Cambarus bartonii - (Fabricius, 1798)
Common Crayfish
Other English Common Names: Appalachian Brook Crayfish
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Cambarus bartonii (Fabricius, 1798) (TSN 97343)
French Common Names: écrevisse de ruisseau
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.872128
Element Code: ICMAL07300
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Invertebrates - Crustaceans - Crayfishes
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Crustacea Malacostraca Decapoda Cambaridae Cambarus
Genus Size: D - Medium to large genus (21+ species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: McLaughlin, P.A., D.K. Camp, M.V. Angel, E.L. Bousfield, P. Brunel, R.C. Brusca, D. Cadien, A.C. Cohen, K. Conlan, L.G. Eldredge, D.L. Felder, J.W. Goy, T. Haney, B. Hann, R.W. Heard, E.A. Hendrycks, H.H. Hobbs III, J.R. Holsinger, B. Kensley, D.R. Laubitz, S.E. LeCroy, R. Lemaitre, R.F. Maddocks, J.W. Martin, P. Mikkelsen, E. Nelson, W.A. Newman, R.M. Overstreet, W.J. Poly, W.W. Price, J.W. Reid, A. Robertson, D.C. Rogers, A. Ross, M. Schotte, F. Schram, C. Shih, L. Watling, G.D.F. Wilson, and D.D. Turgeon. 2005. Common and scientific names of aquatic invertebrates from the United States and Canada: Crustaceans. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 31: 545 pp.
Concept Reference Code: B05MCL01EHUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Cambarus bartonii
Taxonomic Comments: Two subspecies of this species are recognized, Cambarus bartonii bartonii Fabricius 1798 and C. b. cavatus Hay 1902. Cambarus bartonii carinirostris Hay 1914 was elevated to species status by Thoma and Jezerinac (2000).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 26May2015
Global Status Last Changed: 19Feb1996
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by calculator
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Reasons: The nominal species widespread and abundant, found in New Brunswick, Canada, west to Kentucky and Tennessee, south to Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina and east to the Atlantic Ocean. It likely also occurs (different morph- cavatus) Alabama, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio and West Virginia. It is secure throughout its range and faces few threats although localized declines are occurring due to competetive exclusion by Cambarus robustus, and habitat degradation.
Nation: United States
National Status: N5 (19Feb1996)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N5 (11May2017)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Alabama (S2), Connecticut (SNR), Delaware (SNR), Georgia (S5), Kentucky (SNR), Maine (S2?), Maryland (S5), Massachusetts (S2), New Hampshire (S2), New Jersey (S2?), New York (S3), North Carolina (S5), Ohio (S3?), Pennsylvania (S5), Rhode Island (SNR), South Carolina (S4), Tennessee (S4S5), Vermont (S3), Virginia (S4), West Virginia (S5)
Canada New Brunswick (S5), Ontario (S4), Quebec (S5)

Other Statuses

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC): Candidate (High) (10Jul2017)
IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern
American Fisheries Society Status: Currently Stable

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent: 200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments: The nominal species found in New Brunswick, Canada, west to Kentucky and Tennessee, south to Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina and east to the Atlantic Ocean (Hobbs, 1989). Taylor and Schuster (2004) cite Tennessee and northwestern Georgia to southwestern Virginia, West Virginia, and west to Kentucky for the subspecies cavatus. Eversole and Jones (2004) cite New Brunswick, Canada, to northern Georgia and eastern parts of Kentucky and Tennessee with populations in South Carolina and Georgia showing considerable variation across its range. In the southern portion of its range, it is confined to the Blue Ridge province of the Appalachian Highlands. In the northern portion of its range it occurs in the St. Lawrence basin in Ontario and Quebec to the southern Hudson Bay drainage.

Number of Occurrences: > 300
Number of Occurrences Comments: Reeves et al. (2000) included Twin Snakes Cave in Dade Co., Georgia. It was recently found to be extant in the Catawba River basin in North Carolina but not extending into South Carolina (Alderman, 2005). It is found throughout most river basins in North Carolina, except the Broad and Catawba where it is primarily found in the western headwaters along teh eastern Continental Divide (Simmons and Fraley, 2010). In the Cumberland Plateau it occurs in tributaries of the Tennessee River upstream from Walden Gorge (Bouchard, 1974). In Kentucky, subspecies cavatus is widespread but sporadic in the eastern half with records from all major river drainages except the Green (Taylor and Schuster, 2004). Peake et al. (2004) collected this species in the upper Cumberland and upper Kentucky River basins in Kentucky. Jezerinac and Thoma (1984) cite Ohio distribution as Jefferson Co. Cambarus bartonii bartonii is stable in West Virginia and occurs throughout the Atlantic Slope (Potomac, James, Ridge and Valley, Allegheny Mountains, Appalachian Plateau regions) (Loughman and Welsh, 2010). Cambarus bartonii cavatus is stable in West Virginia and occurs in headwaters streams and wetlands throughout central and southern portions of the Ohio River direct drains, western portions of the Kanawha River, and southwestern Ohio River basins (Loughman and Welsh, 2010). In New York's Hudson River drainage, Smith (1979) added Rensselaer and Washington Cos., frequently only in the Poestenkill and upper Hoosic River system. In Vermont, it is known from the Hudson drainage (Battenkill) and the Champlain Basin (Kart et al., 2005). In Maryland, it is stable and is distributed widely from the eastern continental divide to the Coastal Plain as well as tributaries of the Potomac River in southern Maryland (Killian et al., 2010). Francois (1959) cites it in New Jersey in Bergen, Essex, Hunterdon, Mercer, Morris, Passaic, Sussex, Union, and Warren Cos.; as well as Bucks, Northampton, and Philadelphia Cos., Pennsylvania. In Massachusetts it is confined to tributaries flowing into the Hoosic River basin in the Hudson River drainage system, with a few records outside the Hoosic River that are the result of introduction (Smith, 2000). Horowitz and Flinders (2004) found it to be the most common species encountered (9 of 15 stations) in the Piedmont, Ridge and Valley and Highlands regions of New Jersey. It was recently documented in the vicinity of Plummers Island (bank of Potomac River), Montgomery Co., Maryland (Norden, 2008).

Population Size: >1,000,000 individuals
Population Size Comments: This species is abundant and common in at least parts of its range (Jezerinac, 1991; Taylor et al., 2005).

Number of Occurrences with Good Viability/Integrity: Very many (>125)

Overall Threat Impact: Low
Overall Threat Impact Comments: Overall this species faces few threats. In certain areas, it faces localized threats. Increasing range expansion of Cambarus robustus found to competitively exclude Cambarus bartonii in Ontario (Guiasu et al., 1996; Guiasu and Dunham, 1999). Localized declines can also be attributed to general habitat degradation and loss. Fish predation poses a greater threat to small rather than larger individuals (Englund and Krupa, 2000) and predation effects were larger for deeper pools than shallow ones (Englund, 1999).

Short-term Trend: Relatively Stable (<=10% change)

Long-term Trend: Decline of <30% to increase of 25%

Intrinsic Vulnerability: Not intrinsically vulnerable
Intrinsic Vulnerability Comments: It is often the most abundant and dominant species when found (Woodall and Wallace, 1972; Huryn and Wallace, 1987, Griffith et al., 1994; 1996, Seiler and Turner, 2004).

Environmental Specificity: Broad. Generalist or community with all key requirements common.
Environmental Specificity Comments: It is a habitat generalist (Simmons and Fraley, 2010). In laboratory tests, this species tolerated considerable acidity when acutely exposed to greatly reduced pH levels, indicating that occasional episodes of higher than normal acidity in southern Appalachian streams are not necessarily a threat to intermolt adult and juveniles (DiStefano and Neves, 1991).

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)) The nominal species found in New Brunswick, Canada, west to Kentucky and Tennessee, south to Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina and east to the Atlantic Ocean (Hobbs, 1989). Taylor and Schuster (2004) cite Tennessee and northwestern Georgia to southwestern Virginia, West Virginia, and west to Kentucky for the subspecies cavatus. Eversole and Jones (2004) cite New Brunswick, Canada, to northern Georgia and eastern parts of Kentucky and Tennessee with populations in South Carolina and Georgia showing considerable variation across its range. In the southern portion of its range, it is confined to the Blue Ridge province of the Appalachian Highlands. In the northern portion of its range it occurs in the St. Lawrence basin in Ontario and Quebec to the southern Hudson Bay drainage.

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
Color legend for Distribution Map
Endemism: occurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AL, CT, DE, GA, KY, MA, MD, ME, NC, NH, NJ, NY, OH, PA, RI, SC, TN, VA, VT, WV
Canada NB, ON, QC

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
MA Berkshire (25003)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
02 Hudson-Hoosic (02020003)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Basic Description: a crayfish
General Description: Mesial margin of palm of chela with single row of <8 tubercles; color olive to reddish brown; two terminal elements of first pleopod of male bent at least 90 degrees to main axis of pleopod; lacking spines or angles at base of acumen; carina absent (Hobbs, 1976). [LENGTH: to 75 TCL; to 150 TL] [WIDTH: to 25] Jezerinac (1985) outlines morphological differences between the two subspecies.
Diagnostic Characteristics: Both terminal elements of pleopod at right angles to shaft; rostrum only shallowly excavate and acarinate; rostral margins unthickened.
Reproduction Comments: Mate in fall, spawn in early spring. In North Carolina, Form I males were collected in April, May, June, August, September, October, November, and December in 7-20C (Simmons and Fraley, 2010).
Habitat Type: Freshwater
Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Mobility and Migration Comments: No precise data; home range probably does not exceed 100 m.
Riverine Habitat(s): BIG RIVER, CREEK, High gradient, Low gradient, MEDIUM RIVER, Moderate gradient, SPRING/SPRING BROOK
Lacustrine Habitat(s): Shallow water
Palustrine Habitat(s): TEMPORARY POOL
Special Habitat Factors: Benthic, Burrowing in or using soil
Habitat Comments: Cambarus bartonii is usually found in stream and spring habitats, but is occasionally seen in ponds (Hobbs 1989) and lakes (Jezerinac 1985). This species often burrows along streams and in seepage areas up to 1,180m above sea level (Williams and Bivens 1996). The nominal subspecies seems to prefer running water; but subspecies cavatus can be found in burrows in riparian areas, almost always in contact with the stream bed. In North Carolina, it occurs in large rivers to small, high-elevation mountain seeps and is a habitat generalist (Simmons and Fraley, 2010).
Adult Food Habits: Detritivore
Immature Food Habits: Detritivore
Food Comments: Unknown, but probably opportunistic, mostly detritus.
Adult Phenology: Circadian
Immature Phenology: Circadian
Phenology Comments: No data; probably circadian. Hamr and Berill (1985) estimated maximum age of 4 years.
Economic Attributes
Help
Economic Comments: No known economic value.
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 17May2010
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Cordeiro, J.
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 19Aug2010
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): Cordeiro, J. (2010); FITZPATRICK, J.F. (1992)

Zoological data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs) and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Alderman, J.M. 2005. Crayfish surveys for Catawba-Waterlee relicensing. Unpublished report prepared for Duke Power Company, Charlotte, North Carolina, 17 July 2005. 18 pp.

  • Bouchard, R.W. 1974. Geography and ecology of crayfishes of the Cumberland Plateau and Cumberland Mountains, Kentucky, Virginia, Tennessee, Georgia and Alabama. Part II. The genera Fallicambarus and Cambarus. Freshwater Crayfish 2:585-605

  • Cooper, J.E. 2010. Annotated checklist of the crayfishes of North Carolina, and correlations of distributions with hydrologic units and physiographic provinces. Journal of the North Carolina Academy of Science 126(3):69-76.

  • DiStefano, R.J. and R.J. Neves. 1991. Response of the crayfish Cambarus bartonii bartonii to acid exposure in southern Appalachian streams. Canadian Journal of Zoology 69:1585-1591.

  • Dube, J. et J.-F. Desroches. 2007. Les ecrevisses du Quebec. Ministere des Ressources naturelles et de la Faune, Direction de l'amenagement de la faune de l'Estrie, de Montreal et de la Monteregie, Longueuil. v + 51 pp.

  • Englund, G. 1999. Effects of fish on thelocal abundance of crayfish in stream pools. Oikos 87(1):48-56.

  • Englund, G. and J.J. Krupa. 2000. Habitat use by crayfish in stream pools: Influence of predators, depth and body size. Freshwater Biology 43:75-83.

  • Eversole, A.G. and D.R. Jones. 2004. Key to the crayfish of South Carolina. Unpublished report. Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina. 43 pp.

  • Francois, D.D. 1959. The crayfishes of New Jersey. The Ohio Journal of Science 59(2): 108-127.

  • Griffith, M.B., L.T. Wolcott, S.A. Perry. 1996. Production of the crayfish Cambarus bartonii (Fabricius, 1798) (Decapoda, Cambaridae) in an acidic Appalachian stream (U.S.A.). Crustaceana 69:974-984.

  • Griffith, M.B., S.A. Perry and W.B. Perry. 1994. Secondary production of macroinvertebrate shredders in headwater streams with different baseflow alkalinity. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 13: 345-356.

  • Guiasu, R.C. and D.W. Dunham. 1999. Aggressive interactions between teh crayfishes Cambarus bartonii bartonii and C. robustus (Decapoda: Cambaridae): Interspecific and intraspecific contests. Journal of Crustacean Biology 19(1):131-146.

  • Guiasu, R.C., D.W. Dunha, and D.W. Barr. 1996. Interspecific agonistic contests between male Cambarus bartonii bartonii (Fabricius 1798) and Cambarus robustus Girard 1852 (Decapoda,Cambaridae) crayfish and the possible competition between the two species in Ontario. Freshwater Crayfish 11: 364-377.

  • Hamr, P. and M. Berrill. 1985. The life histories of north-temperate populations of the crayfish Cambarus robustus and Cambarus bartoni. Canadian Journal of Zoology 63:2313-2332.

  • Hobbs, H.H., Jr. 1989. An illustrated checklist of the American crayfishes (Decapoda: Astacidae, Cambaridae, and Parastacidae). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 480:1-236.

  • Hobbs, Horton. H. Jr. 1989. An Illustrated Checklist of the American crayfishes (Decapoda: Astacidae, Cambaridae & Parastacidae). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 480. Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington, D. C. 236 pp.

  • Hobbs, Jr., H. H. 1976a. Crayfishes (Astacidae) of North and Middle America. Biological Methods Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio. 173 pp.

  • Horowitz, R.and C. Flinders. 2004. Development of a Headwater IBI for New Jersey Upland Streams. Final Report Patrick Center Project #869, prepared for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton, New Jersey; and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Edison, New Jersy, 30 November 2004.

  • Huryn A.D. and J.B. Wallace. 1987. Production and litter processing by crayfish in an Appalachian mountain stream. Freshwater Biology 18:277-286.

  • Jezerinac, R.F. 1985. Morphological variations of Cambarus (Cambarus) bartonii cavatus (Decapoda: Cambaridae) from Ohio, with a diagnosis of the Ohio form. Ohio Journal of Science 85:131-134.

  • Jezerinac, R.F. and R.F. Thoma. 1984. An illustrated key to the Ohio Cambarus and Fallicambarus (Decapoda: Cambaridae) with comments and a new subspecies record. Ohio Journal of Science, 84: 120-125.

  • Kart, J., R. Regan, S.R. Darling, C. Alexander, K. Cox, M. Ferguson, S. Parren, K. Royar, B. Popp (eds.). 2005. Vermont's Wildlife Action Plan. Vermont Fish & Wildlife Department. Waterbury, Vermont. Available: http://www.vtfishandwildlife.com

  • Kilian, J.V., A.J. Becker, S.A. Stranko, M. Ashton, R.J. Klauda, J. Gerber, and M. Hurd. 2010. The status and distribution of Maryland crayfishes. Southeastern Naturalist 9 (special issue 3):11-32.

  • Loughman, Z.J. and S.A. Welsh. 2010. Distribution and conservation standing of West Virginia crayfishes. Southeastern Naturalist 9 (special issue 3):63-78.

  • McLaughlin, P.A., D.K. Camp, M.V. Angel, E.L. Bousfield, P. Brunel, R.C. Brusca, D. Cadien, A.C. Cohen, K. Conlan, L.G. Eldredge, D.L. Felder, J.W. Goy, T. Haney, B. Hann, R.W. Heard, E.A. Hendrycks, H.H. Hobbs III, J.R. Holsinger, B. Kensley, D.R. Laubitz, S.E. LeCroy, R. Lemaitre, R.F. Maddocks, J.W. Martin, P. Mikkelsen, E. Nelson, W.A. Newman, R.M. Overstreet, W.J. Poly, W.W. Price, J.W. Reid, A. Robertson, D.C. Rogers, A. Ross, M. Schotte, F. Schram, C. Shih, L. Watling, G.D.F. Wilson, and D.D. Turgeon. 2005. Common and scientific names of aquatic invertebrates from the United States and Canada: Crustaceans. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 31: 545 pp.

  • Mirarchi, R.E., M.A. Bailey, J.T. Garner, T.M. Haggerty, T.L. Best, M.F. Mettee, and P. O'Neil. 2004d. Alabama Wildlife. Volume Four: Conservation and Management Recommendations for Imperiled Wildlife. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 221 pp.

  • Norden, A.W. 2008. Biological diversity of Plummers Isalnd, Maryland: the crayfishes and their entocytherid ostracod associates. Bulletin of the Biological Society of Washington, 15: 49-51.

  • Peake, D.R., G.J. Pond, and S.E. McMurray. 2004. Development of tolerance values for Kentucky crayfishes. Report to the Kentucky Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet, Department for Environmental Protection, Division of Water, Frankfurt, Kentucky. 30 pp.

  • Reeves, W.K., J.B. Jensen, and J.C. Ozier. 2000. New faunal and fungal records from caves in Georgia, USA. Journal of Cave and Karst Studies 62(3): 169-179.

  • Seiler, S.M. and A.M. Turner. 2004. Growth and population size of crayfish in headwater streams: Individual- and higher level consequences of acidification. Freshwater Biology 49:870-881.

  • Simmons, J.W. and S.J. Fraley. 2010. Distribution, status, and life-history observations of crayfishes in western North Carolina. Southeastern Naturalist 9 (special issue 3):79-126.

  • Smith, D.G. 1979. New locality records of crayfishes from the middle Hudson River system. Ohio Journal of Science, 79(3): 133-135.

  • Smith, D.G. 2000a. Keys to the Freshwater Macroinvertebrates of Southern New England. Douglas G. Smith: Sunderland, Massachusetts. 243 pp.

  • Taylor, C.A. and G.A. Schuster. 2004. The Crayfishes of Kentucky. Illinois Natural History Survey Special Publication, 28: viii + 210 pp.

  • Taylor, C.A., G.A. Schuster, J.E. Cooper, R.J. DiStefano, A.G. Eversole, P. Hamr, H.H. Hobbs III, H.W. Robison, C.E. Skelton, and R.F. Thoma. 2007. A reassessment of the conservation status of crayfishes of the United States and Canada after 10+ years of increased awareness. Fisheries 32(8):371-389.

  • Thoma, R.F. and R.E. Jezerinac. 2000. Ohio crayfish and shrimp atlas. Ohio Biological Survey Miscellaneous Contribution 7:1-28.

  • Woodall, W. and J.B. Wallace. 1972. The benthic fauna in four small southern Appalachian streams. American Midland Naturalist 88:393-407.

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of March 2018.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2018 NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Dr., 7th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22203, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2018. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.