Somatochlora forcipata - (Scudder, 1866)
Forcipate Emerald
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Somatochlora forcipata (Scudder, 1866) (TSN 101966)
French Common Names: cordulie fourchue
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.112380
Element Code: IIODO32080
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Invertebrates - Insects - Dragonflies and Damselflies
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Mandibulata Insecta Odonata Corduliidae Somatochlora
Genus Size: D - Medium to large genus (21+ species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Paulson, D.R. and S.W. Dunkle. 1999. A Checklist of North American Odonata. Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound Occasional Paper, 56: 86 pp. Available: http://www.ups.edu/x7015.xml.
Concept Reference Code: A99PAU01EHUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Somatochlora forcipata
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 23May2015
Global Status Last Changed: 30Dec1985
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Nation: United States
National Status: N4 (04Nov2004)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N5 (28Jul2017)

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 Maine (S3), Massachusetts (S1), Michigan (SNR), Minnesota (S3), New Hampshire (S2), New Jersey (S3), New York (S1), Pennsylvania (S2), Vermont (S2S3), West Virginia (S3), Wisconsin (S2S3)
Canada Alberta (S2S4), British Columbia (S3?), Labrador (S2), Manitoba (SH), New Brunswick (S3), Newfoundland Island (S3), Northwest Territories (SU), Nova Scotia (S2S3), Ontario (S3), Prince Edward Island (S1), Quebec (S5), Saskatchewan (S1S2)

Other Statuses

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
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 MA, ME, MI, MN, NH, NJ, NY, PA, VT, WI, WV
Canada AB, BC, LB, MB, NB, NF, NS, NT, ON, PE, QC, SK

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


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
MA Berkshire (25003)*, Middlesex (25017), Worcester (25027)
MN Cook (27031), Itasca (27061), Koochiching (27071), Lake (27075), Lake of the Woods (27077), Roseau (27135)
NH Carroll (33003), Coos (33007), Grafton (33009), Merrimack (33013), Sullivan (33019)
NJ Sussex (34037)
NY Essex (36031), Franklin (36033), Hamilton (36041), Lewis (36049), Rensselaer (36083), St. Lawrence (36089)
PA Bradford (42015), Clearfield (42033)*, Clinton (42035), Lycoming (42081), McKean (42083), Monroe (42089), Sullivan (42113), Tioga (42117)*, Wyoming (42131)
VT Essex (50009), Rutland (50021), Windham (50025)
WI Door (55029), Douglas (55031), Forest (55041), Marinette (55075), Vilas (55125)*
WV Tucker (54093)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
01 Upper Androscoggin (01040001)+, Lower Androscoggin (01040002)+*, Saco (01060002)+, Pemigewasset (01070001)+*, Merrimack (01070002)+, Nashua (01070004)+, Upper Connecticut (01080101)+, Passumpsic (01080102)+, Waits (01080103)+, Black-Ottauquechee (01080106)+, Miller (01080202)+, Deerfield (01080203)+, Chicopee (01080204)+, Westfield (01080206)+*
02 Upper Hudson (02020001)+, Middle Hudson (02020006)+, Middle Delaware-Mongaup-Brodhead (02040104)+, Lehigh (02040106)+, Upper Susquehanna-Tunkhannock (02050106)+, Sinnemahoning (02050202)+*, Middle West Branch Susquehanna (02050203)+, Pine (02050205)+
04 Baptism-Brule (04010101)+, St. Louis (04010201)+, Beartrap-Nemadji (04010301)+, Door-Kewaunee (04030102)+, Menominee (04030108)+, Wolf (04030202)+, Black (04150101)+, Raquette (04150305)+, St. Regis (04150306)+, English-Salmon (04150307)+, Otter Creek (04150402)+, Ausable River (04150404)+, Saranac River (04150406)+
05 Upper Allegheny (05010001)+, Cheat (05020004)+
07 Upper St. Croix (07030001)+, Upper Wisconsin (07070001)+*
09 Red Lakes (09020302)+, Roseau (09020314)+, Big Fork (09030006)+, Rapid (09030007)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History Not yet assessed
Help
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: River-breeding Dragonfly Odonates

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 ideally with evidence of on-site breeding (teneral adults, mating pairs, territorial males, ovipositing females, larvae, or exuviae) at a given location with potential breeding habitat. Although oviposition may not necessarily yield progeny that survive to adulthood (Fincke, 1992) and movements resembling oviposition may not necessarily result in egg deposition (Okazawa and Ubukata, 1978; Martens, 1992; 1994), presence of on-site oviposition is here accepted as an indicator of a minimum element occurrence because the time and effort involved in determining success of emergence is beyond the scope of the general survey. As adults of some species might disperse moderate distances (see below), only sites with available larval habitat can be considered appropriate for a minimum occurrence. Single, non-breeding adults captured away from potential suitable breeding habitat should not be treated as element occurrences. 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. A photograph may be accepted as documentation of an element occurrence for adults only (nymphs and subimagos are too difficult to identify in this manner) provided that the photograph shows diagnostic features that clearly delineate the species from other species with similar features. Sight records, though valuable, should not be accepted as the basis for new element occurrences. Instead, such records should be utilized to further study an area to verify the element occurrence in that area.
Separation Barriers: Within catchments there are likely no significant barriers to movement of sexually mature adults between microhabitats, with even extensive sections of inappropriate waterway or major obstructions to flow being readily traversed by adults within the flight season. Dams large enough to cause extensive pooling may serve as separation barriers.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Alternate Separation Procedure: None
Separation Justification: Odonate dispersal capability has been poorly documented with long-range movements inferred from observations in transit and analogy with other insects (Conrad et al., 1999; Corbet, 1999). Adults are known to wander, some over great distances (not so for damselflies). Mass migration over great distances is not herein considered when drafting separation distances as such behavior is limited to few species (e.g. Anax junius, Libellula quadrimaculata and other Libellula spp., Sympetrum spp.), occurs unpredictably and infrequently (10 year cycles for L. quadrimaculata), are unidirectional or intergenerational (Freeland et al., 2003), or occurs under unusual circumstances such as irritation by trematode parasites (Dumont and Hinnekint, 1973) or during major weather events (Moskowitz et al., 2001; Russell et al., 1998).

Corbet (1999) estimated the average distance traveled for a commuting flight (between reproductive and roosting or foraging sites) to be less than 200 m but sometimes greater than one km. Distance traveled is generally greatest for river-breeding odonates, but can vary considerably between taxa (Corbet, 1999). Both D. Paulson and S. Valley (personal communication, 1998) suggest a population should be defined by the river drainage in which it is found, but drainages or catchments vary by orders of magnitude in size and isolation so it is not obvious how to effect this recommendation.

The combination of breeding dispersal in the range of a few km with the potential for periodic long distance dispersal providing landscapes are not fragmented has led to the somewhat arbitrary assignment of separation distances at 10 km (unsuitable and suitable).

Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): .5 km
Inferred Minimum Extent Justification: The few studies determining area of adult foraging habitat surrounding breeding sites have indicated a range of 30 meters to 300 meters [see Briggs (1993) for Enallagma laterale; Corbet (1999) for Nesciothemis nigeriensis and Calopteryx haemorrhoidalis; Beukeman (2002) for Calopteryx haemorrhoidalis; and Samways and Steytler (1996) for Chorolestes tessalatus]. As a result, an element occurrence should include the breeding site and surrounding pond or upland habitat extending 500 m in a radius from the breeding site.
Date: 02Jun2004
Author: Cordeiro, J.
Notes: River breeding dragonflies:
ANISOPTERA: Aeshnidae: Aeshna dugesi, A. persephone, A. walkeri, Anax strenuus, A. walsinghami, Basiaeschna, Boyeria, Oplonaeschna; Cordulegastridae: Cordulegaster diadema, C. dorsalis, C. maculata; Corduliidae: Helocordulia, Somatochlora elongata, S. ensigera, S. filosa, S. forcipata, S. georgiana, S. linearis, S. margarita, S. minor, S. ozarkensis, S. tenebrosa, S. walshii; Gomphidae: Dromogomphus, Erpetogomphus, Gomphus (Gomphurus): all species, Gomphus (Gomphus): all species, Gomphus (Hylogomphus): all species, Gomphus (Stenogomphus): all species, Gomphus (Phanogomphus) borealis, G. descriptus, G. hodgesi, G. lividus, G. minutus, G. quadricolor, Hagenius, Lanthus, Neurocordulia, Octogomphus, Ophiogomphus, Phyllogomphoides albrighti, Progomphus borealis, P. obscurus, Remartina, Stylogomphus, Stylurus; Libellulidae: Brechmorhoga, Dythemis, Macrothemis, Nesogonia, Paltothemis, Pseudoleon; Macromiidae: Macromia

Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help

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

References
Help
  • Somatochlora forcipata in Royal British Columbia Museum and the Spencer Entomological Museum. 2004bh. Odonata distribution maps based on data from the Royal British Columbia Museum and the Spencer Entomological Museum. Produced by Clover Point Cartographics for the Royal British Columbia Museum and Conservation Data Centre,
    Victoria, BC.


  • Abbott, J. C. 2006-2017. Odonata Central: An online resource for the distribution and identification of Odonata [web application]. <http://www.odonatacentral.org>. Accessed 21 March 2017.

  • Blust, M., and B. Pfeiffer. 2015. The Odonata of Vermont. Bulletin of American Odonatology 11(3?4):69-119.

  • Brunelle, P.-M. and P. deMaynadier. 2005. The Maine Dameslfly and Dragonfly Survey: A Final Report. 2nd edition. Report prepared for the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW), Bangor, Maine. November 1, 2005. 31 pp.

  • Cannings, R.A. 2002b. Introducing the dragonflies of British Columbia and the Yukon. Royal B.C. Mus., Victoria, BC. 96pp.

  • Cannings, R.A., S.G. Cannings, and L. Ramsay. 2000. The Dragonflies of the Columbia Basin, British Columbia. Royal B.C. Mus. 287pp.

  • Corser, J.D., E.L. White, and M.D. Schlesinger. 2014. Odonata origins, biogeography, and diversification in an Eastern North American hotspot: multiple pathways to high temperate forest insect diversity. Insect Conservation and Diversity 7:393-404.

  • Donnelly, T. W. 1992. The odonata of New York State. Bulletin of American Odonatology. 1(1):1-27.

  • Donnelly, T.W. 1999. The dragonflies and damselflies of New York. Prepared for the 1999 International Congress of Odonatology and First Symposium of the Worldwide Dragonfly Association. July 11-16, 1999. Colgate University, Hamilton, New York. 39 pp.

  • Donnelly, T.W. 2004. The Odonata of New York State. Unpublished data. Binghamton, NY.

  • Dunkle, S.  2000.  Dragonflies through binoculars:  a field guide to dragonflies of North America.  Oxford University Press, New York, New York.  266 pp.

  • Hughes, M.J. 2003. The dragonflies of Manitoba: an updated species list. Blue Jay 61(3):168-175.

  • Hunt, P.D. 2012. The New Hampshire Dragonfly Survey: A Final Report. Report to the NH Fish and Game Department. Audubon Society of NH, Concord. 54 pp.

  • Jones, Colin D., Andrea Kingsley, Peter Burke, and Matt Holder. 2008. The dragonflies and damselflies of Algonquin Provincial Park and the surrounding area. The Friends of the Algonquin Park. Whitney, ON.

  • Legler, K., D. Legler, and D. Westover.  2013.  Dragonflies of Wisconsin-Edition 5.1, copyright Karl Legler, self-published.

  • Mead, K. 2003. Dragonflies of the North Woods. Kollath-Stensaas Publishing, Duluth, MN. 2003 pp.

  • Mead, K. 2003. Dragonflies of the North Woods. Kollath-Stensaas Publishing, Duluth, Minnesota. 203 pp.

  • Mead, K.  2009.  Dragonflies of the North Woods (North Woods naturalist series).  Second edition.  Kollath-Stensaas Publishing, Duluth, Minnesota.  200 pp.

  • Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 2003. Field guide to the native plant communities of Minnesota: the Laurentian mixed forest province. Ecological Land Classification Program, Minnesota County Biological Survey, and Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, St. Paul, Minnesota. 352 pp.

  • NatureServe.  2009.  NatureServe Explorer:  An online encyclopedia of life [web application].  Version 7.1.  NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia.  <http://www.natureserve.org/explorer>.  Accessed 27 June 2009.

  • New York Natural Heritage Program. 2014. Database of odonate records by county for northeastern U.S. states. Data contributors available: http://nynhp.org/OdonataNE.

  • New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 2005. Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy Planning Database. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Albany, NY.

  • Nikula, B., J.L. Loose, and M.R. Burne. 2003. A field guide to the dragonflies and damselflies of Massachusetts. Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, Westborough, MA. 197 pp.

  • Packauskas, R.J. 2005. Hudsonian emerald dragonfley (Somatochlora husonica): A technical conservation assessment. A report prepared for USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project. 38 pp.

  • Paulson, D. 2011. Dragonflies and damselflies of the east. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.

  • Paulson, D.  2009.  Dragonflies and damselflies of the west (Princeton field guides).  Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.  536 pp.

  • Paulson, D.  2012.  Dragonflies and damselflies of the east (Princeton field guides).  Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.  544 pp.

  • Paulson, D.R. and S.W. Dunkle. 1999. A Checklist of North American Odonata. Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound Occasional Paper, 56: 86 pp. Available: http://www.ups.edu/x7015.xml.

  • Paulson, D.R., and S.W. Dunkle. 2009. A checklist of North American Odonata including English name, etymology, type locality, and distribution. Originally published as Occasional Paper No. 56, Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound, June 1999; completely revised March 2009. Online. Available: http://www.odonatacentral.org/docs/NA_Odonata_Checklist_2009.pdf.

  • Paulson, D.R., and S.W. Dunkle. 2016. A checklist of North American Odonata including English name, etymology, type locality, and distribution. Originally published as Occasional Paper No. 56, Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound, June 1999; completely revised March 2009; updated February 2011, February 2012, and October 2016. Online. Available: http://www.odonatacentral.org/docs/NA_Odonata_Checklist.pdf

  • Ramsay, L.R., and R.A. Cannings. 2004. Determining the Status of British Columbia's Dragonflies. In T.D. Hooper, ed. Proc. of the Species at Risk 2004 Pathways to Recovery Conf. March 2-6, 2004, Victoria, B.C. Species at Risk 2004 Pathways to Recovery Conference Organizing Committee, Victoria, BC. 12pp.

  • Ramsay, L.R., and S.G. Cannings. 2000. Dragonflies at Risk in British Columbia. Pp. 89-92 in L.M. Darling, ed. 2000. Proc. Conf. on the Biology and Manage. Species and Habitats at Risk, Kamloops, B.C., 15 - 19 Feb., 1999. Vol. 1; B.C. Minist. Environ., Lands and Parks, Victoria, BC, and Univ. College of the Cariboo, Kamloops, BC. 490pp.

  • Steffens, W. P., and W. A. Smith. 1999. Status survey for special concern and endangered dragonflies of Minnesota: population status, inventory and monitoring recommendations. Final report submitted to the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. 54 pp.

  • Walker, E. M., and P. S. Corbet.  1975.  1998 reprint.  The Odonata of Canada and Alaska - Volume 3.  University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.  

  • Walker, E.M. and Corbet, P.S. 1975. The odonata of Canada and Alaska, vol. 3: The Ansioptera - three families. University of Toronto Press, Toronto.

  • White, E.L., P.D Hunt, M.D. Schlesinger, J.D. Corser, and P.G. deMaynadier. 2015. Prioritizing Odonata for conservation action in the northeastern USA. Freshwater Science 34(3):1079-1093.

  • Wildlife Management Information System (WMIS). 2006+. Geo-referenced wildlife datasets (1900 to present) from all projects conducted by Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Canada.  Available at http://www.enr.gov.nt.ca/programs/wildlife-research/wildlife-management-information-services

  • Wiley, R.L. and H.O.Eiler. 1972. Drought resistance in subalpine nymphs of Somatochlora semicircularis Selys (Odonata: Corduliidae). The American Midland Naturalist 87:215-220.

  • Wisconsin Odonata Survey.  2009.  Wisconsin dragonflies and damselflies.  Wisconsin Aquatic and Terrestrial Resources Inventory and Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.  <http://wiatri.net/inventory/odonata/SpeciesAccounts/>.  Accessed 25 June 2009.

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.