Oncorhynchus keta - (Walbaum, 1792)
Chum Salmon
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Oncorhynchus keta (Walbaum in Artedi, 1792) (TSN 161976)
French Common Names: saumon kéta
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.103184
Element Code: AFCHA02020
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Fishes - Bony Fishes - Salmon and Trouts
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Actinopterygii Salmoniformes Salmonidae Oncorhynchus
Genus Size: C - Small genus (6-20 species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Robins, C.R., R.M. Bailey, C.E. Bond, J.R. Brooker, E.A. Lachner, R.N. Lea, and W.B. Scott. 1991. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 20. 183 pp.
Concept Reference Code: B91ROB01NAUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Oncorhynchus keta
Taxonomic Comments: Within a region, early run (summer) and late run (fall) chum salmon sometimes are recognized as different stocks (see Salo 1991).

Phylogenetic analysis based on mtDNA data indicates a sister relationship between pink salmon and chum salmon (Domanico and Phillips 1995).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 10May2016
Global Status Last Changed: 12Sep1996
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Nation: United States
National Status: N4N5 (05Sep1996)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N5B,N5N,N5M (27Dec2017)

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 Alaska (S5), California (S1), Nevada (SNA), Oregon (S3?), Washington (S3)
Canada British Columbia (S5), Northwest Territories (SU), Ontario (SNA), Yukon Territory (S4)

Other Statuses

Implied Status under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (USESA): PS
Comments on USESA: Threatened in the U.S.A. (Washington) all naturally spawned summer-run populations in Hood Canal and its tributaries and Olympic Peninsula rivers between Hood Canal and Dungeness Bay (NMFS 1998, 1999) (See Oncorhynchus keta pop. 2, Chum Salmon - Hood Canal Summer Run and Oncorhynchus keta pop. 3, Chum Salmon - Columbia River). In a 90-Day finding on a petition to list the winter-run Puget Sound chum salmon in the Nisqually River system and Chambers Creek as a threatened or endangered evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and to designate critical habitat concurrently with the listing, NMFS (2017) find that the petition does not present substantial information indicating that this ESU qualifies as a ??species?? eligible for listing under the ESA.
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC): Candidate (High) (10Jul2017)

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent Comments: This species has the widest natural range of all the Pacific salmon species. In Asia, the range extends from Korea north to the Arctic Ocean and west along the coast of northern Asia to the Lena River/Laptev Sea. In North America, chum salmon occurred historically from the Sacramento River drainage, California (rarely the San Lorenzo River, southern California), to northwestern Alaska, and east along the arctic coast to the Anderson and Mackenzie rivers, Northwest Territories (Salo 1991). The species is now rare or locally extirpated from southern Oregon southward. Immatures are widely distributed over the North Pacific Ocean. See Frissell (1993) for a map indicating present and former distribution in the Pacific Northwest and California.

Number of Occurrences:  
Number of Occurrences Comments: In a survey of populations in the contiguous U.S., Huntington et al. (1996) identified 20 healthy native stocks, all in Washington. At least 5 stocks have been extirpated (Nehlsen et al. 1991).

Population Size Comments: Total adult population size is unknown but relatively large.

Overall Threat Impact Comments: In jeopardy in Oregon and the Columbia River basin, evidently due to degraded water quality, incidental overharvest, and competition from hatchery fishes in streams (Nehlsen et al. 1991). Nearly extinct in southern coastal Oregon due to overfishing and habitat damage. In the Columbia River basin, reduced primarily by habitat degradation from forest and agricultural practices, urbanization, pollution, and overharvest in mainstem fisheries directed at coho and fall chinook (Nehlsen et al. 1991). In the Washington coast/Puget Sound area, populations in the Duwamish-Green and Elwha rivers generally are very small or extirpated due to habitat loss and degradation (Nehlsen et al. 1991).

Short-term Trend Comments: Trend varies with region. Many stocks in the southern part of the range are declining. Apparently stable at low levels on the north coast of Oregon. In the Columbia River basin, apparently stable at about 0.5% of the historic level (escapement of about 2000 individuals) (Nehlsen et al. 1991). In the Washington coast/Puget Sound area, the Chambers Creek early chum escapement appeared to be rebuilding in the 1980s (Nehlsen et al. 1991). Of 1625 stocks in British Columbia and Yukon, Slaney et al. (1996) categorized 23 as extirpated, 141 as high risk, 12 as moderate risk, 11 as special concern, 966 as unthreatened, and 473 as unknown status. See Frissell (1993) for a map indicating status/trend in different regions. See also NMFS (1998, 1999) for status of federally listed ESUs.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Protection Needs: See Nehlsen et al. (1991) for general protection and management recommendations for anadromous salmonids. See Thomas et al. (1993) for information on habitat management for this and other at-risk fish species in the Pacific Northwest. Waples and Teel (1990) emphasized the importance of monitoring the genetic consequences of the large-scale artificial propagation programs involving Pacific salmon (see also Waples 1990). Meffe (1992) gave reasons why the hatchery approach to recovery ultimately will fail, and he emphasized that overharvest and habitat destruction need to be addressed in a major landscape-level effort.

Distribution
Help
Global Range: This species has the widest natural range of all the Pacific salmon species. In Asia, the range extends from Korea north to the Arctic Ocean and west along the coast of northern Asia to the Lena River/Laptev Sea. In North America, chum salmon occurred historically from the Sacramento River drainage, California (rarely the San Lorenzo River, southern California), to northwestern Alaska, and east along the arctic coast to the Anderson and Mackenzie rivers, Northwest Territories (Salo 1991). The species is now rare or locally extirpated from southern Oregon southward. Immatures are widely distributed over the North Pacific Ocean. See Frissell (1993) for a map indicating present and former distribution in the Pacific Northwest and California.

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 AK, CA, NVexotic, OR, WA
Canada BC, NT, ONexotic, YT

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
AK Prince of Wales-Outer Ketchikan (CA) (02201)
OR Clatsop (41007), Columbia (41009), Lane (41039)*, Lincoln (41041), Multnomah (41051), Tillamook (41057)
WA Clallam (53009)+, Clark (53011)+, Cowlitz (53015)+, Grays Harbor (53027)+, Jefferson (53031)+, King (53033)+, Kitsap (53035)+, Mason (53045)+, Pacific (53049)+, Pierce (53053)+, Skagit (53057)+, Skamania (53059)+, Snohomish (53061)+, Thurston (53067)+, Wahkiakum (53069)+, Whatcom (53073)+
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
17 Middle Columbia-Hood (17070105), Lower Columbia-Sandy (17080001)+, Lower Columbia-Clatskanie (17080003)+, Lower Cowlitz (17080005), Lower Columbia (17080006)+, Yamhill (17090008), Tualatin (17090010), Lower Willamette (17090012)+, Hoh-Quillayute (17100101), Queets-Quinault (17100102), Upper Chehalis (17100103), Lower Chehalis (17100104), Grays Harbor (17100105), Willapa Bay (17100106), Necanicum (17100201)+, Nehalem (17100202)+, Wilson-Trusk-Nestuccu (17100203)+, Siletz-Yaquina (17100204)+, Alsea (17100205)+, Siuslaw (17100206)+, Siltcoos (17100207), Umpqua (17100303), Coos (17100304), Coquille (17100305), Sixes (17100306), Fraser (17110001), Strait of Georgia (17110002), Nooksack (17110004), Upper Skagit (17110005), Sauk (17110006), Lower Skagit (17110007), Stillaguamish (17110008), Skykomish (17110009), Snoqualmie (17110010), Snohomish (17110011), Duwamish (17110013), Puyallup (17110014), Nisqually (17110015), Deschutes (17110016), Skokomish (17110017), Hood Canal (17110018), Puget Sound (17110019), Dungeness-Elwha (17110020), Crescent-Hoko (17110021)
18 Smith (18010101), Mad-Redwood (18010102)*, Lower Eel (18010105)*, South Fork Eel (18010106)*, Mattole (18010107)*, Big-Navarro-Garcia (18010108)*, Gualala-Salmon (18010109)*, Russian (18010110)*, Bodega Bay (18010111)*, Lower Klamath (18010209), Trinity (18010211), Sacramento-Lower Thomes (18020103)*, Sacramento-Stone Corral (18020104)*, Lower Sacramento (18020109)*, Upper Cow-Battle (18020118)*, San Joaquin Delta (18040003)*, Suisun Bay (18050001)*, San Pablo Bay (18050002)*, Tomales-Drake Bays (18050005)*
19 Southeast Mainland (19010101)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed (based on multiple information sources) Help
Ecology & Life History
Help
General Description: Numerous small scales; one dorsal fin plus one adipose fin; no spines in fins; back and tail lack distinct large black spots; first gill arch has 18-28 short, stout, smooth gill rakers; upper side of large individuals is steel-blue, with black speckles; sides silvery; silvery to white belly; tips of caudal, anal, and pectoral fins tinged black in males. Spawning males are dark olive to black on the upper side, with vertical red or dusky bars or blotches on green sides and white-tipped anal and pelvic fins. Spawning females are similar but less distinctly marked. Young have 6-14 narrow, short parr marks on each side. Total length to around 102 cm.
Reproduction Comments: In many areas, chum salmon enter streams in distinct seasonal runs (e.g., summer and fall). In Washington, spawning usually occurs in fall, October-December. In California, spawning has been observed from early August to early February. Spawning adults generally are 2-5 years old, sometimes up to seven years old. Adults die within about a week after spawning. Depending on water temperature, eggs hatch in several months, and the alevins complete yolk absorption within the gravel environment. Fry migrate directly to the sea soon after emergence, with a peak in April-May in Washington, spending relatively little time in fresh water.


Ecology Comments: Transplanting attempts have been unsuccessful outside natural range.
Habitat Type: Freshwater
Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: Y
Long Distance Migrant: Y
Mobility and Migration Comments: Anadromous. Adults return to spawn in areas where they were hatched. Individuals may move up to 2,000 km upstream to spawn in rivers lacking major barriers (Lee et al. 1980).
Marine Habitat(s): Near shore, Pelagic
Estuarine Habitat(s): Bay/sound, River mouth/tidal river
Riverine Habitat(s): BIG RIVER, Low gradient, MEDIUM RIVER, Moderate gradient, Pool, Riffle
Habitat Comments: Chum salmon spend most of their lives (2-7 years, usually 3-5 years) in the ocean. Adults return to spawn in streams where they hatched, sometimes moving up to 2,000 km upstream in rivers lacking major barriers in Alaska and Canada but usually spawning not far from salt water (usually within 100 km). Spawning occurs in gravel riffles in rivers and streams of various sizes. The female digs a redd, or nest, by displacing gravel and making depressions in an area of about 2.25 sq meters (Moyle 1976).
Adult Food Habits: Invertivore, Piscivore
Immature Food Habits: Invertivore, Piscivore
Food Comments: In fresh water juveniles feed on Diptera larvae, diatoms, and cyclops; in salt water they feed on a variety of zoo- plankton. Adults feeds on: polychaetes, pteropods, squid, crustacean larvae, copepods, amphipods, fish (Wydoski and Whitney 1979).
Length: 100 centimeters
Economic Attributes
Help
Economic Comments: An important commercial fish in Alaska and Canada.
Management Summary
Help
Management Requirements: Allendorf et al. (1997) proposed criteria for prioritizing Pacific salmon stocks for conservation; data limitations introduce subjectivity into the process, so expert judgment and peer review should be incorporated into the process.
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Fishes with Anadromous Populations

Use Class: Freshwater
Subtype(s): Rearing & Migration Area, Spawning & Rearing Area
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Occurrences are based on evidence of historical presence, or current and likely recurring presence, at a given location. Such evidence minimally includes collection or reliable observation and documentation of one or more individuals (including eggs and larvae) in appropriate habitat. For anadromous populations, occurrences are based on collection or reliable observation and documentation of one or more spawning adults, redds, other evidence of spawning, or larvae or juveniles in appropriate spawning/rearing habitat.
Mapping Guidance: Conceptually, the occurrence includes the entire freshwater area used by the population, including spawning, rearing, and migration areas. For anadromous populations, an occurrence should extend from the most upstream spawning areas downstream to the ocean. However, it is desirable (and practical) to subdivide this sometimes very large occurrence, sometimes overlapping with many other spaghetti-like occurrences extending down from the upstream spawning areas to the ocean, into separate source features or sub-occurrences, labeled with a feature label that reflects the life history stage in that area. Moreover, it may make practical sense to treat the areas downstream of spawning and/or rearing areas as a mixed element animal assemblage: Freshwater Salmon Migration Corridor. This negates the need to separately map each occurrence down to the ocean from its upstream spawning location. Information about areas with different life-history uses can be generated by using best professional judgment by district or regional fish biologists and may or may not incorporate specific locational information from spawning surveys or other surveys.
Separation Barriers: Dam lacking a suitable fishway; high waterfall; upland habitat that is very unlikely to be submerged even during periods of exceptionally high water (e.g., 100-year flood or 1% flood).
Alternate Separation Procedure: For anadromous populations and migratory populations that have distinct and separate spawning and nonspawning areas, the area used by each population whose spawning area is separated by a gap of at least 10 stream-km from other spawning areas within a stream system is potentially mappable as a distinct occurrence that extends down to the ocean (but see mapping guidance), regardless of whether the spawning areas are in the same or different tributaries.

For other (e.g., nonanadromous) populations in streams, separation distance is 10 stream-km for both suitable and unsuitable habitat. However, if it is known that the same population occupies sites separated by more than 10 km (e.g., this may be common for migratory, nonanadromous populations), those sites should be included within the same occurrence. In lakes, occurrences include all suitable habitat that is presumed to be occupied (based on expert judgment), even if documented collection/observation points are more than 10 km apart. Separate sub-occurrences or source features may usefully document locations of critical spawning areas within a lake.

Separation Justification: The separation distance is arbitrary but was selected to ensure that occurrences are of manageable size but not too small. Because of the difficulty in defining suitable versus unsuitable habitat, especially with respect to dispersal, and to simplify the delineation of occurrences, a single separation distance is used regardless of habitat quality.

"Restricted movement is the norm in populations of stream salmonids during nonmigratory periods," but there is considerable variation in movements within and among species (Rodriguez 2002). Redband trout in Montana had October-December home ranges of 5-377 m, consistent with small movements observed for radio-tagged brook trout and cutthroat trout during fall and winter (Muhlfeld et al. 2001). For nonanadromous populations, little is known about juvenile dispersal (e.g., how far fishes may move between between their embryonic developmental habitat and eventual spawning site).

In summer and fall, radio-tagged cutthroat trout in Strawberry Reservoir in Utah had single-month home ranges that were usually about 3-4 km in maximum length (Baldwin et al. 2002). In the Blackfoot River drainage, Montana, radio-tagged westslope cutthroat trout moved 3-72 km (mean 31 km) to access spawning tributaries (Schmetterling 2001). This indicates that migratory but nonanadromous populations may use extensive areas and that one should not invoke the 10-km separation distance without considering the full extent of the population.

Date: 25Nov2009
Author: Hammerson, G., and L. Master
Notes: This Specs Group comprises fish species that include anadromous populations (may also include nonanadromous populations), such as lampreys, sturgeons, herrings, shads, salmonids, and smelts.

Criteria for marine occurrences (Location Use Class: Marine) have not yet been established. These may not be needed for marine occurrences of species that likely will be dealt with as mixed element assemblages (e.g., Salmonid Marine Concentration Area).

Feature Descriptor Definitions:

Spawning Area: area used for spawning but not for rearing or migration.

Rearing Area: area used for larval/juvenile development but not for spawning or migration.

Migration Corridor: area used for migration but not for rearing or spawning.

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: 21Jan2010
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Hammerson, G.
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 21Jan2010
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): Hammerson, G.

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

References
Help
  • Allendorf, F. W., D. Bayles, D. L. Bottom, K. P. Currens, C. A. Frissell, D. Hankin, J. A. Lichatowich, W. Nehlsen, P. C. Trotter, and T. H. Williams. 1997. Prioritizing Pacific salmon stocks for conservation. Conservation Biology 11:140-152.

  • Berg, D. R. 1995. Riparian silvicultural system design and assessment in the Pacific Northwest Cascade Mountains, USA. Ecological Applications 5:87-96.

  • Domanico, M. J., and R. B. Phillips. 1995. Phylogenetic analysis of Pacific salmon (genus Oncorhynchus) based on mitochondrial DNA sequence data. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 4:366-371.

  • Frissell, C. A. 1993. Topology of extinction and endangerment of native fishes in the Pacific Northwest and California (U.S.A.). Conservation Biology 7(2):342-354.

  • Huntington, C., W. Nehlsen, and J. Bowers. 1996. A survey of healthy native stocks of anadromous salmonids in the Pacific Northwest and California. Fisheries 21(3):6-14.

  • Johnson, O. W., W. S. Grant, R. G. Kope, K. Neely, F. W. Waknitz, and R. S. Waples. 1997. Status review of chum salmon from Washington, Oregon, and California. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-32. 280 pp.

  • La Rivers, I. 1994. Fishes and fisheries of Nevada. University of Nevada Press, Reno. 782 pp.

  • Lee, D. C., and J. Hyman. 1992. The stochastic life-cycle model (SLCM): simulating the population dynamics of anadromous salmonids. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Paper INT-459, Ogden, Utah. 30 pp.

  • Meffe, G. K. 1992. Techno-arrogance and halfway technologies: salmon hatcheries on the Pacific coast of North America. Conservation Biology 6:350-354.

  • Morrow, J.E. 1980. The freshwater fishes of Alaska. Alaska Northwest Publishing Company, Anchorage, AK. 248 pp.

  • Moyle, P. B. 1976a. Inland fishes of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. 405 pp.

  • National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 10 March 1998. Proposed threatened status and designated critical habitat for Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon and Columbia River chum salmon. Federal Register 63(46):11774-11795.

  • National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 25 March 1999. Threatened status for two ESUs of chum salmon in Washington and Oregon. Federal Register 64(57):14508-14517.

  • Nehlsen, W., J. E. Williams, and J. A. Lichatowich. 1991. Pacific salmon at the crossroads: stocks at risk from California, Oregon, Idaho, and Washington. Fisheries 16(2):4-21.

  • Nelson, J. S., E. J. Crossman, H. Espinosa-Perez, L. T. Findley, C. R. Gilbert, R. N. Lea, and J. D. Williams. 2004. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States, Canada, and Mexico. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 29, Bethesda, Maryland. 386 pp.

  • Nielsen, J. L., editor. 1995. Evolution and the aquatic ecosystem: defining unique units in population conservation. American Fisheries Society Symposium 17, Bethesda, Maryland. xii + 435 pp.

  • Page, L. M., H. Espinosa-Pérez, L. T. Findley, C. R. Gilbert, R. N. Lea, N. E. Mandrak, R. L. Mayden, and J. S. Nelson. 2013. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Seventh edition. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 34, Bethesda, Maryland.

  • Page, L. M., and B. M. Burr. 1991. A field guide to freshwater fishes: North America north of Mexico. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts. 432 pp.

  • Page, L. M., and B. M. Burr. 2011. Peterson field guide to freshwater fishes of North America north of Mexico. Second edition. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston. xix + 663 pp.

  • Robins, C.R., R.M. Bailey, C.E. Bond, J.R. Brooker, E.A. Lachner, R.N. Lea, and W.B. Scott. 1991. Common and scientific names of fishes from the United States and Canada. American Fisheries Society, Special Publication 20. 183 pp.

  • Rodriguez, M. A. 2002. Restricted movement in stream fish: the paradigm is complete, not lost. Ecology 83(1):1-13.

  • Salo, E. O. 1991. Life history of chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta). Pages 231-309 in C. Groot and L. Margolis, editors. Pacific salmon life histories. University of British Columbia Press, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. xv + 564 pp.

  • Scott, W. B., and E. J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Bulletin 184. 966 pp.

  • Slaney, T. L., K. D. Hyatt, T. G. Northcote, and R. J. Fielden. 1996. Status of anadromous salmon and trout in British Columbia and Yukon. Fisheries 21(10):20-35.

  • Stearley, R. F. 1992. Historical ecology of Salmoninae, with special reference to Oncorhynchus. Pages 622-658 in R.L. Mayden, editor. Systematics, historical ecology, and North American freshwater fishes. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. xxvi + 969 pp.

  • Thomas, J. W., Ward, J., Raphael, M.G., Anthony, R.G., Forsman, E.D., Gunderson, A.G., Holthausen, R.S., Marcot, B.G., Reeves, G.H., Sedell, J.R. and Solis, D.M. 1993. Viability assessments and management considerations for species associated with late-successional and old-growth forests of the Pacific Northwest. The report of the Scientific Analysis Team. USDA Forest Service, Spotted Owl EIS Team, Portland Oregon. 530 pp.

  • Waples, R. S. 1990a. Conservation genetics of Pacific salmon. II. Effective population size and the rate of loss of genetic variability. Journal of Heredity 81:267-276.

  • Waples, R. S. 1990b. Conservation genetics of Pacific salmon. III. Estimating effective population size. Journal of Heredity 81:277-289.

  • Waples, R. S., and D. J. Teel. 1990. Conservation genetics of Pacific salmon. I. Temporal changes in allele frequency. Conservation Biology 4:144-156.

  • Williams, J. E., J. A. Lichatowich, and W. Nehlsen. 1992b. Declining salmon and steelhead populations: new endangered species concerns for the West. Endangered Species Update 9(4):1-8.

  • Wydoski, R. S., and R. R. Whitney. 1979. Inland fishes of Washington. The University of Washington Press, Seattle. 220 pp.

References for Watershed Distribution Map
  • Lee, D. S., C. R. Gilbert, C. H. Hocutt, R. E. Jenkins, D. E. McAllister, and J. R. Stauffer, Jr. 1980. Atlas of North American freshwater fishes. North Carolina State Museum of Natural History, Raleigh, North Carolina. i-x + 854 pp.

  • Master, L. L. 1996. Synoptic national assessment of comparative risks to biological diversity and landscape types: species distributions. Summary Progress Report submitted to Environmental Protection Agency. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia. 60 pp.

  • Master, L. L. and A. L. Stock. 1998. Synoptic national assessment of comparative risks to biological diversity and landscape types: species distributions. Summary Report submitted to Environmental Protection Agency. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA. 36 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 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.