Threatened and endangered species by state and province
Posted 01 March 2007 - 10:54 PM
Posted 01 March 2007 - 11:34 PM
What state did you check that's missing SC species?
I just want to add you may also want to check your particular State's local agency/department/division which will most likely also list species of special concern that are not listed on the above site. I bring this up only because in one of the states I checked, I know there are more species protected in it than what are listed. These are the species of special concern that may not have an official listing status, but must have attention brought to their conservation nonetheless.
Posted 02 March 2007 - 12:13 AM
Compare the links, some species of fish and amphibians (most noticeable to me) are missing. Compare the links:
Colorado Division of Wildlife
It popped out to me because I worked at a facility in Colorado that raised a lot of these fish and the State Endangered Boreal Toad. I worked with pikeminnow, bonytail chub, rio grande chub, roundtail chub, rio grande suckers, northern red belly dace, southern red belly dace, plains minnows, suckermouth minnows, arkansas darter, common shiner, and briefly the razorback sucker. Some of these like the Rio Grande Sucker are listed as State Endangered and aren't listed at all in the USFWS, yet a State Threatened fish like the Arkansas Darter come up in a search on USFWS. Same with the Boreal Toad which is endangered in CO and I think in NM, it doesn't come up if you search Bufo boreas boreas on the USFWS page.
Posted 02 March 2007 - 09:23 AM
One final note...I'd personally wonder why the State of Colorado is spending money on raising Southern Red Belly Dace and Common Shinern. These fish may be scarce in Colorado, but that is only because the humans decided to draw a boundary for a state is on the edge of the natural range and a watershed. Sticking an imaginarey state boundary over a real, physical boundary such as a watershed is often useless in the realm of biology and consevation. When the natural range or a widely distributed species knicks the a small fraction of a political boundary does the fish really care or know? While a fish in that situation would still be suited to having a protection status, lets be serious here, Common Shiner and SRBD aren't facing broadscale imperilment here.
Posted 02 March 2007 - 11:12 AM
Posted 02 March 2007 - 01:13 PM
For a complete list of all listed North American freshwater fishes -- federal, state and provincial -- download this Excel spreadsheet:
Some of these like the Rio Grande Sucker are listed as State Endangered and aren't listed at all in the USFWS, yet a State Threatened fish like the Arkansas Darter come up in a search on USFWS. Same with the Boreal Toad which is endangered in CO and I think in NM, it doesn't come up if you search Bufo boreas boreas on the USFWS page.
Posted 29 November 2010 - 08:30 AM
I noticed that there wasn't brook silversides on the Indiana list. are they an introduced species then??? I know there here
The link for Indiana shows Brook Silversides http://www.in.gov/dn..._April_2007.pdf
NANFA also has posted a spredsheet list that compiles all of the T & E fish from each state in one convenient listing. I'm not sure which list you're looking at.
Keep your eyes out for new books for Indiana though.....A little birdie told me a field guide and "fishes of" books are in the works.
Posted 10 January 2015 - 03:41 PM
I assume the protection is limited to setting the catch limit at zero, and no protection is afforded to their habitat?
Reply to this topic
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users