the Washington Wildlife Commission adopted procedures for listing and de-listing species as endangered, threatened, or sensitive and for writing recovery and management plans for listed species (WAC 220-610-110, Appendix A). The procedures, developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies, require preparation of recovery plans for species listed as threatened or endan- gered. Recovery, as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is the process by which the decline of an endangered or threatened species is arrested or reversed, and threats to its survival are neutralized, so that its long-term survival in nature can be ensured. The Mazama pocket gopher (Thomomys mazama) was listed as threatened by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife in March 2006. The four subspecies found in Thurston and Pierce counties were listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act in 2014. This is the Washington State Recovery Plan and periodic status review for the Mazama Pocket Gopher. This is an update of the 2013 draft re- covery plan that was not finalized while genetic analysis was completed, population modeling was done, and our understanding of recovery needs progressed. It updates information on the current distribution and abundance of the species in Washington and describes factors affecting populations and habitat, and prescribes strategies to recover the species, such as protecting populations and habitat and research and monitoring needed to aid in recovery actions. It also identifies population objectives for populations needed for reclassification of the species. As part of the State’s listing and recovery procedures, the update of the draft recovery plan and status review was available for 90-day public comment period. Responses to public comments on both the 2019 and 2013 drafts are included in Appendix E and F. Comments received were considered in preparation of the final recovery plan. The Department presented a summary of the recovery plan and periodic status review to the Fish and Wildlife Commission at the July 31, 2020 meeting, and the Commission voted to maintain the species status of Threatened on 21 August. For additional information about Mazama Pocket Gophers or other state-listed species, check our web- site, or contact us at [email protected], or by mail to: Wildlife Program, Recovery Section Manager Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife P.O. Box 43141 Olympia, WA 98504-3141 This report should be cited as: Stinson, D. W.. 2020. Mazama Pocket Gopher Recovery Plan and Periodic Status Review. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia.102+vii pp. Cover photos by Rod Gilbert (gopher), D. Stinson (background: camas on JBLM, Range 51). illustration by Darrell Pruett. This work was supported in part by personalized and endangered species license plates Mazama Pocket Gopher Recovery Plan and Periodic Status Review Derek W. Stinson Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Program Natural Resources Building, 1111 Washington Street SE Olympia, Washington August 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................. iii LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ............................................................................................................ iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................................... v INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 1 DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................................. 2 NATURAL HISTORY ................................................................................................................................. 5 Behavior, Burrowing and Burrows ........................................................................................................... 5 Diet and Foraging ...................................................................................................................................... 8 Home Range, Movements, and Dispersal ............................................................................................... 10 Reproduction ........................................................................................................................................... 12 Pocket Gopher Demography and Population Dynamics ......................................................................... 13 Predation .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Ecological Relationships and Functions .................................................................................................. 15 HABITAT REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................................... 17 Mazama Pocket Gopher Association with Prairies and Grassland Vegetation ....................................... 17 POPULATION AND HABITAT STATUS ............................................................................................... 22 Past Status of Habitat and Populations .................................................................................................... 22 Present Status of Populations and Habitats ............................................................................................. 28 MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................................. 37 Habitat Protection and Conservation Planning ....................................................................................... 37 Habitat Management and Restoration ..................................................................................................... 40 Research .................................................................................................................................................. 41 Information and Education ...................................................................................................................... 43 FACTORS AFFECTING Mazama Pocket Gophers ................................................................................... 43 Adequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms ...................................................................................... 43 Impacts of Habitat Loss, Fragmentation, Degradation, and Succession ................................................. 45 Airport Management and Development .................................................................................................. 49 Military training and land management on Joint Base Lewis-McChord ................................................. 49 Climate Change ....................................................................................................................................... 50 Altered Ecological Communities ............................................................................................................ 51 RECOVERY .............................................................................................................................................. 52 RECOVERY GOAL ................................................................................................................................... 52 RECOVERY STRATEGIES AND TASKS ............................................................................................... 57 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE ........................................................................................................... 67 PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS .......................................................................................................... 80 Appendix A. Washington Administrative Code. ........................................................................................ 81 Appendix B. Measurements and dorsal fur colora of eight described subspecies of Mazama Pocket Gophers from Washington. ............................................................................................................ 84 Appendix C. Hypothesized suitabilityab of certain soils of Mason County for Mazama Pocket Gophers based on gopher presence and abundance...................................................................................... 85 Appendix D. Washington localities, year, and collector of Mazama Pocket Gopher specimens collected from 1825–2006, in major research collections. ............................................................................ 86 Appendix E. Responses to written public comments received on the 2013 Draft Recovery Plan. ............. 90 Appendix F. Responses to written public comments received on the Draft Recovery Plan. ...................... 98 Washington State, Periodic Status Reviews, Status Reports, Recovery Plans, and Conservation Plans .. 102 August 2020 iii Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table 1. Federal and state legal status and locations of eight subspecies of Mazama Pocket Gopher, and the Brush Prairie Pocket Gopher (T. talpoides douglasii)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Wild Hyacinth (Camassia Scilloides) in Canada
    PROPOSED Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series Adopted under Section 44 of SARA Recovery Strategy for the Wild Hyacinth (Camassia scilloides) in Canada Wild Hyacinth 2015 Recommended citation: Environment Canada. 2015. Recovery Strategy for the Wild Hyacinth (Camassia scilloides) in Canada [Proposed]. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Environment Canada, Ottawa. 21 pp. + Annexes. For copies of the recovery strategy, or for additional information on species at risk, including the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) Status Reports, residence descriptions, action plans, and other related recovery documents, please visit the Species at Risk (SAR) Public Registry1. Cover illustration: © Gary Allen Également disponible en français sous le titre « Programme de rétablissement de la camassie faux-scille (Camassia scilloides) au Canada [Proposition] » © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Minister of the Environment, 2015. All rights reserved. ISBN Catalogue no. Content (excluding the illustrations) may be used without permission, with appropriate credit to the source. 1 http://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca RECOVERY STRATEGY FOR THE WILD HYACINTH (CAMMASSIA SCILLOIDES) IN CANADA 2015 Under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk (1996), the federal, provincial, and territorial governments agreed to work together on legislation, programs, and policies to protect wildlife species at risk throughout Canada. In the spirit of cooperation of the Accord, the Government of Ontario has given permission to the Government of Canada to adopt the Recovery Strategy for the Wild Hyacinth (Camassia scilloides) in Ontario (Part 2) under Section 44 of the Species at Risk Act (SARA).
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Variation Within a Broadly Distributed Chewing Louse Genus (Thomomydoecus)
    University of Northern Iowa UNI ScholarWorks Honors Program Theses Honors Program 2020 Genetic variation within a broadly distributed chewing louse genus (Thomomydoecus) Clarissa Elizabeth Bruns University of Northern Iowa Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy Copyright ©2020 Clarissa Elizabeth Bruns Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uni.edu/hpt Part of the Entomology Commons, and the Genetics Commons Recommended Citation Bruns, Clarissa Elizabeth, "Genetic variation within a broadly distributed chewing louse genus (Thomomydoecus)" (2020). Honors Program Theses. 433. https://scholarworks.uni.edu/hpt/433 This Open Access Honors Program Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors Program at UNI ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Program Theses by an authorized administrator of UNI ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. GENETIC VARIATION WITHIN A BROADLY DISTRIBUTED CHEWING LOUSE GENUS (THOMOMYDOECUS) A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Designation University Honors with Distinction Clarissa Elizabeth Bruns University of Northern Iowa May 2020 This Study by: Clarissa Elizabeth Bruns Entitled: Genetic distribution within a broadly distributed chewing louse genus (Thomomydoecus) has been approved as meeting the thesis or project requirement for the Designation University Honors with Distinction ________ ______________________________________________________ Date James Demastes, Honors Thesis Advisor, Biology ________ ______________________________________________________ Date Dr. Jessica Moon, Director, University Honors Program Abstract No broad study has been conducted to examine the genetics of Thomomydoecus species and their patterns of geographic variation. Chewing lice and their parasite-host relationships with pocket gophers have been studied as a key example of cophylogeny (Demastes et al., 2012).
    [Show full text]
  • S Q U a L L I a B S C H Reservation Nisqually Market to Expand
    S q u a l l i A b s c h NewsNisqually Tribal News 4820 She-Nah-Num Dr. SE Olympia, WA 98513 Phone Number (360)456-5221 Volume 8, Issue 1 www.nisqually-nsn.gov January 2018 Reservation Nisqually Market to Expand By Debbie Preston The Nisqually Tribe’s reservation Nisqually Market will expand with a $3.5 million, 10,000-square-foot building in the new year, according to Bob Iyall, Medicine Creek Enterprise Corporation Chief Executive Officer. “The phase two was always in the original plans for the market,” Iyall said. The new addition will not affect the operations of the current store except for a minor change in the entrance to the drive-in during construction. The expansion will include offices for the Nisqually Construction Company on the second floor and a mixture of retail on the ground floor. “We are going to have a mail shop, kind of like a UPS store, but we’re going to run it,” Iyall said. Other tenants are still being decided, but will probably include some sort of fast food business. The Nisqually Construction Company will build the project and that will include four to five tribal member jobs through TERO. Meanwhile, the Frederickson store that opened in the fall of 2017 is doing quite well. “In that location, we are serving a number of companies that have 24-hour operations such as Boeing and JBLM. We’re already selling twice as much gas there as we do at our reservation store.” Additionally, the deli is in high demand due to the shift workers.
    [Show full text]
  • 2013 Draft Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan
    DRAFT Mazama Pocket Gopher Status Update and Recovery Plan Derek W. Stinson Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Program 600 Capitol Way N Olympia, Washington January 2013 In 1990, the Washington Wildlife Commission adopted procedures for listing and de-listing species as endangered, threatened, or sensitive and for writing recovery and management plans for listed species (WAC 232-12-297, Appendix A). The procedures, developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies, require preparation of recovery plans for species listed as threatened or endangered. Recovery, as defined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is the process by which the decline of an endangered or threatened species is arrested or reversed, and threats to its survival are neutralized, so that its long-term survival in nature can be ensured. This is the Draft Washington State Status Update and Recovery Plan for the Mazama Pocket Gopher. It summarizes what is known of the historical and current distribution and abundance of the Mazama pocket gopher in Washington and describes factors affecting known populations and its habitat. It prescribes strategies to recover the species, such as protecting populations and existing habitat, evaluating and restoring habitat, and initiating research and cooperative programs. Target population objectives and other criteria for down-listing to state Sensitive are identified. As part of the State’s listing and recovery procedures, the draft recovery plan is available for a 90-day public comment period. Please submit written comments on this report by 19 April 2013 via e-mail to: [email protected], or by mail to: Endangered Species Section Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98501-1091 This report should be cited as: Stinson, D.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Publications Museum of Texas Tech University Number 63 18 September 2014
    Special Publications Museum of Texas Tech University Number 63 18 September 2014 List of Recent Land Mammals of Mexico, 2014 José Ramírez-Pulido, Noé González-Ruiz, Alfred L. Gardner, and Joaquín Arroyo-Cabrales.0 Front cover: Image of the cover of Nova Plantarvm, Animalivm et Mineralivm Mexicanorvm Historia, by Francisci Hernández et al. (1651), which included the first list of the mammals found in Mexico. Cover image courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library at Brown University. SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS Museum of Texas Tech University Number 63 List of Recent Land Mammals of Mexico, 2014 JOSÉ RAMÍREZ-PULIDO, NOÉ GONZÁLEZ-RUIZ, ALFRED L. GARDNER, AND JOAQUÍN ARROYO-CABRALES Layout and Design: Lisa Bradley Cover Design: Image courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library at Brown University Production Editor: Lisa Bradley Copyright 2014, Museum of Texas Tech University This publication is available free of charge in PDF format from the website of the Natural Sciences Research Laboratory, Museum of Texas Tech University (nsrl.ttu.edu). The authors and the Museum of Texas Tech University hereby grant permission to interested parties to download or print this publication for personal or educational (not for profit) use. Re-publication of any part of this paper in other works is not permitted without prior written permission of the Museum of Texas Tech University. This book was set in Times New Roman and printed on acid-free paper that meets the guidelines for per- manence and durability of the Committee on Production Guidelines for Book Longevity of the Council on Library Resources. Printed: 18 September 2014 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Special Publications of the Museum of Texas Tech University, Number 63 Series Editor: Robert J.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. EPA, Pesticide Product Label, 0.5% STRYCHNINE MILO for HAND
    Jl.l!l€' 23, 1997 Dr. Alan V. Tasker Acting Leader, rata Support Teaill Tec.'mical and Sciemtific Services USDA/AHflS/BBEP Unit ISO ) 4700 River Foad Rivcreale, ND 20737 Dear Dr. Tasker, Subject: 0.5% Str.fclmine Mlo rex Ha.'ld Baiting fucket C,ophers EPA Registratirn No. 56228-19 Your Slil;;nissions of Septemb€r 23, 19%, and June 2, 1997 ~Je nave reviewed ,YOUr sl.ibmi~sicn of Sept€T."'~r 19, 1996:. ThE' cnongp--s in tl"le inert ingredients a'ld t..'1e revised basic and alte..."7late Confidential StatC1"~nts of Forl'1Ula (CSFs) ;;.r8 acceptable. He 1=1<: fort-l;;.rd to receiving the product chemistry data on the nc-w formulation. Your letter of SepteJl'J::>er 23, 19%, imicates thClt some of these studies ~Jere underway at that tire. The proposed revis20 label stibIcJ tted 00 June 2, 1997, is J:-.asically ) acceptC!ble, but the change identified l.-elow must be made. 1. In the "NOI'E TO PHYSICIAN", change "CI\UrION," to "NOrrcp.:" so as not to conflict with the label's required signal Nord "I'i"lNGFR". 8u.1:'mit one r:::q:y of the fin.-J.l printed label before releasing this prcrluct for shipment. :;;~x¥~~ COP~ E William H. JacObs BEST AVA'LAB\.. i\cting Product 1<1a.'l8.ger 14 Insecticide-Rodenticide Branch Reo.istration Division (7505C) :::::, ~.. ..w·-1······ _.. ._-j.. ......w. ··1· "~'~"·Tm--I··· ·1· ............ ·····1· _............. DATE ~ •......••.•....... .........•..••.• ....... ~ ..•....... ..........................................................................................- ....... EPA Form 1320-102-70) OFFICIAL FILE COpy r.. PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTS 0.5% STRYCHNINE r~1.0 HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND FOR HAND BAITING STORAGE AND DISPOSAL I -, DOMESTIC ANIMALS Do not contaminate water, food, or POCKET GOPHERS feed by storage or disposal.
    [Show full text]
  • Malde, 1964). in the Present Status of North Texas 10,000 Years Ago (Kupsch, 1960)
    Ritchie, 1953; Malde, 1964). In the Present Status of North Texas 10,000 years ago (Kupsch, 1960). The Central Valley of California, along the Origin Theories retreat was followed by a warming base of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, trend which lasted from about 8,000 Although a myriad of hypotheses the Hydrostatic Pressure Theory is B.C.to the beginning of the Christian have been projected concerning mima popular (Nikiforoff, 1941; Retzer, era (Dix, 1964) and is recognized as mounds in north Texas, no specific 1945). A recent study of landscape the Hypsithermal period (Deevy and theory of mima mound formation is features of the Texas Gulf Coast by Flint, 1957). During the Hypsithermal commonly accepted.’ Theories of Aronow (1968) resulted in a theory of period, the deciduous forest retreated erosion and accumulation are “Landscape Deterioration.” eastward and grasslands occupied the currently the most widely accepted. The Patterned Ground Theory is vacated area. Some members of the The erosional theory suggests that the based on the concept that a network forest flora, especially grasses, removal of the intermound area by of polygonal-fissured ice could have withstood the climatic change. These running water and wind has left the developed on the landscape early in species survived, reproduced, and mounds as essentially residual forms the last ice recession. As the landscape integrated with the grassland flora (Featherman, 1872; Holland et al., began to thaw, the meltwater removed (Dix, 1964). Gleason (1923) noted 1952; Goebel, 1971). Goebel (1971) the glacial till from around the still that the three most important grass postulated that mima mounds in north frozen hemispheroidal cores of each genera Texas primarily result from a low (Andropogon, Sorghas trum, polygon.
    [Show full text]
  • Nisqually Transmission Line Relocation Project
    Nisqually Transmission Line Relocation Project Preliminary Environmental Assessment Bonneville Power Administration Fort Lewis Military Reservation Nisqually Indian Tribe Bureau of Indian Affairs October 2004 Nisqually Transmission Line Relocation Project Responsible Agencies and Tribe: U.S. Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville); U.S. Department of Defense, Fort Lewis Military Reservation (Fort Lewis); the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA); and the Nisqually Indian Tribe (Tribe). Name of Proposed Project: Nisqually Transmission Line Relocation Project Abstract: Bonneville proposes to remove and reroute two parallel transmission lines that cross the Nisqually Indian Reservation in Thurston County, Washington. Bonneville’s easement across the Reservation for a portion of the Olympia-Grand Coulee line has expired. Though Bonneville has a perpetual easement for the Olympia-South Tacoma line across the Reservation, the Tribe has asked Bonneville to remove both lines so the Tribe can eventually develop the land for its community. The land fronts State Route 510 and is across the highway from the Tribe’s Red Wind Casino. In addition, the Tribe would like Bonneville to remove the two lines from a parcel next to the Reservation that Fort Lewis owns. The Tribe is working with Fort Lewis to obtain this parcel, which also has frontage on SR 510. Bonneville is proposing to remove the portions of these lines on the Reservation and on the Fort-owned parcel and rebuild them south of SR 510 on Fort Lewis property. Fort Lewis is willing to have these lines on their federal property, in exchange for other in-holdings currently owned by Thurston County that the Tribe would purchase and turn over to Fort Lewis.
    [Show full text]
  • Controlling Pocket Gopher Damage to Conifer Seedlings D.S
    FOREST PROTECTION EC 1255 • Revised May 2003 $2.50 Controlling Pocket Gopher Damage to Conifer Seedlings D.S. deCalesta, K. Asman, and N. Allen Contents ocket gophers (or just plain Gopher habits and habitat.............. 1 P “gophers”) damage conifer seed- Control program ........................... 2 lings on thousands of Identifying the pest ......................2 acres in Washington, Assessing the need for treatment ...3 Idaho, and Oregon Damage control techniques ...........3 annually. They invade clearcuts and Applying controls .......................... 7 clip (cut off) roots or Figure 1.—Typical Oregon pocket gopher. Christmas tree plantations .............7 girdle (remove bark from) the bases of conifer seedlings and saplings, causing significant economic losses. Forest plantations ........................ 7 This publication will help you design a program to reduce or eliminate Summary .................................... 8 gopher damage to seedlings and saplings in your forest plantation or Christmas tree farm. Sources of supply ......................... 8 First, we describe pocket gophers, their habits, and habitats. Then we For further information .................. 8 discuss procedures for controlling pocket gopher damages—control techniques, their effectiveness and hazard(s) to the environment, and their use under a variety of tree-growing situations. Gopher habits and habitat Three species of pocket gopher can damage conifer seedlings. The two smaller ones, the northern pocket gopher and the Mazama pocket gopher, are 5 to 9 inches long and brown with some white beneath the chin and belly. The northern gopher is found east of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon and Washington and in Idaho; the Mazama lives in Oregon and Washington west of the Cascades. David S. deCalesta, former Exten- The Camas pocket gopher is similar looking, but larger (10 to 12 inches) sion wildlife specialist, and Kim than the two others.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Risk Assessments for Methods Used in Wildlife Damage Management
    Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment for the Use of Wildlife Damage Management Methods by USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services Chapter I Introduction to Risk Assessments for Methods Used in Wildlife Damage Management MAY 2017 Introduction to Risk Assessments for Methods Used in Wildlife Damage Management EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The USDA-APHIS-Wildlife Services (WS) Program completed Risk Assessments for methods used in wildlife damage management in 1992 (USDA 1997). While those Risk Assessments are still valid, for the most part, the WS Program has expanded programs into different areas of wildlife management and wildlife damage management (WDM) such as work on airports, with feral swine and management of other invasive species, disease surveillance and control. Inherently, these programs have expanded the methods being used. Additionally, research has improved the effectiveness and selectiveness of methods being used and made new tools available. Thus, new methods and strategies will be analyzed in these risk assessments to cover the latest methods being used. The risk assements are being completed in Chapters and will be made available on a website, which can be regularly updated. Similar methods are combined into single risk assessments for efficiency; for example Chapter IV contains all foothold traps being used including standard foothold traps, pole traps, and foot cuffs. The Introduction to Risk Assessments is Chapter I and was completed to give an overall summary of the national WS Program. The methods being used and risks to target and nontarget species, people, pets, and the environment, and the issue of humanenss are discussed in this Chapter. From FY11 to FY15, WS had work tasks associated with 53 different methods being used.
    [Show full text]
  • Soil Morphological Characteristics of Prairie Mounds in the Forested Region of South-Central United States
    Soil morphological characteristics of prairie mounds in the forested region of south-central United States Brad Lee A and Brian Carter B APlant and Soil Sciences Department, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40546, Email [email protected] BPlant and Soil Sciences Department, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078, Email [email protected] Abstract Prairie mounds are common in the prairie islands of the forested regions of the south-central United States, however their origin is not well understood. A topographic survey and pedon investigation of a mound and intermound area was conducted in a grassed field of prairie mounds 15 – 25 m in diameter and ~ 1 m. Both soils contain three parent materials: loess over an alluvial silty clay paleosol underlain by weathered shale. The mounded soil loess thickness is ~1.5 m while the loess in the intermound area is ~0.5 m thick. Fragic soil properties (dense, brittle, silt coats above dense horizon) are present in the loess immediately above the paleosol contact. Crayfish ( Cambarus spp .) chimneys in the intermound and abundant gopher burrows (Geomys spp .) above the fragic horizon in the mound mound and loess of the intermound soil indicate the soils across the field are actively bioturbated. Depletions near the surface of the intermound soil indicate a seasonally high water table. Relict crayfish krotavinas in the paleosol under the mound and active crayfish burrows in intermound areas suggest the entire plain was previously bioturbated by crayfish. Bioturbation by gophers appears to be more recent and associated with the loess deposit. Key Words Prairie pimples, pimpled plains, mima mounds, Arkansas River valley.
    [Show full text]
  • Louisiana's Animal Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN)
    Louisiana's Animal Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) ‐ Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals ‐ 2020 MOLLUSKS Common Name Scientific Name G‐Rank S‐Rank Federal Status State Status Mucket Actinonaias ligamentina G5 S1 Rayed Creekshell Anodontoides radiatus G3 S2 Western Fanshell Cyprogenia aberti G2G3Q SH Butterfly Ellipsaria lineolata G4G5 S1 Elephant‐ear Elliptio crassidens G5 S3 Spike Elliptio dilatata G5 S2S3 Texas Pigtoe Fusconaia askewi G2G3 S3 Ebonyshell Fusconaia ebena G4G5 S3 Round Pearlshell Glebula rotundata G4G5 S4 Pink Mucket Lampsilis abrupta G2 S1 Endangered Endangered Plain Pocketbook Lampsilis cardium G5 S1 Southern Pocketbook Lampsilis ornata G5 S3 Sandbank Pocketbook Lampsilis satura G2 S2 Fatmucket Lampsilis siliquoidea G5 S2 White Heelsplitter Lasmigona complanata G5 S1 Black Sandshell Ligumia recta G4G5 S1 Louisiana Pearlshell Margaritifera hembeli G1 S1 Threatened Threatened Southern Hickorynut Obovaria jacksoniana G2 S1S2 Hickorynut Obovaria olivaria G4 S1 Alabama Hickorynut Obovaria unicolor G3 S1 Mississippi Pigtoe Pleurobema beadleianum G3 S2 Louisiana Pigtoe Pleurobema riddellii G1G2 S1S2 Pyramid Pigtoe Pleurobema rubrum G2G3 S2 Texas Heelsplitter Potamilus amphichaenus G1G2 SH Fat Pocketbook Potamilus capax G2 S1 Endangered Endangered Inflated Heelsplitter Potamilus inflatus G1G2Q S1 Threatened Threatened Ouachita Kidneyshell Ptychobranchus occidentalis G3G4 S1 Rabbitsfoot Quadrula cylindrica G3G4 S1 Threatened Threatened Monkeyface Quadrula metanevra G4 S1 Southern Creekmussel Strophitus subvexus
    [Show full text]