Cicindela ancocisconensis - T.W. Harris, 1852
Appalachian Tiger Beetle
Other English Common Names: Appalachian tiger beetle
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Cicindela ancocisconensis T. W. Harris, 1852 (TSN 697670)
French Common Names: cicindèle des Appalaches
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.109437
Element Code: IICOL02070
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Invertebrates - Insects - Beetles - Other Beetles
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Mandibulata Insecta Coleoptera Carabidae Cicindela
Genus Size: D - Medium to large genus (21+ species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Freitag, R. P. 1999. Catalogue of the tiger beetles of Canada and the United States. National Research Council Research Press, Ottawa, Canada. 195 pp.
Concept Reference Code: B99FRE01EHUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Cicindela ancocisconensis
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G3
Global Status Last Reviewed: 02Aug2016
Global Status Last Changed: 01Sep1997
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G3 - Vulnerable
Reasons: Spotty in most or all of range, habitat specialist, decline in much of range, but not as severely in West Virginia, although not a lot of occurrences there. Probably between 20 and 100 populations or metapopulations extant from Quebec to at least North Carolina, but not clear how many could be considered viable. Has declined to some extent in New England. A state rank of S1S3 indicates substantial uncertainty as to severity of decline in New Hampshire which is a major core area of the range and the species is extirpated in Massachusetts. While some good metapopulations still exist, for example in West Virginia, this species is at least globally uncommon, has declined greatly and may still be declining, but is not now imminently imperiled.
Nation: United States
National Status: N3 (01Sep1997)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N3 (18Nov2016)

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 Georgia (SNR), Illinois (SNR), Indiana (SNR), Kentucky (S3), Maine (SNR), Maryland (S1), Massachusetts (SX), New Hampshire (S1S3), New Jersey (SNR), New York (S2), North Carolina (S1S2), Ohio (S1), Pennsylvania (S1), Tennessee (S2), Vermont (S1), Virginia (S2), West Virginia (S3)
Canada New Brunswick (S2), Quebec (S3)

Other Statuses

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: Gaspe region of Quebec through western Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, west in the Ohio Valley formerly to Indiana (Pearson et al. (1997) and maybe Illinois; also south in a narrow band in the mountains from western Maryland along the border of the Virginias through far western North Carolina barely into Georgia. Extirpated from Massachusetts, Indiana, possibly Ohio. Records are remarkably concentrated in the White Mountains and adjacent parts of new England and slightly over th border into Quebec.

Area of Occupancy: 21-2,000 1-km2 grid cells
Area of Occupancy Comments:  

Number of Occurrences: 21 - 300
Number of Occurrences Comments: Approximately 50+ occurrences have been documented, but many of these are not extant. However it is likely others remain to be discovered. Probably over 20 extant and maybe over 100.

Population Size: Unknown
Population Size Comments: Generally reported as uncommon and less numerous than associated species, but no estimates. Sometimes more than 100 are seen at a time.

Number of Occurrences with Good Viability/Integrity: Very few to some (1-40)

Overall Threat Impact: High
Overall Threat Impact Comments: The usual threats for fragmented riparian species. Isolation of some populations, dams, disruption of normal processes that create or maintain habitat, possibly in some cases small populations and/or very small areas of occupancy. The species is reported to somehow survive even major floods, although floods can both destroy and create habitat. Uncertainty especially about the scope of threats.

Short-term Trend: Decline of <30% to relatively stable
Short-term Trend Comments: Said to be declining over much of range but not in West Virginia (Acciavati et al., 1992). Actually it is not clear the species is still declining now but it certainly has in the past.

Long-term Trend: Decline of 30-70%
Long-term Trend Comments: See Knisley and Schultz (1997) and more recent references for details. This species has declined in overall slightly to moderately in extent of range, and more substantially in number of individuals and area of occupancy, even in New England.

Intrinsic Vulnerability: Moderately vulnerable
Intrinsic Vulnerability Comments: Habitat is intrinsically unstable due to natural flooding and low water periods, and made more unstable, or in some cases deteriorating, by dams etc. As with other tiger beetles survival may be substantial if inundation is only for a few days and the habitat is not physically demolished. Long term inundation would eradicate an occurrence. Floods surely kill a lot of individuals but occurrences generally survive them. However this could be jeopardized by either low areas of occupancy or small numbers. Acciavatti et al., 1992 report an instance where this species survived, and may have benefited from, a "devastating flood". Thus flooding of known sites should not be assumed to eradicate them. River dynamics may be an important habitat factor.

Environmental Specificity: Narrow. Specialist or community with key requirements common.
Environmental Specificity Comments: Almost entirely along rivers in gravel and sand but somewhat variable as to exact microhabitat. Found in shaded wooded regions.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Inventory Needs: Additional surveys needed throughout the species' range. Many potentially suitable rivers have not been checked.

Protection Needs: Sites with A-ranked occurrences should be protected by fee simple acquisition or conservation easements.

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)) Gaspe region of Quebec through western Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, west in the Ohio Valley formerly to Indiana (Pearson et al. (1997) and maybe Illinois; also south in a narrow band in the mountains from western Maryland along the border of the Virginias through far western North Carolina barely into Georgia. Extirpated from Massachusetts, Indiana, possibly Ohio. Records are remarkably concentrated in the White Mountains and adjacent parts of new England and slightly over th border into Quebec.

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.

Map unavailable!:
Distribution data for U.S. states and Canadian provinces is known to be incomplete or has not been reviewed for this taxon.
Endemism: occurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States GA, IL, IN, KY, MAextirpated, MD, ME, NC, NH, NJ, NY, OH, PA, TN, VA, VT, WV
Canada NB, QC

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
MD Allegany (24001), Washington (24043)
NH Coos (33007), Grafton (33009)
NY Allegany (36003), Cattaraugus (36009), Erie (36029), Essex (36031), Greene (36039), Hamilton (36041), Livingston (36051), Sullivan (36105), Ulster (36111), Warren (36113), Wyoming (36121)
OH Lake (39085)
PA Centre (42027)*, Mifflin (42087)*
VA Alleghany (51005), Augusta (51015), Bath (51017), Buchanan (51027), Dickenson (51051), Highland (51091)
VT Windham (50025), Windsor (50027)
WV Barbour (54001), Fayette (54019), Grant (54023), Greenbrier (54025), Hampshire (54027), McDowell (54047), Mercer (54055), Monongalia (54061), Pocahontas (54075), Preston (54077), Raleigh (54081), Randolph (54083), Tucker (54093), Webster (54101)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
01 Pemigewasset (01070001)+, Waits (01080103)+, White (01080105)+, West (01080107)+
02 Upper Hudson (02020001)+, Sacandaga (02020002)+, Schoharie (02020005)+, Middle Hudson (02020006)+, East Branch Delaware (02040102)+, Middle Delaware-Mongaup-Brodhead (02040104)+, Lower Susquehanna-Penns (02050301)+*, South Branch Potomac (02070001)+, Cacapon-Town (02070003)+, South Fork Shenandoah (02070005)+, Upper James (02080201)+
04 Grand (04110004)+, Cattaraugus (04120102)+, Buffalo-Eighteenmile (04120103)+, Upper Genesee (04130002)+, Ausable River (04150404)+
05 Tygart Valley (05020001)+, Upper Monongahela (05020003)+, Cheat (05020004)+, Middle New (05050002)+, Greenbrier (05050003)+, Lower New (05050004)+, Elk (05050007)+, Tug (05070201)+, Upper Levisa (05070202)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Basic Description: a riparian tiger beetle
Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Palustrine Habitat(s): Riparian
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Sand/dune
Special Habitat Factors: Burrowing in or using soil
Habitat Comments: Habitat specialist. Prefers open sand or a matrix of sand and cobble along permanent streams or medium-sized rivers. Usually found along rocky mountain streams and small rivers in partially shaded areas such as sand banks and sand bars Has been occasionally reported along roads etc. Apparently prefers to breed in sandy loam and adults are usually on sandy patches but have been reported on clay. Most often near water's edge but adults do wander. Habitats may be grassy. See Leonard and Bell (1999) and Knisley and Schultz (1997).
Adult Food Habits: Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Invertivore
Adult Phenology: Diurnal
Immature Phenology: Hibernates/aestivates
Phenology Comments: Adults are most often found in June at least in New England. Apparently a fall-spring species emerging in late July to September, hibernating and reappearing in late April to June and then declining in midsummer. Sometimes cannot be found in late season where it was present in spring suggesting adults may not always be active in fall. Believed to have a two year life cycle southward and three northward so larvae will always be present in their burrows at any season.
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Biological Research Needs: Mark-recapture studies to determine 1) population dynamics and 2) degree of interchange between habitat patches within the same drainage.
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Cicindelidae: Riparian Taxa

Use Class: Not applicable
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: An area of sand or other appropriate substrate, for high quality occurrences generally a cluster of several such areas, along a river or stream or occasionally ditch or some sort of embankment where a colony occurs with potential for persistence or regular recurrence. Minimally a collection or photograph of an adult associated with a habitat patch. Single isolated colonies should not be ranked higher than C and high quality occurrences will be clusters of several such colonies along a river or stream.
Mapping Guidance: Before trying to map an occurrence for any species consult the habitat comments field and relevant literature such as Freitag (1999), Knisley and Schultz (1997), Larochelle and Lariviere, 2001, and Leonard and Bell (1999) and if necessary the original references in them to determine the precise species-specific habitat parameters such as soil type, vegetation cover etc.
Separation Barriers: Possibly dams, rip-raps, groins etc. but for now it is suggested the disturbances they create be treated as unsuitable habitat unless direct observations show them to be barriers. Some adults should be able to move over or around them, especially during low water periods when unvegetated areas are exposed.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Justification: It is obvious that long term viable occurrences of these taxa are generally metapopulations, although possible that some large single site occurrences are viable for the long term if the habitat is fairly stable. This would be virtually forced by the dynamic nature of the habitat. Local extirpations and colonizations are presumed to have been normal and persistence may be unlikely (or more often failed to occur) once population dynamics are disrupted. While it seems obvious that dispersal of adults several kilometers along a riparian corridor would have originally be common, there are no direct data on how far adults travel--in part because populations that have been well studied (e.g. along the Connecticut River) are already severely disrupted. However it is known that C. D. DORSALIS adults have a very open population structure and move more than 20 kilometers around the Chesapeake Bay and apparently at least two other shore species and two non-shore species, C. TOGATA and C. HEAMORRHAGICA,, are apparently much more dispersive (Pearson et al., 1997). It is assumed that riparian species must be comparably dispersive--and actually C. TOGATA is probably somewhat riparian.
As with most tiger beetles it makes no sense to treat every little colony as a separate occurrence, especially considering the dynamic nature of riparian habitats including the potential for floods to greatly alter and create habitat.. These should be clustered into more defensible metapopulations. Some local extirpation and colonization is probably normal. In most cases the suitable habitat distance should be applied along stream or river banks. However, impoundments behind substantial dams (not the typical little 18th century New England mill pond), extensive rip-raps, groins etc. are suggested as unsuitable habitat even for dispersal. Knisley and Schultz (1997) suggest they could even be barriers. The suitable habitat distance is arbitrary but is less than half the distance known to be traveled by adult C. DORSALIS which seems to be among the more sedentary of the littoral species (the most similar group with data) and seems reasonable for tiger beetles in general since they clearly colonize over at least a few kilometers rather easily.

Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): .5 km
Inferred Minimum Extent Justification: Inferred extent is extremely problematic, and while this seems unrealistic there is usually no choice but to confine it to the immediate location pending further exploration. It does seem reasonable that if the observer notes very similar habitat within half a kilometer up or down stream that it be included. Occurrences of most or all taxa originally often, if not always, extended for many kilometers and adults are good fliers. Now however, much potential suitable habitat is really unsuitable due to factors such as flood control practices, ORV use, heavy trampling by people or livestock. There are also natural unknowns and mappers/observers may not really understand the exact habitat needs. So if the inferred extent would matter, the only reasonable course of action is to do field work to establish boundaries--ideally based on larvae as well as adults.
Date: 06Dec2001
Author: Schweitzer, Dale F.
Notes: C. PURITANA is included with some reservation. These Specs should be workable (but the distances may be somewhat exceeded for practical reasons) on the Connecticut River, but probably not on its other occurrence on Chesapeake Bay.
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: 31May2007
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Schweitzer, D.F., Fichtel, C.
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 13Dec2000
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): SCHWEITZER, D.F.

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

References
Help
  • Acciavatti, R. E, Allen, T. J., and Stuart, C. 1992. The West Virginia Tiger Beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Cicindela 24(3-4): 45-78.

  • Acciavatti, R.E., T.J Allen and C. Stuart. 1992. The West Virginia tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Cicindela 24(3/4):45-77.

  • Acciavetti, Robert E., Thomas J. Allen and Claire Stuart, 1992. The West Virginia tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Cicindela 24(3-4): 45-78.

  • Allen, T. J., and R. E. Acciavatti. 2002. Tiger beetles of West Virginia. West Virginia Department of Natural Resources, Charleston. 31 pp.

  • BOYD, H. 1978. THE TIGER BEETLES (COLEOPTERA: CICINDELIDAE) OF NEW JERSEY WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THEIR ECOLOGICAL RELATIONSHIPS. TRANS. AMER. ENT. SOC. 104:191-242.

  • Beaton, G. 2008. Notes on tiger beetle distributions in the state of Georgia, U.S.A., with new county records (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Coleoptera 40(3):37-45.

  • Bousquet, Y. 2012. Catalogue of Geadephaga (Coleoptera, Adephaga) of America, north of Mexico. ZooKeys 245:1-1722.

  • Bousquet, Y., P. Bouchard, A.E. Davies, and D.S. Sikes. 2013. Checklist of beetles (Coleoptera) of Canada and Alaska, second edition. Pensoft Series Faunistica No 109.

  • Davis, C. 1998. Printed e-mail communication of 9 April to Jim McCann regarding surveys for Cicindela ancocisconensis at Sideling Hill Creek.

  • Dunn, G. 1981. The tiger beetles of New Hampshire. Cicindela 13(1/2):1-28.

  • Dunn, G.A. 1981. Tiger beetles of New Hampshire. Cicindela 13(1/2):1-28.

  • Dunn, Gary A., 1979. A New Hampshire population of CICINDELA ANCOCISCONENSIS exhibiting reduced alytral maculation. Cicindela 11(4): 61-64.

  • Dunn, Gary. 1981. Tiger Beetles of New Hampshire. Cicindela: 13(1/2):1, Mar/June.

  • Freitag, R. P. 1999. Catalogue of the tiger beetles of Canada and the United States. National Research Council Research Press, Ottawa, Canada. 195 pp.

  • GLASER, J.D. 1984. THE CICINDELIDAE (COLEOPTERA) OF MARYLAND. MARYLAND ENTOMOLOGIST 2(4):65-76.

  • GLASER, J.D. 1992. CICINDELA ANCOCISCONENSIS HARRIS (COLEOPTERA:CICINDELIDAE) IN MARYLAND.

  • Glaser, J.D. 1999. Package of misc notes and maps, including specimen data and other info.

  • Gordon, W.M. 1939. The Cicindelidae of New York with reference to their ecology. M.S. thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. 136 pp.

  • Graves, R.C. and D.W. Brzoska. 1991. The tiger beetles of Ohio (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Ohio Biol. Surv. Bull. New Series 8(4):1-42.

  • Knisley, C. B. and T. Koenig. 1994. A Survey of Sideling Hill Creek for the Tiger Beetle, Cicindela ancocisconensis, 1994. A report submitted on Novermer 15, 1994 to MDNHP. 4pp + 2 maps and 1 field form

  • Knisley, C.B. 1998. Written comments on draft of McCann's Cicindelid inventory, research & monitoring priorities for next 3-5 yrs.

  • Knisley, C.B. and T.D. Schultz. 1997. The Biology of Tiger Beetles and a Guide to the Species of the South Atlantic States. Virginia Museum of Natural History Special Publication Number 5. Virginia Museum of Natural History: Martinsville, Virginia. 210 pp.

  • Knisley, C.B. and T.D. Schultz. 1997. The biology of tiger beetles and a guide to the species of the South Atlantic states. VA Museum of Nat. Hist. Special Pub. No. 5.

  • Knisley, C.B. and T.D. Schultz. 1997. The biology of tiger beetles and a guide to the species of the south Atlantic States. Virginia Mus. of Nat. Hist. special publication number 5.

  • Knisley, C.B., D.W. Brzoska and J.R. Schrock. 1987. Distribution, checklist and key to adult tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae) of Indiana. Proc. Ind. Acad. Sci. 97:279-294.

  • LaRochelle, A. 1986. Cicindelidae from New England in the Museum of Comparative Zoology. Cicindela 18(4):59-63.

  • Larochelle, A. 1986. A concise bibliography on the geographical distribution of the Cicindelidae of North America north of Mexico. Cicindela 18(2):17-32.

  • Leonard, J.G. and R.T. Bell, 1999. Northeastern Tiger Beetles: A Field Guide to Tiger Beetles of New England and Eastern Canada. CRC Press: Boca Raton, Florida. 176 pp.

  • Leonard, J.G. and R.T. Bell. 1999. Northeastern Tiger Beetles: A field guide to tiger beetles of New England and Eastern Canada. CRC Press, New York.

  • Leonard, J.G. and R.T. Bell. 1999. Northeastern tiger Beetles: A Field Guide to tiger Beetles of New England and Eastern Canada. CRC Press. NY, NY. 176 pp.

  • Mawdsley, J.R. 2007. An Adirondack record of Cicindela ancocisconensis T. W. Harris (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Cicindela 39(3-4):59-60.

  • Nelson, Robert E and James R. LeBonte, 1989. Rediscovery of CICINDELA ANCOCISCONENSIS T. W. Harris and first records for C. SCUTELLARIS LECONTEI Haldeman in Maine. Cicindela 21(3-4): 49-54.

  • New York Natural Heritage Program. 2006. Biotics Database. Albany, NY.

  • Pearson, D. L., C. B. Knisley and C. J. Kazilek. 2006. A field guide to the tiger beetles of the United States and Canada: identification, natural history, and distribution of the Cicindelidae. Oxford University Press, New York, New York. 227 pp.

  • Pearson, D.L. 2004. A list of suggested common English names for species of tiger beetles occurring in Canada and the U.S. Cicindela 36(1-2):31-40.

  • Pearson, D.L., C.B. Knisley, D.P. Duran, and C.J. Kazilek. 2015. A field guide to the tiger beetles of the United States and Canada: identification, natural history, and distribution of the Cicindelinae. Oxford University Press, New York, New York. 251 pp.

  • Pearson, D.L., C.B. Knisley, and C.J. Kazilek. 2006. A field guide to the tiger beetles of the United States and Canada. Oxford University Press. NY, NY. 227 pp.

  • Pearson, D.L., T. G. Barraclough, and A.P. Vogler. 1997. Distributional range maps for North American species of tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Cicindela, 29(3-4): 33-84. Available online: http://www.bio.ic.ac.uk/research/tigerb/rangepaper.htm.

  • Pearson, D.L., T.G. Barraclough and A.P. Vogler. 1997. Distributional maps for North American species of tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Cicindela 29(3-4):33-84.

  • Wilson, D. A., and A. E. Brower. 1983. The Cicindelidae of Maine. Cicindela 15: 1-33.

  • Wilson, D. A., and A. LaRochelle. 1979. CICINDELA ANCOCISCOENSIS T.W. Harris. Cicindela 11(3):33-48.

  • Wilson, D.A. 1979. Cicindela ancocisconensis T. W. Harris. Cicindela 11:33-48.

  • Wilson, D.A. 1979. Cicindela ancocisconensis T.W. Harris. Cicindela 11(3):33-48.

  • Wilson, D.A. 1983. The Cicindelidae of Maine. Cicindela 15(1-4):1-33.

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 2019.
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 © 2019 NatureServe, 2511 Richmond (Jefferson Davis) Highway, Suite 930, Arlington, VA 22202, 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. 2019. 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.