Peromyscus boylii - (Baird, 1855)
Brush Deermouse
Other English Common Names: Brush Mouse, brush deermouse
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Peromyscus boylii (Baird, 1855) (TSN 180282)
Spanish Common Names: Ratón
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.784076
Element Code: AMAFF03100
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Mammals - Rodents
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Mammalia Rodentia Cricetidae Peromyscus
Genus Size: D - Medium to large genus (21+ species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Bradley, R. D., D. S. Carroll, M. L. Haynie, R. Muñiz Martínez, M. J. Hamilton, and C. W. Kilpatrick. 2004. A new species of Peromyscus from western Mexico. Journal of Mammalogy 85:1184-1193.
Concept Reference Code: A04BRA0100LA
Name Used in Concept Reference: Peromyscus boylii
Taxonomic Comments: Peromyscus schmidlyi of western Mexico formerly was included in P. boylii; it was described as a distinct species by Bradley et al. (2004). Peromyscus attwateri, P. aztecus, P. baetae, P. levipes, P. madrensis, P. sagax, P. simulus, and P. spicilegus formerly were included in P. boylii; Musser and Carleton (in Wilson and Reeder 2005) cited pertinent studies in recgonizing these taxa as distinct species. Peromyscus stephani was included in Peromyscus boylii by Hafner et al. (2001), but Musser and Carleton (in Wilson and Reeder 2005) cited other studies in maintaining P. stephani as a distinct species.

Some taxa previously included as subspecies of P. boylii are now included in other species (e.g., cordillerae and evides in P. aztecas; ambiguus in P. levipes; sacarensis in P. baetae, and penicillatus in P. nasutus (see Musser and Carleton, in Wilson and Reeder 2005).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 08Nov1996
Global Status Last Changed: 08Nov1996
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Nation: United States
National Status: N5 (05Sep1996)

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 Arizona (S5), California (SNR), Colorado (S4), Navajo Nation (S5), Nevada (S3), New Mexico (S5), Oklahoma (S3), Texas (S5), Utah (S4S5)

Other Statuses

IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent Comments: Northern California, southern Nevada, northern Utah, southwestern and southeastern Colorado, and western Oklahoma and northern Texas south through California, Arizona, New Mexico, and western Texas to northern Baja California and through the Sierra Madre Occidental and adjacent Mexican Plateau to Queretaro and western Hidalgo (Musser and Carleton, in Wilson and Reeder 2005). Populations in the Sierra Madre Occidental of Durango, eastern Sinaloa, and possibly northern Nayarit are now recgonized as a distinct species, P. schmidlyi (Bradley et al. 2004).

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: Northern California, southern Nevada, northern Utah, southwestern and southeastern Colorado, and western Oklahoma and northern Texas south through California, Arizona, New Mexico, and western Texas to northern Baja California and through the Sierra Madre Occidental and adjacent Mexican Plateau to Queretaro and western Hidalgo (Musser and Carleton, in Wilson and Reeder 2005). Populations in the Sierra Madre Occidental of Durango, eastern Sinaloa, and possibly northern Nayarit are now recgonized as a distinct species, P. schmidlyi (Bradley et al. 2004).

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 AZ, CA, CO, NM, NN, NV, OK, TX, UT

Range Map
Note: Range depicted for New World only. The scale of the maps may cause narrow coastal ranges or ranges on small islands not to appear. Not all vagrant or small disjunct occurrences are depicted. For migratory birds, some individuals occur outside of the passage migrant range depicted. For information on how to obtain shapefiles of species ranges see our Species Mapping pages at www.natureserve.org/conservation-tools/data-maps-tools.

Range Map Compilers: NatureServe, 2003; NatureServe, 2005; Sechrest, 2002

Ecology & Life History
Help
Reproduction Comments: Breeds mainly March-April through September-October in California (see Kirkland and Layne 1989). Several litters of 1-6 (average generally 3-4, but average 2.3 in Oaxaca, Mexico) young are reared annually.
Ecology Comments: In New Mexico, median home range size was less than 0.5 ha (Ribble and Stanley 1998).

In northern New Mexico, based on short-term data, mean home range size (minimum convex polygon) was 0.29 ha (trapping data) or 0.52 ha (radiotelemetry) (Ribble et al. 2002).

Non-Migrant: Y
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Mobility and Migration Comments: In southeastern Arizona, radio-tagged brush mice, on average, moved 17.7 m between consecutive locations (at least 3 hr apart); annually, the average size of home range areas was 0.12 ha (Gottesman et al. 2004). Juveniles and subadults were not studied, so dispersal distances were not determined.

Palustrine Habitat(s): Riparian
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Bare rock/talus/scree, Desert, Shrubland/chaparral, Woodland - Conifer, Woodland - Hardwood, Woodland - Mixed
Special Habitat Factors: Fallen log/debris, Standing snag/hollow tree
Habitat Comments: Rough, rocky canyons of coniferous brush. Also in open pine forests, riparian zones, oak woodland, scrub oak on flats and steep slopes, juniper woodland, around buildings, in caves and mine shafts. Usually rocks and heavy brush are present. Usually places nest in natural cavity, rocky crevice, or under brushpile.
Adult Food Habits: Frugivore, Granivore, Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Frugivore, Granivore, Invertivore
Food Comments: Diet consists of a variety of plant items, including pine nuts, acorns, berries (e.g., manzanita, juniper), and insects and other arthropods (may comprise a large portion of the diet). Often climbs into vegetation to feed.
Adult Phenology: Nocturnal
Immature Phenology: Nocturnal
Phenology Comments: Completely nocturnal. Active year-round.
Length: 24 centimeters
Weight: 36 grams
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Small Murid Rodents

Use Class: Not applicable
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: 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 in appropriate habitat where the species is presumed to be established and breeding.
Mapping Guidance: Separate sites separated by less than 1000 meters should be mapped as separate polygons.
Separation Barriers: Barriers include: wide highways with heavy traffic (subjective determination) and highways with continuous solid barriers that prevent rodent passage; major water bodies, arbitrarily set at those greater than 50 meters across in ice-free areas and those greater than 200 meters wide if frozen regularly.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 2 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: Home ranges may be quite small, but at least some species exhibit good dispersal ability that may take them several kilometers from their natal area (Maier 2002). Peromyscus that have been displaced up to 3 km may return home within a few days (see Maier 2002). Displaced Neotoma fuscipes dispersed up to at least 1.6 km from their release point in five nights (Smith 1965). A male Dicrostonyx richardsoni moved more than 3 kilometers per day several times (Engstrom, in Wilson and Ruff 1999). Some species can traverse significant distances of unsuitable habitat. For example, Peromyscus leucopus may move between wooded areas separated by a deforested agricultural gap of up to at least 2 km (Krohne and Hoch 1999). In New Brunswick, a tagged subadult male Peromyscus maniculatus was captured at locations 1.77 km apart after a period of 2 weeks in September, suggesting that dispersal may extend at least this far (Bowman et al. 1999). In Kansas, individual Peromyscus maniculatus were captured at trap sites up to 1.32 km apart (Rehmeier et al. 2004). Dispersal can play a key role in the population dynamics of murid rodents.

Patterns of genetic (DNA) variation indicate that gene flow can be low among subpopulations of Neotoma magister and that effective dispersal is limited among subpopulations separated by as little as 3 km (Castleberry et al. 2002).

Separation distance for suitable habitat is a compromise between the typical small home range sizes of these mammals and their sometimes considerable dispersal ability and the likely low probability that two occupied locations separated by less than several kilometers of suitable habitat would represent independent populations.

Roads, especially divided highways, are major barriers to dispersal in small mammals (Oxley et al. 1974, Wilkins 1982, Garland and Bradley 1984).

Date: 08Mar2005
Author: Hammerson, G., and S. Cannings
Notes: Group contains most members of the family Muridae: mice, voles, lemmings, woodrats, etc.
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 20Apr2005
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
  • Allen, C. R., S. Demarais, and R. S. Lutz. 1994. Red imported fire ant impact on wildlife: an overview. The Texas Journal of Science 46(1):51-59.

  • Armstrong, D.M. 1972. Distribution of Mammals in Colorado. Monograph of the Museum of Natural History, University of Kansas. University of Kansas Printing Service, Lawrence. 415 pp.

  • Armstrong, D.M. 1972. Distribution of mammals in Colorado. University of Kansas, Museum of Natural History, Monograph No. 3, Lawrence.

  • Banks, E. M., R. J. Brooks, and J. Schnell. 1975. A radiotracking study of home range and activity of the brown lemming (Lemmus trimucronatus). Journal of Mammalogy 56:888-901.

  • Bowman, J. C., M. Edwards, L. S. Sheppard, and G. J. Forbes. 1999. Record distance for a non-homing movement by a deer mouse, Peromyscus maniculatus. Canadian Field-Naturalist 113:292-293.

  • Bradley, R. D., D. J. Schmidly, and R. D. Owen. 1989. Variation in the glans penes and bacula among Latin American populations of the PEROMYSCUS BOYLII species complex. J. Mamm. 70:712-725.

  • Bradley, R. D., D. S. Carroll, M. L. Haynie, R. Muñiz Martínez, M. J. Hamilton, and C. W. Kilpatrick. 2004. A new species of Peromyscus from western Mexico. Journal of Mammalogy 85:1184-1193.

  • Bradley, R. D., I. Tiemann-Boege, C. W. Kilpatrick, and D. J. Schmidly. 2000. Taxonomic status of Peromyscus boylii sacarensis: inferences from DNA dequences of the mitochondrial cytochrome-b gene. Journal of Mammalogy 81:875-884.

  • Bradley, R. D., Schmidly, D. J., and C. W. Kilpatrick. 1996. The relationships of Peromyscus sagax to the P. boylii and P. truei species groups in Mexico based on morphometric, karyotypic, and allozymic data. Pp. 95-106 in Contributions in Mammalogy: A Memorial Volume Honoring Dr. J. Knox Jones, Jr. (H. H. Genoways and R. J. Baker, eds). Museum of Texas Tech University, Lubbock.

  • Brooks, R. J., and E. M. Banks. 1971. Radio-tracking study of lemming home range. Communications in Behavioral Biology 6:1-5.

  • Carleton, M. D. 1989. Systematic and evolution. Pp. 7-142 in Kirkland, G. L. and Layne, J. N., eds. Advances in the Study of Peromyscus (Rodentia). Lubbock, Texas Tech University Press.

  • Castleberry, S., B., T. L. King, P. B. Wood, and W. M. Ford. 2002. Microsatellite DNA analysis of population structure in Allegheny woodrats (Neotoma magister). Journal of Mammalogy 83:1058-1070.

  • Castro-Campillo, A. A., H. R. Roberts, D. J. Schmidly, and R. D. Bradley. 1999. The systematic status of Peromyscus boylii ambiguus based on morphological and molecular data. Journal of Mammalogy 80:1214-1231.

  • Coombs, E. M. [no date-1977?]. Wildlife observations of the hot desert region, Washington County, Utah, with emphasis on reptilian species and their habitat in relation to livestock grazing. A report to the Cedar City District, BLM by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources.

  • Davis, W. B. 1978. The mammals of Texas. Texas Parks and Wildlife Dept., Bull. No. 41. 294 pp.

  • Douglass, R. J. 1977. Population dynamics, home ranges, and habitat associations of the yellow-cheeked vole, Microtus xanthognathus, in the Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 91:237-47.

  • Drake, J. 1958. The brush mouse (Peromyscus boylii) in Southern Durango. Mich. 130 pp.

  • Fitzgerald, J. P. et al. 1992. Mammals of Colorado. Review manuscript.

  • GARNER, HERSCHEL W. 1967. AN ECOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE BRUSH MOUSE, PEROMYSCUS BOYLII, IN WESTERN TEXAS. TEXAS J. SCI. 19(3): 285-291.

  • Garland, T., Jr. and W. G. Bradley. 1984. Effects of a highway on Mojave Desert rodent populations. American Midland Naturalist 111:47-56.

  • Garner, H.W. 1967. An ecological study of the brush mouse,Peromyscus boylii, in western Texas. Texas J. Sci. 19:285- 291.

  • Gottesman, A.B., P. R. Krausman, M. L. Morrison, and Y. Petryszyn. 2004. Movements and home range of brush mice. Southwestern Naturalist 49:289-294.

  • Hafner, D. J., B. R. Riddle, and S. T. Alvarez-Castañeda. 2001. Evolutionary relationships of white-footed mice (Peromyscus) on islands in the Sea of Cortez. Journal of Mammalogy 82:775-790.

  • Hall, E. R. 1981a. The Mammals of North America, second edition. Vols. I & II. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York. 1181 pp.

  • Hoffmeister, D. F. 1986. Mammals of Arizona. University of Arizona Press and Arizona Game and Fish Department. 602 pp.

  • Houseal, T. W., I. F. Greenbaum, D. J. Schmidly, S. A. Smith, and K. M. Davis. 1987. Karyotypic variation in Peromyscus boylii from Mexico. Journal of Mammalogy 68:281-296.

  • Jike, L., G. O. Batzli, L. L. Geta. 1988. Home ranges of prairie voles as determined by radiotracking and by powdertracking. Journal of Mammalogy 69:183-186.

  • Jones, J. K., Jr. and C. Jones. 1992. Revised checklist of recent land mammals of Texas, with annotations. The Texas Journal of Science 44(1):53-74.

  • Jones, J. K., Jr., C. Jones, and D. J. Schmidly. 1988. Annotated checklist of recent land mammals of Texas. Occasional Papers The Museum Texas Tech University 119:1-26.

  • Jones, J. K., Jr., R. S. Hoffman, D. W. Rice, C. Jones, R. J. Baker, and M. D. Engstrom. 1992a. Revised checklist of North American mammals north of Mexico, 1991. Occasional Papers, The Museum, Texas Tech University, 146:1-23.

  • Jones, J. K., S. Demarais, and C. T. McAllister. 1995. Contribution to a bibliography of recent Texas mammals 1981-1990. Special Publications, The Museum Texas Tech University 38:1-64.

  • KASPER, STEPHEN. 1992. MAMMALS FROM THE LATE PLEISTOCENE CARROL CREEK LOCAL FAUNA, DONLEY COUNTY, TEXAS. SOUTHWEST. NAT. 37(1):54-64.

  • King, J. A. (ed.). 1968. Biology of PEROMYSCUS (Rodentia). Am. Soc. Mamm. Spec. Publ. No. 2. 593 pp.

  • Kirkland, G. L., Jr., and J. N. Layne. 1989. Advances in the study of PEROMYSCUS (Rodentia). Texas Tech Univ. Press, Lubbock.

  • Krohne, D. T., and G. A. Hoch. 1999. Demography of Peromyscus leucopus populations on habitat patches: the role of dispersal. Canadian Journal of Zoology 77:1247-1253.

  • MacMillen, R. E. 1964. Population ecology, water relations and social behavior of a southern California semidesert rodent fauna. University of California Publications in Zoology 71:1-59.

  • Maier, T. J. 2002. Long-distance movements by female white-footed mice, Peromyscus leucopus, in extensive mixed-wood forest. Canadian Field-Naturalist 116:108-111.

  • OWEN, JAMES G. 1990. AN ANALYSIS OF THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF MAMMALIAN DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS IN TEXAS. ECOLOGY 71(5):1823-1832.

  • OWEN, JAMES G. 1990. PATTERNS OF MAMMALIAN SPECIES RICHNESS IN RELATION TO TEMPERATURE, PRODUCTIVITY, AND VARIANCE IN ELEVATION. J. MAMM. 71(1):1-13.

  • Oxley, D. J., M. B. Fenton and G. R. Carmody. 1974. The effects of roads on populations of small mammals. Journal of Applied Ecology 11: 51-59.

  • Rehmeier, R. L., G. A. Kaufman, and D. W. Kaufman. 2004. Long-distance movements of the deer mouse in tallgrass prairie. Journal of Mammalogy 85:562-568.

  • Ribble, D. O., A. W. Wurtz, E. K. McConnell, J. J. Buegge, and K. Welch, Jr. 2002. A comparison of home ranges of two species of Peromyscus using trapping and radiotelemetry data. Journal of Mammalogy 83:260-266.

  • Ribble, D. O., and S. Stanley. 1998. Home ranges and social organization of syntopic PEROMYSCUS BOYLII and P. TRUEI. Journal of Mammalogy 79:932-941.

  • SULLIVAN, JOHN M., C. WILLIAM KILPATRICK, AND PAUL D. RENNERT. 1991. BIOCHEMICAL SYSTEMATICS OF THE PEROMYSCUS BOYII SPECIES GROUP. J. MAMM. 72(4):664-680.

  • Schmidly, D. J., R. D. Bradley, and P. S. Cato. 1988. Morphometric differentiation and taxonomy of three chromosomally characterized groups of PEROMYSCUS BOYLII from east-central Mexico. J. Mamm. 69:462-480.

  • Smith, M. H. 1965. Dispersal capacity of the dusky-footed wood rat, Neotoma fuscipes. American Midland Naturalist 74:457-463.

  • Smith, S. A. 1990. Cytosystematic evidence against monophyly of the PEROMYSCUS BOYLII species group (Rodentia: Cricetidae). J. Mamm. 71:654-667.

  • Storer, T. I., F. C. Evans, and F. G. Palmer. 1944. Some rodent populations in the Sierra Nevada of California. Ecological Monographs 14:166-192.

  • Tiemann-Boege, I., C. W. Kilpatrick, D. J. Schmidly, and R. D. Bradley. 2000. Molecular phylogenetics of the Peromyscus boylii species group. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 16:366-378.

  • Wilkins, K. T. 1982. Highways as barriers to rodent dispersal. Southwestern Naturalist 27: 459-460.

  • Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (editors). 1993. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Second edition. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. xviii + 1206 pp. Available online at: http://www.nmnh.si.edu/msw/.

  • Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (editors). 2005. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Third edition. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Two volumes. 2,142 pp. Available online at: https://www.departments.bucknell.edu/biology/resources/msw3/

  • Wilson, D. E., and S. Ruff. 1999. The Smithsonian book of North American mammals. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 750 pp.

  • Yancey II, Franklin D. 1997. The mammals of Big Bend Ranch State Park, Texas. Special Publication 39. 1 October 1997. Texas Tech University. Lubbock. 210 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 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.