State Conservation Links and Information

  AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID,  IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NB, NC, ND, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI, WV, WY

State Environmental Resource Center
Updated 10 March 2004

ALABAMA

Links: Auburn University Herpetological Collection 

Non-listed species of conservation concern: S1 = critically imperiled in state (5 or fewer occurrences), S2 = imperiled in state (6 to 20 occurrences), S3 = rare or uncommon in state (21 to 100 occurrences), SH = of historical occurrence, not verified in past 20 years, SU = status uncertain. Hyla andersonii S2, Pseudacris ocularis S1, Rana capito sevosa S2, Rana heckscheri S1, Rana sylvatica S2, Ambystoma texanum S3, Ambystoma tigrinum S3, Amphiuma means S3, Amphiuma pholeter S1, Cryptobranchus alleganiensis S3, Aneides aeneus S3, Desmognathus aeneus S2, Desmognathus apalachicolae S3, Desmognathus ocoee S2, Gyrinophilus palleucus S2, Hemidactylium scutatum S3, Necturus alabamensis S2, Plethodon serratus S3, Siren lacertina S3, Eumeces anthracinus S3, Ophisaurus mimicus S2, Farancia erytrogramma S3, Heterodon simus SH, Lampropeltis calligaster S3, Lampropeltis triangulum syspila S2, Lampropeltis triangulum triangulum S2, Masticophis fiagellum S3, Nerodia clarkii S1, S2, Nerodia cyclopion S2, Nerodia floridana SU, Pituophis melanoleucus lodingi S2, Pituophis melonleucus melanoleucus S3, Pituophis melanoleucus mugitus S2, Micrurus fulvius S3, Crotalus adamanteus S3, Macroclemys temminckii S3, Graptemys barbouri S2, Graptemys ernsti S2, Graptemys nigrinoda delticola S2, Graptemys nigrinoda nigrinoda S3, Malaclemys terrapin pileata S1 S2, Sternotherus carinatus S1, Gopherus polyphemus S2 (non-listed east of Mobile Bay), Apalone ferox S2

Species with legal conservation status: Ambystoma cingulatum (federally threatened), Phaeognathus hubrichti (federally threatened), Caretta caretta (federally threatened), Chelonia mydas (federally endangered-federally threatened), Dermochelys coriacea (federally endangered), Drymarchon corais couperi (federally threatened), Eretmochelys imbricata (federally endangered) Gopherus polyphemus (federally threatened west of Mobile River), Lepidochelys kempii (federally endangered), Pseudemys alabamensis (federally endangered), Sternotherus depressus (federally threatened)

Herpetological conservation issues: 

Contributors: Jim Godwin, Craig Guyer (December 2000)

Return to top

Links:

Non-listed species of conservation concern:

Species with legal conservation status:

Herpetological conservation issues:

Contributors:

Return to top

Non-listed species of conservation concern: (EX: Extinct species are those species or subspecies that are no longer extant in the wild or in captivity, anywhere. EN: Endangered species are those species or subspecies (a) extirpated from Arizona since the mid-1800s and/or (b) for which extinction or extirpation is highly probable unless conservation efforts are undertaken soon. T: Threatened species are those species or subspecies whose continued presence in Arizona could be in jeopardy in the near future. Serious threats have been identified and populations are (a) lower than they were historically or (b) extremely local and small. C: Candidate species are those species or subspecies for which threats are known or suspected but for which substantial population declines from historical levels have not been documented [though they appear likely to have occurred]) Amphibians: Ambystoma tigrinum stebbinsi (EN), Hylactophryne augusti (EN), Pternohyla fodiens (C), Rana blairi (EN), Rana chiricahuensis (T), Rana onca [includes Rana fisheri] (EX), Rana pipiens (C), Rana tarahumarae (EN), Rana yavapaiensis (C), Gastrophryne olivacea (C). Reptiles: Gopherus agassizi (C), Uma notata (C), Uma scoparia (C), Phrynosoma mcallii (T), Eumeces gilberti arizonensis (EN), Thamnophis eques (C), Thamnophis rufipunctatus (C), Oxybelis aeneus (C), Sistrurus catenatus (EN), Crotalus willardi willardi (C).

Species with legal conservation status: Ambystoma tigrinum stebbinsi (federally endangered), Rana chiricahuensis (proposed federally threatened), Gopherus agassizi (populations north and west of the Colorado River only: federally threatened).

Herpetological conservation issues: In Arizona, the greatest threat to amphibian and reptile populations is habitat destruction, alteration, and fragmentation. Among habitats most affected by these factors are riparian areas and other aquatic systems. Specific impacts in these systems include damming and diverting of rivers and streams and draining of wetlands. Ground water pumping has led to water table draw-down and drying of spring fed systems.
    The effects of urbanization, agricultural land conversion, and highway and road building can have obvious localized impacts on Arizona herpetofauna populations, but the effects of habitat fragmentation that often accompanies these forms of development are little known.
    Other common land use practices in Arizona likely affect herpetofauna populations. In some cases, impacts of a particular practice are apparent and obvious, but for the majority of land uses the mechanism by which they affect herpetofauna remain unstudied. Also largely unstudied are the effects of alternative land use practices on herpetofauna populations.
    Heavy metals and agricultural pesticides are thought to have affected some Arizona herpetofauna populations. With the exception of a few species, the effects of livestock grazing on herpetofauna populations are little known, but are thought to have both positive and negative effects. Forest management practices likely impact herpetofauna populations, but their affects on those populations are also little studied.
    Non-natives species are another major threat to Arizona herpetofauna populations, particularly aquatic herpetofauna. Species that cause the greatest concern are the American bullfrog, crayfish, and various species of non-native, predatory fishes. In upland habitats, introductions of non-native plants, primarily grasses, have affected the frequency and intensity of fires, potentially impacting these systems, some of which are not fire adapted. Research and development of mechanism to effectively control of these non-native organisms are sorely needed.
    Other factors have potential impact on Arizona herpetofauna populations. In 1998, chytrid fungus was first identified in Arizona. Presently, this fungus has affected nine species of amphibians in Arizona, but its origin and role in amphibian population declines is still emerging. Although bag and possession limits for most herpetofauna are reasonable, potential for illegal collecting for certain desirable species is high.

Contributor: Michael J. Sredl (November 2000)

Return to top

Species with legal conservation status: Alligator mississippiensis  (federally threatened)

Herpetological conservation issues: The North American Amphibian Monitoring Program (NAAMP) has no frog calling information from Arkansas, nor does the North American Center for Amphibian Malformities (NARCAM). The Arkansas Amphibian Monitoring Program was established in 1999 to begin work on NAAMP surveys and desperately needs volunteers for the 2001 season, while NARCAM is not currently active in the state.  The ranges and status of many subspecies are either uncertain or unknown. For example: the intergradation zones of Acris crepitans crepitans and Acris crepitans blanchardi as well as of Rana clamitans clamitans and Rana clamitans melanota appear to be arbitrary.  Deforestation is a problem in some parts of the state.  Human alteration of cedar glade habitats is widespread.  Little if any information is available on agronomic impacts on species in the Mississippi Embayment.   Populations of hellbenders in the spring river are severely imperiled, restoration and reintroduction practices are severely needed to save the population.  Stocking of alligator snapping turtles in some habitats may be warranted to improve degraded populations and the aquacultural fishery of this species in the state needs development to reduce pressure on naturally occurring populations.  Preliminary information suggest that fire ants may be excluding and exterminating several sympatric species of amphibians and reptiles.  As fire ants move northward this becomes a serious concern for some of the more rare species such as Pseudacris streckeri and Terrapene ornata as well as common species such as Cnemidophorus sexlineatus.  Poultry farming impacts surrounding habitats, hormones contained in feces, along with the eutrophication impacts of the manure are a serious threat when allowed to enter amphibian breeding areas.  Both Micrurus fulvius and Crotalus atrox are virtually unstudied in the state, virtually nothing is known about their population sizes, denning sites, habitats use, or other aspects of their natural history and conservation needs.  Desmognathus fuscus conanti is believed to be extirpated from its former range on Crowley’s Ridge and is in need of inventory and monitoring as well as restoration activities.  The role of National Parks and Wildlife Areas in the state as reproductive sources is unstudied, as is potential roles of rice fields and agronomic ditches as source/sinks for many species.  No long-term resource and ecological monitoring sites (LTREM) are present in the state, several large national parks and wildlife management areas are in need of inventory and monitoring activities.  The impact of paper mill effluent and atmospheric releases on herpetofaunae need to be investigated.  Potential impact of introduced nutria on turtle basking sites via gnawing and defecation needs investigation as well as their competition with turtles in particular.  Several species are in dire need of preserve establishment.  Disjunct ranges of Hyla avivoca in the state must be explained as their absence from expansive regions of the Delta is prime cause for concern.  Differences in Acris crepitans population parameters and breeding biology between the northern Delta and Ozarks must be addressed as well.  The role of immunosuppressant and reproductively toxic herbicides and pesticides in amphibian and reptile biology is of concern as well.  Endemic urodeles within the Ouachita National Forest have restricted ranges as do many other of the states herps.  Damming of some rivers in the state may further restrict ranges of some species.  Recreational use of some rivers is a problem.  Educational programs are badly needed to inform Arkansas citizens about the value of all herpetofaunae in the state, as well as to reduce recreational impact.  Poaching of alligator snapping turtles may be a problem, as is killing of many poisonous snakes which is sporadically featured in the local papers.  Many conservation issues with Arkansas herps are simply unknown because of the extreme lack of baseline data,  basic biology and range information, and relatively small number of herpetologists working in the state.

Contributors: Malcolm McCallum
Stan Trauth (June 2000)

Return to top

Links: California Natural Diversity Database
California Academy of Sciences
Museum of Vertebrate Zoology
Redwood Sciences Laboratory – Herpetological Research Group
Westward Frog
Humboldt State Herpetology Group

Non-listed species of conservation concern:  The following species have no legal conservation status but are considered sensitive species in the state of California by various state and federal agencies (FPE = Federally Proposed Endangered, FSC = Federal Special Concern Species, ST = State Threatened, BLM = Bureau of Land Management Sensitive Species, CSC = California Department of Fish and Game Species of Special Concern, P = California Department of Fish and Game Protected Species, FP = California Department of Fish and Game Fully Protected Species, FS = Forest Service Sensitive).  Species listed as federally threatened or endangered are not included in this list.  Rhyacotriton variegatus (FSC, CSC, P, FS), Taricha torosa torosa (CSC), Batrachoseps campi (FSC, CSC, P, FS, BLM), Batrachoseps gabrieli (FS), Batrachoseps pacificus pacificus (FSC), Batrachoseps relictus (FSC, CSC), Batrachoseps  sp. 1 – Breckenridge Mountain slender salamander (FSC, CSC, FS), Batrachoseps sp. 4 – Kern Plateau slender salamander (FS), Ensatina eschscholtzii croceator (FSC, CSC, FS, BLM), Ensatina eschscholtzii klauberi (FSC, CSC, FS), Hydromantes platycephalus (FSC, CSC, P), Hydromantes sp. 2 – Owens Valley web-toed salamander (FSC, CSC), Plethodon elongatus (FSC, CSC, P), Ascaphus truei (FSC, CSC, P), Scaphiopus couchii (CSC, BLM), Scaphiopus hammondii (FSC, CSC, P, BLM), Bufo alvarius (CSC, P), Bufo canorus (FPE, FSC, CSC, P, FS), Bufo microscaphus microscaphus (FSC, P), Rana aurora aurora (FSC, CSC, P, FS), Rana aurora draytonii (FSC, CSC, P, FS), Rana boylii (FSC, CSC, P, FS, BLM), Rana cascadae (FSC, CSC, P, FS), Rana muscosa  (FPE, CSC, P, FS), Rana pipiens (CSC, FS), Rana pretiosa (FSC, CSC, P, BLM), Rana yavapaiensis (FSC, CSC, P, BLM), Kinosternon sonoriense (CSC, P), Clemmys marmorata (FSC, CSC, P), Clemmys marmorata marmorata (FSC, CSC, P, FS, BLM), Clemmys marmorata pallida (FSC, CSC, P, FS, BLM), Coleonyx variegatus abbotti (FSC), Sauromalus obesus (FSC, BLM), Phryonosoma coronatum blainvillei (FSC, CSC, P, FS), Phryonosoma coronatum frontale (FSC, CSC, P, BLM), Phrynosoma mcallii (CSC, P, BLM), Sceloporus graciosus graciosus (FSC, BLM), Uma notata notata (FSC, CSC, BLM), Uma scoparia (CSC, BLM), Xantusia henshawi gracilis (FSC, CSC, BLM), Xantusia vigilis sierrae (FSC, CSC, FS), Eumeces skiltonianus interparietalis (FSC, CSC, FS), Cnemidophorus hyperythrus beldingi (FSC, CSC, P), Cnemidophorus tigris multiscutatus (FSC), Elgaria panamintina (FSC, CSC, P, FS, BLM), Anniella pulchra pulchra (FSC, CSC, FS), Anniella pulchra nigra (CSC, P, FS), Heloderma suspectum cinctum (FSC, CSC, P, BLM), Charina trivirgata (FSC, BLM), Bogertiphis rosaliae (CSC), Diadophis punctatus modestus (FSC, FS), Diadophis punctatus similes (FS), Lampropeltis zonata parvirubra (FSC, CSC, FS), Lampropeltis zonata pulchra (FSC, CSC, P, FS), Masticophis flagellum ruddocki (FSC, CSC, P), Pituophis melanoleucus pumilus (FSC, CSC), Salvadora hexalepis virgultea (FSC, CSC), Thamnophis hammondii (CSC, P, FS, BLM), Thamnophis sirtalis sp. – South Coast garter snake (FSC, CSC), Crotalis ruber ruber (FSC, CSC).

Species with legal conservation status:  Species included in this list may have additional conservation concern with various agencies.  (FE = federally endangered, FT = federally threatened, SE = state endangered, ST = state threatened)  Ambystoma californiense (FE¹), Ambystoma macrodactylum croceum (FE, SE), Plethodon stormi (ST), Batrachoseps stebbinsi (ST), Batrachoseps simatus (ST), Batrachoseps aridus (FE, SE), Hydromantes shastae (ST), Hydromantes brunus (ST), Bufo exsul (ST), Bufo microscaphus californicus (FE), Rana aurora draytonii (FT²), Gopherus agassizii (FT, ST), Chelonia mydas (FT), Caretta caretta (FT), Lepidochelys olivacea (FT), Dermochelys coriacea (FE), Coleonyx switaki (ST), Uma inornata (FT, SE), Gambelia silus (FE, SE), Xantusia riversiana (FT), Charina bottae umbratica (ST), Masticophis lateralis euryxanthus (FT, ST), Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia (FE, SE), Thamnophis couchi gigas (FT, ST).
    ¹Federally threatened only in Santa Barbara County Distinct Vertebrate Population Segment.
    ²Federally threatened in all areas except Humboldt, Trinity, and Mendocino counties; Glenn, Lake, and Sonoma counties west of the Central Valley Hydrologic Basin; Sonoma and Marin counties north and west of the Napa River, Sonoma Creek, and Petaluma River drainages which flow into San Francisco Bay, and north of the Walker Creek drainage which flows to the Pacific Ocean.

Herpetological conservation issues:  Habitat destruction and loss, particularly in riparian and aquatic habitats, may be the greatest threat to amphibian and reptile populations in California.  Alteration of habitat can occur directly, as in development of land for human uses or resource extraction, or indirectly due to upstream or upslope impacts of activities such as timber harvesting or grazing.  Land development for homes and businesses has resulted in extirpation of many amphibian and reptile populations particularly in urban areas of California.  The herpetofauna of the central valley has been impacted by agriculture and grazing, and timber harvesting has resulted in declines of species, such as Rhyacotriton variegatus and Ascaphus truei, particularly in northern California.
    Herbicides, pesticides, fertilizers, and other environmental contaminants can have deleterious effects on amphibian and reptile populations.  Chemicals have been shown to cause immediate mortality and deformities in amphibians and reptiles in cases such as fuel spills, and longer-term chronic mortality and deformities with the application of herbicides and pesticides.  Spill events or repeated use of chemicals in an area can also result in habitat destruction.  The Cantara spill in the upper central valley caused immediate mortality and chronic malformation in Clemmys marmorata.  Some chemicals can act as endocrine disruptors in amphibians and reptiles, such as Rana aurora, and may compromise reproduction.  The impacts of chemicals on herpetofauna in California have been particularly evident in the central valley, and on the west side of the Sierra Nevada, due to drift of agricultural chemicals via prevailing winds.
    Fish stocking in lakes and rivers continues to be an important ecological issue in California.  Non-native fish, such as pikeminnow and brook trout, introduced into lakes and rivers can decimate amphibian and reptile populations.  Many native amphibians and reptiles are not adapted to predation by introduced fish species and are often extirpated following introductions into previously fishless waters.  Stocking was ceased in Yosemite National Park in 1990, due to concerns that native amphibian species, such as Rana muscosa, were being eliminated.  The California Department of Fish and Game is currently re-evaluating its program of stocking high elevation lakes in the Sierra Nevada and the Klamath region, while they study the effects of introduced fish on native amphibians.
    Introductions of other exotic species have been responsible for losses in both terrestrial and aquatic systems.  Introductions of bullfrogs, muskrats, snapping turtles, and exotic snakes into areas outside of their historic range have caused the decline and extirpation of native amphibian and reptile populations.  Bullfrogs are known to prey on Ambystoma californiense and are partially responsible for the declines in Rana aurora draytonii in parts of its range.
    Disease is becoming an increasingly important factor in amphibian declines in California.  The bacteria, Aeromonas hydrophila, which causes the anuran septicemia “red-leg disease,” was the probable cause of at least one die-off reported for B. canorus near Yosemite National Park.  Chytrid fungus has been implicated in declines and dramatic mortality events of several amphibian species within the state.  Many pathogens, which affect amphibians and reptiles, occur naturally in the environment and pose no risk until animals become stressed in some way.  This implies that pathogens are acting synergistically with other impacts to cause declines and potential extirpation of amphibian and reptile population

Contributors: Hartwell H. Welsh, Jr.
Nancy E. Karraker (February 2001)

Return to top

Non-listed species of conservation concern: The following nongame species have no special legal status but are either on a Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW) administrative list of species of special concern (SSC) or tracked by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP, rankings of SH or S#): Scaphiopus couchii (SSC, S1), Acris crepitans (SSC, SH), Bufo debilis (S2), Gastrophryne olivacea (SSC, S1), Hyla arenicolor (SSC, S2), Spea intermontana (SSC, S3), Spea multiplicata (SSC), Rana blairi (SSC, S3), Rana pipiens (SSC, S3), Rana sylvatica (SSC, S3), Chrysemys picta (S5), Kinosternon flavescens (SSC, S1), Cnemidophorus neotesselatus (S2), Cnemidophorus velox (S4), Gambelia wislizenii (SSC, S1), Phrynosoma cornutum (SSC, S3), Phrynosoma modestum (SSC), Eumeces gaigeae (S3), Sceloporus magister (SSC, S2), Urosaurus ornatus (S4), Coluber constrictor mormon (S3), Crotalus viridis concolor (SSC, S3?), Elaphe guttata (S3), Lampropeltis getula (SSC, S1), Leptotyphlops dulcis (SSC, S1), Liochlorophis vernalis (S4), Rhinocheilus lecontei (S1?), Sistrurus catenatus (SSC, S2), Sonora semiannulata (S3), Tantilla hobartsmithi (S2?), Thamnophis cyrtopsis (S2?), Thamnophis proximus (SH), Thamnophis sirtalis (SSC), Tropidoclonion lineatum (S3).

Species with legal conservation status: All native amphibians and reptiles have some legal status as threatened or endangered wildlife, nongame wildlife, or game wildlife. Bufo boreas boreas (CNHP status S1), is listed as State Endangered. The Southern Rocky Mountain populations of Bufo boreas boreas, which include those in Colorado, are considered Warranted but Precluded for Federal listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Although bullfrogs (Rana catesbeiana) are not a native species, their take and the take of larval tiger salamanders (Ambystoma tigrinum) less than 5 inches long require a Colorado fishing or commercial fishing license, which set bag and possession limits, season, and method of take. Take of the Prairie rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis viridis) and snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) require a Colorado small game license, which sets bag and possession limits, season, and method of take. (Note: As per Colorado Revised Statutes, 33-6-107(9), rattlesnakes (all species) may be killed without a license "to protect life or property.") Unless otherwise noted, all native amphibian and reptile species are considered nongame. Nongame species and subspecies, including threatened or endangered wildlife are protected and their harassment, taking or possession is prohibited except as follows: 1) Under a scientific collecting license, 2) Under a rehabilitation license, 3) Under a license for zoological, educational, propagation or other special purposes. Possession of up to four individuals of each of the following species and/or subspecies of reptiles and amphibians may be taken annually and held in captivity, provided that no more than twelve in the aggregate are possessed at any time: Bufo woodhousii, Pseudacris triseriata, Spea bombifrons, Chrysemys picta, Terrapena ornata, Cnemidophorus tigris, Holbrookia maculata, Sceloporus graciosus, Sceloporus undulatus, Urosaurus ornatus, Uta stansburiana, Coluber constrictor, Heterodon nasicus, Pituophis catenifer, Thamnophis elegans, and Thamnophis radix. Further, such reptiles and amphibians may be released back into the wild provided they have not come into contact with reptiles and amphibians from other geographic areas and they are released as close as possible to, but in no event further than ten miles from, their place of origin. Import, transportation, stocking, sale, or possession for release of green frogs (Rana clamitans) is prohibited in Colorado.

 Herpetological conservation issues: Populations of boreal toads, a state endangered species, have tested positive for chytrid fungus. Consequently, pathogen issues related to declining amphibian populations need further investigation. It is especially important to develop management strategies for retaining (and ultimately restoring) amphibian populations that have been affected by pathogen-related declines. Human population growth has resulted in extensive urban and suburban development with resulting habitat destruction and fragmentation. Agricultural (cropland) use has eliminated large tracts of native habitat. In addition to outright habitat destruction, human population growth has resulted in more highway traffic, which appears to be an important cause of mortality for some amphibian and reptile populations. Water diversion, development, and storage as well as wetland loss or alteration, contribute to habitat loss and habitat fragmentation for some herpetofauna. Although fewer amphibian and reptile species occur in the mountains of Colorado than at low elevations, some species, such as the boreal toad, make more extensive use of non-wetland habitat than previously believed. Logging and other habitat alterations, such as the expansion of ski areas, even away from wetlands, may have an impact on populations. Populations of raccoons, corvids, and other potential predators of herpetofauna may also be increasing as a result of human population growth. Fish stocking for recreation has reduced some local amphibian populations. The effects of livestock grazing on native amphibians and reptiles needs more study in Colorado, but this land use is almost certainly more benign than the other forms of habitat alteration mentioned here.
    Establishment of bullfrog populations has been associated with population declines of some native amphibians. Other non-native species have the potential to establish extralimital populations as well, although most reports of non-native herpetofauna in Colorado appear to be of waifs. Even waifs, however, have the potential to introduce disease to native populations. In addition, some native species, such as the ornate box turtle, collared lizard, and milk snake, may experience illegal collection for the pet trade.
    Pesticides and contaminants have the potential to affect herpetofauna, but the effects of most contaminants have not received much study in Colorado. Drainage from mines is often acidic and laden with heavy metals, which may result in extripation of local herpetofauna, especially amphibians. Climate change, acid precipitation, UV radiation changes, and other global or regional alterations have the potential to affect Colorado herpetofauna. Although several studies have addressed one or more of these factors, major or long term population declines have not been linked directly to these factors.
    Some areas of the state have not had recent surveys, resulting in a lack of current information concerning the status of several amphibian and reptile species. Declines in native amphibians may have contributed to the apparent decline in red-sided garter snake populations in some areas of northeastern Colorado; the status of this snake needs to be examined. At least two species, the northern cricket frog and the ribbon snake, appear to have been extripated from Colorado since the 1900s.

Contributor: Lauren Livo (December 2000)

Return to top

Links: Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection DEP Store (for State publications cited)

Non-listed species of conservation concern: The following species are listed as “special concern” under the Connecticut Endangered Species Act. Clemmys insculpta, Terrapene c. carolina, Heterodon platirhinos, Thamnophis s. sauritus, Ambystoma laterale “complex”, Ambystoma jeffersonianum “complex”, Rana pipiens.  Special Concern species are defined as, any native plant or nonharvested wildlife species documented by scientific research and inventory to have a naturally restricted range or habitat in the state, to be at a low population level, to be in such high demand by man that its unregulated taking would be detrimental to the conservation of its population.  Special concern status provides no legal protection, however the collection and possession of all of these listed species are regulated as noted below.

Species with legal conservation status: The following species are listed as either “state endangered” or “state threatened” and are afforded legal protection through the Connecticut Endangered Species Act.  Several of these species are also federally listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act.  Caretta caretta (federal threatened, state threatened), Chelonia mydas (federal threatened, state threatened), Clemmys muhlenbergii (federal threatened, state endangered), Dermochelys coriacea (federal endangered, state endangered), Lepidochelys kempii (federal endangered, state endangered), Crotalus horridis (state endangered), Eumeces fasciatus (state threatened), Ambystoma laterale diploid populations (state threatened), Gyrinophilus p. porphyriticus (state threatened), Plethodon glutinosus (state threatened), Scaphiopus holbrookii (state endangered).
    Collection and possession of the following species are regulated in Connecticut by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. Clemmys inscuplta, Malaclemys t. terrapin, Terrapene carolina, Elaphe o. obsoleta, Heterodon platirhinos, Thamnophis  sauritus, Ambystoma jeffersonianum, Ambystoma laterale, Ambystoma maculatum, Ambystoma opacum, Notophthalmus v. viridescens, Rana pipiens, Scaphiopus holbrookii.  

Herpetological conservation issues:  Connecticut has among the highest population density in the U.S. with significant suburban expansion continuing across the landscape.  The majority of land use planning occurs at the municipal level among the state’s 169 townships.  Both of these factors present significant conservation challenges.  The primary conservation issues facing most amphibian and reptile populations in the state are related to habitat degradation,  habitat loss and fragmentation resulting from urban and suburban sprawl.  Populations of species that are characterized by delayed sexual maturity and low reproductive output, including Crotalus horridus, Clemmys sp. and Terrapene carolina, are especially vulnerable. The aggregate and long-term impacts of road mortality and incidental human take on localized populations often results in a significant loss of breeding adults consequently leading to population declines or extirpation.
    Species requiring specialized habitats are also highly vulnerable to both the direct and indirect impacts associated with sprawl and are of conservation concern in Connecticut. For example, vernal pool-breeding amphibians including Ambystoma sp. and Rana sylvatica require temporary woodland pools for reproduction as well as substantial areas of surrounding forested upland habitat for the remainder of their life cycle. This renders them highly vulnerable to the impacts of development across the landscape, especially the construction of roads, which often lead to increased mortality and act as barriers to dispersal. Road construction and forest clearing leads to the gradual isolation of these populations across the landscape, thus interrupting metapopulation dynamics resulting in an increased probability of localized population extirpation. Other species with specialized habitat requirements include, Clemmys muhlenbergii (calcareous bogs), Eumeces fasciatus (open ledge and talus along upland ridges), Rana pipiens (wet meadows and bogs), Scaphiopus holbrookii (river valley floodplains), Gyrinophilus porphyriticus (springs and high gradient streams) and Plethodon glutinosus (mature forests). Historical declines have been documented for many of these species in Connecticut (Klemens 1993). In the case of Clemmys muhlenbergii, natural succession and the proliferation of invasive plant species are also a potential management issue.  
    The illegal collection of several species is also of conservation concern in Connecticut.  Poaching has historically significantly depleted populations of Crotalus horridus and this threat remains a documented management issue at several sites in the state.  Although not well documented in the state, the illegal collection of Terrapene, and Clemmys sp. is also of concern.
    The frontline of land use and conservation planning in Connecticut takes place at the township level and primarily occurs via a “case by case” permitting process under the jurisdiction of town inland wetlands or conservation commissions.  One of the key challenges for herpetological conservation in the state is working with individual townships to address conservation issues on a broader landscape scale. To effectively move local conservation efforts beyond a primarily lot by lot regulatory process, to that of an ecosystem planning process that integrates current knowledge of amphibian and reptile ecology and ecosystem functions (see Klemens 2000).

Literature:
Klemens, M. W. 2000. Amphibians and Reptiles in Connecticut: A Checklist with Notes on Conservation Status, Identification and Distribution. State Geological and Natural History Survey of Connecticut. Bull. 32, 96 pp.,  
Klemens, M. W. 1993 The Amphibians and Reptiles of Connecticut and Adjacent Regions. State Geological and Natural History Survey of Connecticut. Bull. 112, 318 pp. 

Contributors: Hank Gruner
Julie Victoria (December 2000)

Return to top

Links: Delaware Division of Fish and Wildlife

Non-listed species of conservation concern: The following species are included in the Delaware Natural Heritage Program’s list of species of conservation concern (1999): Ambystoma maculatum (S2), Ambystoma opacum (S3), Eurycea longicauda (S1), Hemidactylium scutatum (S1), Pseudotriton montanus (S1), Pseudotriton ruber (S3), Hyla chrysoscelis (S2), Hyla cinerea (S3), Rana virgatipes (S1), Clemmys guttata (S3), Eumeces laticeps (SH), Scincella lateralis (S1), Cemophora coccinea (SH), Lampropeltis getula (S2), Lampropeltis triangulum (S2), Nerodia erythrogaster (S1), Opheodrys aestivus (S2), Regina septemvittata (S1), Storeria dekayi (S3), Storeria occipitomaculata (S1), Thamnophis sauritus (S2), Virginia valeriae (S1), Agkistrodon contortrix (S1)

Species with legal conservation status:  All native reptile and amphibian species are afforded some degree of legal protection through state statute or regulation.  Anyone wishing to collect or possess a native reptile or amphibian for commercial or non-commercial purposes must obtain a permit from the Director of the Division of Fish and Wildlife, with the following exception: one individual of each of the following species or subspecies can be collected without a permit, if for non-commercial purposes:  Sceloporus undulatus hyacinthinus, Coluber c. constrictor, Eumeces fasciatus, Elaphe o. obsoleta, Thamnophis s. sirtalis, Heterodon platirhinos, Carphophis a. amoenus, Nerodia s. sipedon, Diadophis punctatus, Malaclemys t. terrapin, Sternotherus odoratus, Terrapene c. carolina, Kinosternon s. subrubrum, Chrysemys picta, Pseudemys rubriventris, Chelydra serpentina, Rana catesbeiana, Rana clamitans melanota, Pseudacris triseriata kalmi, Acris c. crepitans, Rana palustris, Rana utricularia, Rana sylvatica, Notophthalmus v. viridescens, Pseudacris c. crucifer, Desmognathus f. fuscus, Eurycea bislineata, Plethodon cinereus, Scaphiopus h. holbrookii, Bufo americanus, Hyla versicolor, Hyla chrysoscelis.  The following species are regulated as game species: Rana catesbeiana, Chelydra serpentica, Malaclemys t. terrapin.  Closed seasons, license requirements, and size or daily limits apply.  The following species are listed as threatened or endangered (FE: federally endangered; FT: federally threatened; SE: state endangered): Clemmys muhlenbergii (FT, SE), Caretta caretta (FT, SE), Chelonia mydas (FT, SE), Eretmochelys imbricata (FE), Lepidochelys kempii (FE, SE), Dermochelys coriacea (FE, SE), Ambystoma t. tigrinum (SE), Hyla gratiosa (SE), Elaphe g. guttata (SE).

Herpetological conservation issues:

Contributors: Alice Doolittle, Christopher M. Heckscher (March 2001)

Return to top

Links: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission; Florida Natural Areas Inventory; Florida Museum of Natural History

Non-listed species of conservation concern: G1 = Critically imperiled globally (5 or fewer occurrences), G2 = Imperiled globally (6-20 occurrences), G3 = Very rare and local throughout its range or found locally in a restricted range.  Amphiuma pholeter (G3); Desmognathus apalachicolae (G3); Notophthalmus perstriatus (G2-G3); Pseudobranchus striatus lustricolus (G1); Eumeces egregius insularis (G1); Farancia erytrogramma seminola (G1); Graptemys ernsti (G2); Heterodon simus (G2); Lampropeltis getula "goini" (G2); Malaclemys terrapin rhizophorarum (G2); Nerodia clarkii clarkii (G3); Sceloporus woodi (G3).

Species with legal conservation status: Ambystoma cingulatum (federally threatened; state species of special concern); Haideotriton wallacei (state species of special concern); Hyla andersonii (state species of special concern); Rana capito (state species of special concern); Rana okaloosae (state species of special concern); Alligator mississippiensis (federally threatened due to similarity of appearance, state species of special concern); Crocodylus acutus (state and federally endangered); Caretta caretta (state and federally threatened); Chelonia mydas (state and federally endangered); Dermochelys coriacea (state and federally endangered); Eretmochelys imbricata (state and federally endangered); Lepidochelys kempi (state and federally endangered); Gopherus polyphemus (state species of special concern); Macrochelys temminckii (state species of special concern); Graptemys barbouri (state species of special concern); Pseudemys concinna suwanniensis (state species of special concern); Eumeces egregius egregius (state species of special concern); Eumeces egregius lividus (state and federally threatened); Neoseps reynoldsi (state and federally threatened); Diadophis punctatus acricus (state threatened); Drymarchon corais couperi (state and federally threatened); Nerodia clarkii taeniata (state and federally threatened); Pituophis melanoleucus mugitus (state species of special concern); Tantilla oolitica (state threatened); Stilosoma extenuatum (state threatened).  Additionally, Lower Florida Keys populations of the following species have legal status: Kinosternon baurii (state endangered); Storeria dekayi victa (state threatened); Thamnophis sauritus sackeni (state threatened); Elaphe guttata (state species of special concern).  Additionally, take of the following species of turtles is governed by personal possession limits of 1-2 individuals and sale is prohibited: Macrochelys temminckii (possession 1), Terrapene carolina, Graptemys ernsti, Malaclemys terrapin, Pseudemys concinna, and Sternotherus minor.

Herpetological conservation issues: Loss and degradation of habitat are the greatest factors impacting the herpetofauna of Florida.  Although wetlands are still a major component of Florida's landscape, it is estimated that Florida has lost about 50% of its original wetlands. The inadequacy of regulatory protection for smaller, ephemeral wetlands has allowed the ongoing loss of critical breeding habitat for ambystomatid salamanders, Notophthalmus perstriatus, and roughly a dozen species of anurans. The narrow upland ridges along both coasts have been extensively urbanized or developed for recreation, and the once extensive tracts of sandhill and scrub in the interior have been impacted by urbanization and agricultural and silvicultural conversion.  It is estimated that Florida has lost 88% of its sandhill habitat, 82% of its unique, ancient sand pine scrub, and 98% of the Miami Rock Ridge pinelands. Remaining undeveloped sandhills have been degraded by removal of  longleaf pine forests, fire exclusion, fragmentation, and conversion to dense, monoculture plantations of slash pine or sand pine.  The extensive pine flatwoods that once occupied much of the coastal terraces of northern Florida were less suitable for residential and agricultural development due to seasonal high-water, but they have been extensively ditched, drained, and bedded for pine plantations, thus adversely affecting several amphibian species typical of  flatwoods habitats.  Along the coasts, sea turtles have been adversely affected by coastal armoring, beach  lighting, shrimp trawling, and increased nest depredation caused by raccoon populations that are unnaturally high due to augmented food supplies found in areas of human activity.  Filling of coastal wetlands has also impacted Nerodia clarkii, Malaclemys terrapin, and Crocodylus acutus, although the improving status of  C. acutus is due in part to its success in exploiting some artificial habitats for nesting.  Upper Respiratory Tract Disease (URTD) has been associated with high mortality in several populations of the gopher tortoise, and it is likely that the transmission of URTD among populations has been facilitated by the well-intentioned relocation of tortoises from areas scheduled for development.  At least two species (Desmognathus auriculatus, Lampropeltis getula) have undergone severe, unexplained population declines in most of the state, although ample seemingly suitable habitat remains.  Commercial exploitation of turtles (primarily Apalone ferox) for food and Crotalus adamanteus and C. horridus for leather are especially controversial.  Exotic species are a particular concern in Florida, which now has more exotic than native species of lizards, although most of the exotics are presently very restricted in distribution.  A few species (e.g., Eleutherodactylus planirostris and Hemidactylus sp.) fill otherwise unoccupied niches in Florida, although they may be minor competitors with natives for food.  Other, more aggressive invaders, such as Osteopilus septentrionalis and Anolis sagrei, are of greater concern. Non-herpetofaunal exotics are also of significant concern, with red imported fire ants having been implicated as major predators on eggs and hatchlings of reptiles, feral hogs both depredating amphibians and reptiles and severely damaging some amphibian habitats, and monoculture stands of several species of invasive plants (e.g., Melaleuca, Australian pine, Brazilian pepper) replacing native habitats.

Contributor: Paul Moler (October 2001)

Return to top

Links:
Georgia Department of Natural Resources

Non-listed species of conservation concern: eastern diamondback rattlesnake Crotalus adamanteus (S4); seepage salamander,Desmognathus aeneus (S3); Apalachicola dusky salamander Desmognathus apalachicolae (S1S2); coal skink Eumeces anthracinus (S1); mole skink Eumeces egregius (S3); longtail salamander Eurycea longicauda (S2); cave salamander Eurycea lucifuga (S3); Blue Ridge two-lined salamander Eurycea wilderae (S2?); rainbow snake Farancia erytrogramma (S3); Tennessee cave salamander Gyrinophilus palleucus (S1); four-toed salamander Hemidactylium scutatum (S3); southern hognose snake Heterodon simus (S3); striped mud turtle Kinosternon bauri (S3); eastern milk snake Lampropeltis triangulum triangulum (S2); shovelnose salamander Leurognathus marmoratus (S3); eastern coral snake Micrurus fulvius fulvius (S3); Alabama waterdog Necturus alabamensis (S2); mudpuppy Necturus maculosus (S1); dwarf waterdog Necturus punctatus (S2); Florida green water snake Nerodia floridana (S2); slender glass lizard Ophisaurus attenuatus (S3); island glass lizard Ophisaurus compressus (S2); mimic glass lizard Ophisaurus mimicus (S2); northern pine snake Pituophis melanoleucus melanoleucus (S3); Pituophis melanoleucus mugitus (S3); southern zigzag salamander Plethodon dorsalis dorsalis (S1); southern Appalachian salamander Plethodon oconaluftee (S1); Webster’s salamander Plethodon websteri (S1); Brimley’s chorus frog Pseudacris brimleyi (S2); Florida redbelly turtle Pseudemys nelsoni (S2); dwarf siren Pseudobranchus striatus (S3); gopher frog Rana capito (S3); wood frog Rana sylvatica (S3); carpenter frog Rana virgatipes (S3); striped crayfish snake Regina alleni (S2); pine woods snake Rhadinaea flavilata (S2); Florida worm lizard Rhineura floridana (S1); black swamp snake Seminatrix pygaea (S3); Florida brown snake Storeria dekayi victa (SU). 

Species with legal conservation status: Ambystoma cingulatum (state and federally threatened); Amphiuma pholeter (state rare); Aneides aeneus (state rare); Cryptobranchus alleganiensis (state rare); Haideotriton wallacei (state threatened); Notophthalmus perstriatus (state rare); Plethodon petraeus (state rare); Alligator mississippiensis (federally threatened due to similarity of appearance); Caretta caretta (state and federally threatened); Chelonia mydas (state threatened; US nesting population federally endangered, other populations federally threatened); Clemmys guttata (state unusual); Clemmys muhlenbergii (state threatened and federally threatened due to similarity of appearance); Graptemys geographica (state rare); Graptemys pulchra (state rare); Dermochelys coriacea (state and federally endangered); Lepidochelys kempii (state and federally endangered); Macroclemys temminckii (state threatened); Eretmochelys imbricata (state and federally endangered); Gopherus polyphemus (state threatened); Graptemys barbouri (state threatened); Drymarchon corais couperi (state and federally threatened)

Herpetological conservation issues: The greatest threat facing reptiles and amphibians in Georgia is habitat loss and alteration (in uplands, wetlands, caves, and aquatic habitats), however some species face additional problems.  Several species of turtles (including Macroclemys temminckii, Graptemys spp., and Clemmys spp.) are especially threatened by overcollection to support the legal and illegal turtle meat and pet trade.  Disease has been implicated as a threat to at least two species - Gopherus polyphemus (Upper Respiratory Tract Disease) and Graptemys barbouri (Proliferative Shell Disease).  Stream and groundwater pollution and sedimentation are likely impacting populations of aquatic amphibians such as Cryptobranchus alleganiensis and Haideotriton wallacei.  Indiscriminate killing of snakes is certainly contributing to the declines of such species as Drymarchon corais and Pituophis melanoleucus.  Rattlesnake Roundups and the associated skin trade may be affecting populations of Crotalus adamanteus by overcollection, and the practice of introducing gasoline into the burrows of Gopherus polyphemus to drive out rattlesnakes surely impacts the tortoise and its other burrow-dependant herps including Rana capito and Masticophis flagellum.  Introduced and invasive species such as fire ants and feral hogs have been documented as egg and nestling predators of sea turtles, and have been implicated as potential threats to Heterodon simus (fire ants) and Amphiuma pholeter (hogs).  Increased populations of raccoons threaten nest success of many turtle species of conservation concern.  Sea turtles are further impacted by beach lighting, commercial shrimp trawling, egg poaching, and boat collisions.  Acid rain has been implicated as a potential threat to plethodontid salamanders, especially Aneides aeneus, in the extreme northeastern portion of the state. Amphibian deformation has not surfaced as a significant problem in Georgia.

Contributor: John Jensen (June 2000)

Return to top

Links:

Non-listed species of conservation concern:

Species with legal conservation status:

Herpetological conservation issues:

Contributor: Fred Kraus

Return to top

Links: