Galba obrussa - (Say, 1825)
Golden Fossaria
Synonym(s): Fossaria obrussa (Say, 1825)
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Fossaria obrussa (Say, 1825) (TSN 76504)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.117321
Element Code: IMGASL1120
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Invertebrates - Mollusks - Freshwater Snails
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Mollusca Gastropoda Basommatophora Lymnaeidae Galba
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Turgeon, D.D., J.F. Quinn, Jr., A.E. Bogan, E.V. Coan, F.G. Hochberg, W.G. Lyons, P.M. Mikkelsen, R.J. Neves, C.F.E. Roper, G. Rosenberg, B. Roth, A. Scheltema, F.G. Thompson, M. Vecchione, and J.D. Williams. 1998. Common and scientific names of aquatic invertebrates from the United States and Canada: Mollusks. 2nd Edition. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 26, Bethesda, Maryland: 526 pp.
Concept Reference Code: B98TUR01EHUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Fossaria obrussa
Taxonomic Comments: Fossaria Westerlund, 1985 is a junior objective synonym of Galba Schrank, 1903, based on ICZN Opinion 1896 (ICZN 1998). All species previously recognized as Fossaria are now in genus Galba following Johnson et al. (2013). Dillon et al. (2013) follows Hubendick (1951) in considering this species to be a junior synonym of Lymnaea (Fossaria) humilis based on observational similarity. Burch (1989) follows Baker (1928) in recognizing obrussa, exigua, modicella, peninsulae, and rustica in the Fossaria obrussa group.

Lymnaeids are the most diverse pulmonate group in the northern United States and Canada (Pyron and Brown 2014). Taxonomy is confusing, with redundancies in nomenclature and constant revisions in species definitions (Standley et al. 2013). Burch (1989) recognized 55 species in seven genera, while Hubendick (1951) recognized 13 species and placed them all in the genus Lymnaea. Based on analyses of three species of Galba in Argentina, Standley et al. (2013) cited the need to combine molecular, morphological, and ecological variables to develop a solid taxonomic framework.
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 06Mar2015
Global Status Last Changed: 14Sep1999
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by calculator
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Reasons: This species is ranked secure because it has a wide distribution, presumed large population, occurrence in a number of protected areas, tolerance of a broad range of habitats, tolerance to habitat modification, lack of substantial immediate threats, and is unlikely to be declining fast enough to qualify for listing in a more threatened category. However, the taxonomy of these snails remains largely unresolved.
Nation: United States
National Status: N5 (14Sep1999)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N3N4 (28Jul2004)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
United States Alabama (S5), Alaska (SNR), Arizona (SNR), Arkansas (SNR), California (SNR), Colorado (S5), Connecticut (SU), Delaware (SNR), Georgia (SU), Idaho (SNR), Illinois (SNR), Indiana (SNR), Iowa (SNR), Kansas (SNR), Kentucky (SNR), Louisiana (SNR), Maine (SNR), Maryland (SNR), Massachusetts (S5), Michigan (SNR), Minnesota (SNR), Mississippi (SNR), Missouri (S2), Montana (SNR), Nebraska (SNR), Nevada (SNR), New Hampshire (SNR), New Jersey (SNR), New Mexico (SNR), New York (S4), North Carolina (SU), North Dakota (SNR), Ohio (SNR), Oklahoma (S4?), Oregon (S3), Pennsylvania (S5), Rhode Island (SNR), South Carolina (SNR), South Dakota (SNR), Tennessee (S5?), Texas (SNR), Utah (S4S5), Vermont (SNR), Virginia (S5), Washington (SNR), West Virginia (SNR), Wyoming (S3)
Canada Manitoba (SNR), Northwest Territories (SNR), Nunavut (SU), Saskatchewan (SNR)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent: >2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments: Range is from the Atlantic to Pacific Oceans, and from Mackenzie Territory, Canada, south to Arizona and northern Mexico (Burch, 1989).

Number of Occurrences: > 300
Number of Occurrences Comments: This species is represented by a large number of occurrences (subpopulations). A survey of aquatic snails in the St. Croix National Scenic Riverway (Minnesota) in 2004 found this species at five out of 66 sampled locations. The sampled locations included a wide variety of habitats and a diversity of substrates (Malizio et al. 2004).

Population Size: >1,000,000 individuals

Number of Occurrences with Good Viability/Integrity: Unknown

Overall Threat Impact: Low
Overall Threat Impact Comments: Given the large geographic distribution of this species, it is unlikely that any major threat is impacting its global population. However, some sub-populations may be experiencing localized declines due to habitat loss and degradation. Some populations in northern Wisconsin lakes have been impacted by introduced populations of the invasive Rusty Crayfish, Orconectes rusticus (Kreps et al. 2012).

Short-term Trend: Relatively Stable (<=10% change)
Short-term Trend Comments: Pip (2000) was unable to find this species in Manitoba in recent surveys despite historical presence in similar surveys in 1975-1978.

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

Intrinsic Vulnerability: Not intrinsically vulnerable

Environmental Specificity: Broad. Generalist or community with all key requirements common.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)) Range is from the Atlantic to Pacific Oceans, and from Mackenzie Territory, Canada, south to Arizona and northern Mexico (Burch, 1989).

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces
Color legend for Distribution Map
Endemism: occurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AK, AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, GA, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WV, WY
Canada MB, NT, NU, SK

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
AZ Coconino (04005)
ID Bannock (16005), Bear Lake (16007)*, Blaine (16013)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
15 Lower Colorado-Marble Canyon (15010001)+
16 Bear Lake (16010201)+*
17 Portneuf (17040208)+, Little Wood (17040221)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Habitat Type: Freshwater
Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Lacustrine Habitat(s): Shallow water
Palustrine Habitat(s): TEMPORARY POOL
Habitat Comments: This species is found in both perennial lakes and vernal ponds with a mud substrate and macrophytes (Burch 1989, O'Neal and Soulliere 2006).
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Freshwater Snails

Use Class: Not applicable
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Occurrences are based on some evidence of historical or current presence of single or multiple specimens, including live specimens or recently dead shells (i.e., soft tissue still attached without signs of external weathering or staining), at a given location with potentially recurring existence. Weathered shells constitute a historic occurrence. Evidence is derived from reliable published observation or collection data; unpublished, though documented (i.e. government or agency reports, web sites, etc.) observation or collection data; or museum specimen information.
Mapping Guidance: Unlike most freshwater mussels [possibly excepting Uniomerus tetralasmus (Say, 1831) (see Isley, 1914)], some freshwater pulmonates are able to survive in intermittent streams and ponds by settling into sediment on the bottom and aestivating in otherwise dry or frozen conditions. Some species (e.g. Stagnicola spp.) may form a sheet of mucus just within the aperture called an epiphragm that effectively seals the snail from harsh external conditions (Jokinen, 1978; Brown, 1991). For ephemeral or intermittent water species, it may be particularly difficult to define the limits of an occurrence. Movement out of the water for the purposes of aestivation is on the order of cm (Jokinen, 1978), not m or km, so this behavior should not affect separation distance between occurrences. Species that may be found in intermittent waters include: Aplexa elongata, Fossaria bulimoides, F. dalli, F. modicella, F. obrussa, F. parva, Gyraulus circumstriatus, G. crista, G. parvus, Laevapex fuscus, Physa vernalis, Physella gyrina, Planorbella campestris, Planorbula armigera, Stagnicola caperata, S. elodes, S. exilis.
Separation Barriers: Separation barriers are largely based on permanent hydrological discontinuity between water bodies, with distances of 30 meters or greater between maximum high water marks constituting a separation barrier. Additional barriers are chemical and/or physical and include any connecting water body (regardless of size) with one or more of the following on a permanent basis: no dissolved calcium content, acidity greater than pH 5, lack of dissolved oxygen, extremely high salinity such as that found in saline lakes and brine waters, or temperature greater than 45

An additional physical barrier, particularly for flowing water, is presence of upland habitat between water connections. High waterfalls and anthropogenic barriers to water flow such as dams are barriers as they limit movement in an upstream direction.

Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 2 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 2 km
Alternate Separation Procedure: Freshwater cave species (mostly prosobranchs) may occur near entrances to very deep in cave systems with specimens occurring on the undersides of small stones in riffle areas (Hershler et al., 1990). For cave species, separation distance cannot often be determined accurately due to varying degrees of accessibility to occupied cave habitat. In these instances, each cave where an observation or collection was recorded (see Minimum EO Criteria, above) constitutes an element occurrence regardless of separation distance. Multiple caves within a single hydrological cave system are each considered separately. Caves with multiple entrances and passages known to be connected, but with connecting passages too small or unsafe for human entry shall be treated as a single element occurrence when the non-negotiable portion of the cave is thought to be less than approximately 300 m linear length. Species known to occur in caves include: Amnicola cora, Antrobia spp., Antrobis spp., Antroselates spp., Dasyscias spp., Fontigens aldrichi, F. antroecetes, F. bottimeri, F. morrisoni, F. nickliniana, F. orolibas, F. prosperpina, F. tartarea, F. turritella, Holsingeria spp., Phreatodrobia spp., Stygopyrgus spp.
Separation Justification: Freshwater snails have adapted to most North American habitats including permanent standing, intermittent, and flowing waters. As a whole, pulmonates (previously Subclass Pulmonata) are better dispersers than prosobranchs (previously Subclass Prosobranchia). Pulmonates adapt better to changing temperature and oxygen concentration, resist desiccation better (use pulmonary respiration, store excreted nitrogen as urea, aestivate), and have faster crawling rates (including righting response and actual movement rate) than prosobranchs (Brown et al., 1998). Some species are more tolerant to adverse habitat conditions such as high pollution levels (e.g. Physella spp.), high altitude [e.g. Acroloxus coloradensis (Henderson, 1930)], underground cave pools and springs (e.g. Fontigens spp., Phreatodrobia spp.) and hot springs (e.g. Pyrgulopsis spp.).

Precise geographic distribution of many American freshwater snails is not known but presumably reflects past geological, geographic, and climatic change (Smith, 1989). Movements between isolated or inaccessible portions of water bodies is possible but dependent on outside, passive processes (e.g. rafting, periodic flooding, transport by vertebrates, introduction by humans). Long-distance dispersal is generally not considered when assigning separation distances as otherwise impracticably large separation distances would result.

Several factors contribute to limiting freshwater snail distribution but none apply across diverse habitats or taxa. Approximately 95% of all freshwater gastropods are restricted to waters with calcium concentrations greater than 3 mg/liter (Brown, 1991; for exceptions see Jokinen, 1983). Calcium uptake for shell construction requires energy expenditure (active transport) when calcium concentration is low, but is passive at higher concentrations (Greenaway, 1971). Typically, no known biotic or abiotic factors consistently limit the abundance or distribution of freshwater gastropods among sites (DeVries et al., 2003). At specific localities, limiting factors may include hardness, acidity, dissolved oxygen, salinity, high temperature, and food availability as associated with depth (Smith, 1989). Most species and the largest populations occur in hard, alkaline waters with normal range 20-180 ppm (Shoup, 1943; Harman, 1974). Snails are uncommon in habitats with surface acidity greater than pH 5 (see also Jokinen, 1983). Dissolved oxygen limits diversity so severely polluted waters (oxygen consumed by algae blooms) are often devoid of freshwater snails excepting pollution tolerant species. Because pulmonates can utilize atmospheric oxygen, they can exist under anaerobic conditions for longer time periods (Harman and Berg, 1971; Harman, 1974; McMahon, 1983). High salinity is limiting to freshwater gastropods and inland saline lakes generally lack an associated snail fauna. Most species (excepting hot springs species) are intolerant of temperatures greater than 45ºC (McDonald, 1969; van der Schalie and Berry, 1973), a condition rarely occurring naturally. Lower temperatures are less limiting as snails have been found foraging in ice-covered waters (Harman and Berg, 1971; Harman, 1974). Most species live in the shallows, (depths less than 3 m) where food abundance is greatest. As a result, drastic water fluctuations (draw-downs) may cause declines in snail populations (Hunt and Jones, 1972).

Any contiguous, occupied stretch of suitable flowing water habitat 2 km long or greater is considered an element occurrence. Two km was chosen based upon the limited active movement capabilities of most benthic invertebrates and observed home range of freshwater snails (J. Cordeiro, personal observation) as well as the relatively short life span of most species (five years for most stream species and two years for most pond species).

Date: 18Oct2004
Author: Cordeiro, J.
Notes: Prosobranchs: Neritidae: Neritina; Viviparidae: Campeloma, Cipangopaludina, Lioplax, Tulotoma, Viviparus; Ampullariidae: Marisa, Pomacea; Pleuroceridae: Elimia, Goniobasis, Gyrotoma, Io, Juga, Leptoxis, Lithasia, Pleurocera; Thiaridae: Melanoides, Tarebia; Bithyniidae: Bithynia; Hydrobiidae: Amnicola, Antrobia, Antrorbis, Antroselates, Aphaostracon, Balconorbis, Birgella, Cincinnatia, Clappia, Cochliopa, Cochliopina, Colligyrus, Dasyscias, Eremopyrgus, Floridiscrobs, Fluminicola, Fontelicella, Fontigens, Gillia, Heleobops, Holsingeria, Hoyia, Hydrobia, Lepyrium, Littoridina, Littoridinops, Lyogyrus, Notogillia, Onobops, Paludina, Phreatoceras, Phreatodrobia, Potamopyrgus, Pristinicola, Probythinella, Pyrgophorus, Pyrgulopsis, Rhapinema, Somatogyrus, Spilochlamys, Spurwinkia, Stiobia, Stygopyrgus, Taylorconcha, Texadina, Texapyrgu, Tryonia; Assimineidae: Assiminea; Pomatiopsidae: Pomatiopsis, Heterostropha; Valvatidae: Valvata
MORE IN BCD EO SPECS NOTES TAB

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: 06Mar2015
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Cordeiro, J. (2008), Ormes, M. (2015)

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

References
Help
  • Andersen, M.D. and B. Heidel. 2011. HUC-based species range maps. Prepared by Wyoming Natural Diversity Database for use in the pilot WISDOM application operational from inception to yet-to-be-determined date of update of tool.

  • Baker, F.C. 1911. The Lymnaeidae of North and Middle America[,] Recent and fossil. Chicago Academy of Sciences, Special Publication No. 3, i-xvi + 1-539, 58 pls

  • Baker, F.C. 1928a. The freshwater Mollusca of Wisconsin: Part I. Gastropoda. Bulletin of the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, Wisconsin Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, 70(2): 1-507.

  • Branson, B.A. and D.L. Batch. 1981. Distributional records for gastropods and sphaeriid clams of the Kentucky and Licking Rivers and Tygarts Creek drainages, Kentucky. Brimleyana, 7: 137-144.

  • Burch, J.B. 1989. North American Freshwater Snails. Malacological Publications: Hamburg, Michigan. 365 pp.

  • Clarke, A.H. 1981a. The freshwater mollusks of Canada. National Museum of Natural Sciences, National Museums of Canada, D. W. Friesen and Sons, Ltd.: Ottawa, Canada. 446 pp.

  • Dillon, R. T., Jr., M. Ashton, M. Kohl, W. Reeves, T. Smith, T. Stewart and B. Watson. 2013. The freshwater gastropods of North America. Online. Available: http://www.fwgna.org.

  • Dillon, R.T., Jr. and E.F. Benfield. 1982. Distribution of pulmonate snails in the New River of Virginia and North Carolina, U.S.A.: interaction between alkalinity and stream drainage area. Freshwater Biology, 12:179-186.

  • Dillon, R.T., Jr. and T.W. Stewart. 2003. The freshwater gastropods of South Carolina. Created 26 August 2003. Last updated September 2007. Available online: http://www.cofc.edu/~fwgna/FWGSC/index.html.

  • Dillon, R.T., Jr., W.K. Reeves, and T.W. Stewart. 2006b [2007]. The freshwater gastropods of Georgia. Created 26 August 2003. Last updated September 2007. Available online: http://www.cofc.edu/~fwgna/FWGGA/index.html.

  • Evans, R.R. and S.J. Ray. 2010. Distribution and environmental influences on freshwater gastropods from lotic systems and springs in Pennsylvania, USA, with conservation recommendations. American Malacological Bulletin 28:135-150.

  • Freeman, P.W. and K. Perkins. 1997. Survey of mollusks of the Niobrara River. Final Report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Grand Island, Nebraska, September 1997. 22 pp.

  • Frest, T.J. and E.J. Johannes. 2000a. An annotated checklist of Idaho land and freshwater mollusks. Journal of the Idaho Academy of Science, 36(2): 1-51.

  • Goodrich, C. and H. van der Schalie. 1944. A revision of the Mollusca of Indiana. The American Midland Naturalist, 32: 257-326.

  • Gordon, M.E. 1985. Mollusca of Frog Bayou, Arkansas. The Nautilus, 99(1): 6-9.

  • Hubendick, B. 1951. Recent Lymnaeidae. Their variation, morphology, taxonomy, nomenclature, and distribution. Kunglica Svenska Vetenskapsakademiens Handlingar Series 4, 3(1): 1-223.

  • International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN). 1998. Opinion 1896. Galba Schrank, 1803 (Mollusca, Gastropoda): Buccinum truncatulum Müller. 1774 designated as the type species. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 55:123.

  • Johnson, P.D., A.E. Bogan, K.M. Brown, N.M. Burkhead, J.R. Cordeiro, J.T. Garner, P.D. Hartfield, D.A.W. Lepitzki, G.L. Mackie, E. Pip, T.A. Tarpley, J.S. Tiemann, N.V. Whelan, and E.E Strong. 2013. Conservation status of freshwater gastropods of Canada and the United States. Fisheries 38(6):247-282.

  • Kreps, T.A., Baldridge, A.K., and Lodge, D.M. 2012. The impact of an invasive predator (Orconectes rusticus) on freshwater snail communities: insights on habitat-specific effects from a multilake long-term study. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 69(7):1164-1173.

  • La Rocque, A. 1962. Checklist of the non-marine Mollusca of Quebec. Sterkiana, 7: 23-44.

  • Malizio, G.M., Karns, B.N., Hove, M., Slaght, J., and Strong, E. 2004. A survey of aquatic snails in the St. Croix National Scenic Riverway: are they native, exotic, invasive or just great bio-indicators? University of Minnesota and U.S. National Park Service. Poster Presentation

  • Mirarchi, R.E., et al. 2004a. Alabama Wildlife. Volume One: A Checklist of Vertebrates and Selected Invertebrates: Aquatic Mollusks, Fishes, Amphibians, Reptiles, Birds, and Mammals. University of Alabama Press: Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 209 pp.

  • Pip, E. 2000. The decline of freshwater molluscs in southern Manitoba. Canadian Field Naturalist 114(4):555-560.

  • Pyron, M. and K.M. Brown. 2014. Introduction to Mollusca and the Class Gastropoda. Pages 381-506 in J.H. Thorp and D.C. Rogers (eds.), Thorp and Covich's freshwater invertebrates: ecology and general biology, 4th edition, volume 1, Academic Press, San Diego, California.

  • Pyron, M., J. Beaugly, E. Martin, and M. Spielman. 2008. Conservation of the freshwater gastropods of Indiana: Historic and current distributions. American Malacological Bulletin, 26: 137-151.

  • Standley, C. J., Prepelitchi, L., Pietrokovsky, S. M., Issia, L., Stothard, J. R., and Wisnivesky-Colli, C. 2013. Molecular characterization of cryptic and sympatric lymnaeid species from the Galba/Fossaria group in Mendoza Province, Northern Patagonia, Argentina. Parasites & vectors 6(1): 304.

  • Stephen, B.J. and V.B. Winkler. 2007. A survey of the freshwater snails of the major ecoregions of South Dakota. Ellipsaria, 9(1): 14-15.

  • Thompson, F.G. 2008. An annotated checklist and bibliography of the land and freshwater snails of Mexico and Central America. Unpublished. Available online: http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/malacology/mexico-central_america_snail_checklist/, 16 June 2008. 903 pp.

  • Turgeon, D.D., J.F. Quinn, Jr., A.E. Bogan, E.V. Coan, F.G. Hochberg, W.G. Lyons, P.M. Mikkelsen, R.J. Neves, C.F.E. Roper, G. Rosenberg, B. Roth, A. Scheltema, F.G. Thompson, M. Vecchione, and J.D. Williams. 1998. Common and scientific names of aquatic invertebrates from the United States and Canada: Mollusks. 2nd Edition. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 26, Bethesda, Maryland: 526 pp.

  • Wu, S.-K., R.D. Oesch, and M.E. Gordon. 1997. Missouri Aquatic Snails. Natural History Series, No. 5. Missouri Department of Conservation: Jefferson, Missouri. 97 pp.

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 November 2016.
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 © 2017 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. 2017. 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.