Scaphiopus holbrookii - (Harlan, 1835)
Eastern Spadefoot
Other English Common Names: eastern spadefoot
Synonym(s): Scaphiopus holbrookii holbrookii (Harlan, 1835)
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Scaphiopus holbrookii (Harlan, 1835) (TSN 173426)
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.100521
Element Code: AAABF01040
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Amphibians - Frogs and Toads
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Amphibia Anura Scaphiopodidae Scaphiopus
Genus Size: C - Small genus (6-20 species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Collins, J. T. 1990. Standard common and current scientific names for North American amphibians and reptiles. 3rd ed. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. Herpetological Circular No. 19. 41 pp.
Concept Reference Code: B90COL01NAUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Scaphiopus holbrookii holbrookii
Taxonomic Comments: Scaphiopus hurterii formerly was regarded as a subspecies of S. holbrookii, but recent checklists (Crother et al. 2000, Collins and Taggart 2002) have treated it as a distinct species.

Garcia-Paris et al. (2003) used mtDNA to examine the phylogentic relationships of Pelobatoidea and found that the family Pelobatidae, as previously defined, is not monophyletic (Pelobates is sister to Megophryidae, not to Spea/Scaphiopus). They split the Pelobatidae into two families: Eurasian spadefoot toads (Pelobates), which retain the name Pelobatidae, and North American spadefoot toads (Scaphiopus, Spea), which make up the revived family Scaphiopodidae.
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 15Apr2005
Global Status Last Changed: 29Nov2001
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Reasons: Widespread, occurring primarily in the southeastern United States; common in many areas; secure, with local extirpations due to urbanization in the northeastern part of the range.
Nation: United States
National Status: N5 (05Nov1996)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
United States Alabama (S5), Arkansas (S2), Connecticut (S1), Delaware (S4), District of Columbia (SH), Florida (SNR), Georgia (S5), Illinois (S3), Indiana (S2), Kentucky (S4), Louisiana (S3), Maryland (S4), Massachusetts (S2), Mississippi (S5?), Missouri (S2), New Jersey (SNR), New York (S2S3), North Carolina (S5), Ohio (S1), Pennsylvania (S1), Rhode Island (S1), South Carolina (SNR), Tennessee (S5), Virginia (S4), West Virginia (S1)

Other Statuses

IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent: 200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments: Range extends from Southern New England across the southern Great Lakes states to southeastern Missouri and northeastern Arkansas, and south to the Gulf Coast, from eastern Louisiana to southern Florida (absent at higher elevations in Appalachians)(Conant and Collins 1991).

Number of Occurrences: 81 to >300
Number of Occurrences Comments: Represented by many and/or large occurrences throughout most of the range. Probably there are many undiscovered occurrences; this species evades detection via erratic nocturnal activity.

Population Size: 100,000 to >1,000,000 individuals
Population Size Comments: Secretive; usually more abundant than is apparent. In Florida, Greenberg and Tanner (2005) found that apparently reduced populations of adults during some years clearly reflected suspended breeding activity rather than low densities. The probability that only a portion of the potential adult breeding population actually breeds during any given breeding event further biases population estimates.

Number of Occurrences with Good Viability/Integrity: Many to very many (41 to >125)

Overall Threat Impact: Medium
Overall Threat Impact Comments: Urbanization is a known threat in the northeastern United States (Klemens 1993). Pesticide use in conjunction with forest pest management is a potential threat.

Short-term Trend: Relatively Stable (<=10% change)
Short-term Trend Comments: Overall, probably relatively stable.

Long-term Trend: Decline of <30% to increase of 25%
Long-term Trend Comments: Likely relatively stable in extent of occurrence, unknown level of decline in population size, area of occurrence, and number/condition of occurrences.

Intrinsic Vulnerability: Moderately vulnerable

Environmental Specificity: Very narrow to narrow.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)) Range extends from Southern New England across the southern Great Lakes states to southeastern Missouri and northeastern Arkansas, and south to the Gulf Coast, from eastern Louisiana to southern Florida (absent at higher elevations in Appalachians)(Conant and Collins 1991).

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces
Color legend for Distribution Map
Endemism: endemic to a single nation

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AL, AR, CT, DC, DE, FL, GA, IL, IN, KY, LA, MA, MD, MO, MS, NC, NJ, NY, OH, PA, RI, SC, TN, VA, WV

Range Map
No map available.


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
AR Chicot (05017)*, Craighead (05031)*, Drew (05043)*
CT Hartford (09003)*, New Haven (09009)*, New London (09011), Tolland (09013)*, Windham (09015)
IN Daviess (18027), Floyd (18043), Gibson (18051), Greene (18055), Harrison (18061), Knox (18083), Martin (18101), Orange (18117), Owen (18119), Pike (18125), Posey (18129), Spencer (18147), Sullivan (18153), Vigo (18167)
MA Barnstable (25001), Bristol (25005), Dukes (25007), Essex (25009), Franklin (25011), Hampden (25013), Hampshire (25015), Middlesex (25017)*, Nantucket (25019), Norfolk (25021)*, Plymouth (25023)*, Suffolk (25025)*
MO Bollinger (29017), Butler (29023), Dunklin (29069), Jefferson (29099), Mississippi (29133), New Madrid (29143), Pemiscot (29155)*, Scott (29201), Stoddard (29207)
NY Albany (36001), Dutchess (36027), Nassau (36059), Saratoga (36091), Suffolk (36103)
OH Athens (39009), Coshocton (39031), Lawrence (39087), Meigs (39105), Morgan (39115), Tuscarawas (39157), Washington (39167)
PA Adams (42001), Berks (42011), Bucks (42017), Centre (42027), Cumberland (42041), Franklin (42055), Lehigh (42077), Northampton (42095), Northumberland (42097), Union (42119), York (42133)
RI Providence (44007)*, Washington (44009)
WV Cabell (54011)*, Hardy (54031)*, Kanawha (54039)*, Mason (54053)*, Raleigh (54081)*, Wayne (54099), Wood (54107)*
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
01 Merrimack (01070002)+, Middle Connecticut (01080201)+, Lower Connecticut (01080205)+, Westfield (01080206)+, Charles (01090001)+, Cape Cod (01090002)+, Narragansett (01090004)+, Pawcatuck-Wood (01090005)+, Quinebaug (01100001)+, Quinnipiac (01100004)+*, Housatonic (01100005)+
02 Hudson-Hoosic (02020003)+, Middle Hudson (02020006)+, Northern Long Island (02030201)+, Southern Long Island (02030202)+, Middle Delaware-Musconetcong (02040105)+, Lehigh (02040106)+, Bald Eagle (02050204)+, Lower West Branch Susquehanna (02050206)+, Lower Susquehanna-Swatara (02050305)+, Cacapon-Town (02070003)+*, Conococheague-Opequon (02070004)+, Monocacy (02070009)+
05 Little Muskingum-Middle Island (05030201)+, Upper Ohio-Shade (05030202)+, Little Kanawha (05030203)+*, Hocking (05030204)+, Tuscarawas (05040001)+, Muskingum (05040004)+, Lower New (05050004)+*, Upper Kanawha (05050006)+*, Big Sandy (05070204)+, Raccoon-Symmes (05090101)+, Twelvepole (05090102)+*, Little Scioto-Tygarts (05090103)+, Middle Wabash-Busseron (05120111)+, Lower Wabash (05120113)+, Lower White (05120202)+, Eel (05120203)+, Lower East Fork White (05120208)+, Patoka (05120209)+, Silver-Little Kentucky (05140101)+, Blue-Sinking (05140104)+, Lower Ohio-Little Pigeon (05140201)+
07 Big (07140104)+
08 New Madrid-St. Johns (08020201)+, Lower St. Francis (08020203)+, Little River Ditches (08020204)+, Bayou Bartholomew (08040205)+*, Boeuf (08050001)+*
11 Upper Black (11010007)+*, Current (11010008)+*
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Basic Description: A 6-cm toad.
General Description: The upper surface is brown, olive, gray, or blackish. A curved yellow line often extends from each eye and down the back. The pupil of the eye is vertically elliptical in bright light (like a cat's eye). A single hard sickle-shaped spade is on the inner underside of each hind foot. Maximum snout-vent length is about 2.9 inches (7.3 cm). Breeding males have black pads on the thumbs and inner toes of the front feet. Breeding calls are loud, nasal "quonk" or "wank" sounds, repeated every few seconds. Larvae are brown to bronze on top; the belly skin is clearish; the tail fins are clear; the tail musculature is not conspicuously spotted or blotched; and the eyes are very close together on the top of the head. Larvae are up to 2 inches (5 cm) in total length. Eggs are deposited in strings that may break apart, in masses of up to a few thousand eggs, attached to submerged plant material.
Reproduction Comments: Eastern spadefoots do not have a well-defined breeding season. Instead, they breed whenever heavy rains produce suitable breeding pools and temperatures are above about 45 degrees (F). Breeding occurs often in spring or summer in the north but in any month in the far south (for example, recorded in February, March, June, September, and October in Florida) (Greenberg and Tanner 2004). Breeding aggregations in single pools include dozens to hundreds of adults. Individual females produce a clutch of up to about 2,500 eggs (in several batches). Eggs laid in summer may hatch in 1 day, whereas eggs laid in colder conditons may take 2 weeks or more. The aquatic larvae may form huge aggregations. They metamorphose into the terrestrial form in as little as 2 weeks when conditions are warm and in 8 weeks or more if it is cold (e.g., first emigration 16-29 days after breeding in Florida; Greenberg and Tanner 2004). Over a period of several years, individual breeding pools may produce metamorphs infrequently and at irregular intervals (Greenberg and Tanner 2005). In Florida, maximum lifespan was estimated to be 7 years (Greenberg and Tanner 2005).
Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: Y
Long Distance Migrant: N
Mobility and Migration Comments: Migrates up to several hundred meters between breeding pools and nonbreeding terrestrial habitats.
Palustrine Habitat(s): Riparian, TEMPORARY POOL
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Cropland/hedgerow, Forest - Conifer, Forest - Hardwood, Forest - Mixed, Grassland/herbaceous, Savanna, Shrubland/chaparral, Suburban/orchard, Woodland - Conifer, Woodland - Hardwood, Woodland - Mixed
Special Habitat Factors: Benthic, Burrowing in or using soil, Fallen log/debris
Habitat Comments: Eastern spadefoots occur in areas of sandy, gravelly, or soft, light soils in wooded or unwooded terrain. On land, they range up to at least several hundred meters from breeding sites. When inactive, they remain burrowed in the ground. Eggs and larvae develop in temporary pools formed by heavy rains. Breeding sites include temporary pools and areas flooded by heavy rains.
Adult Food Habits: Carnivore, Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Carnivore, Detritivore, Herbivore, Invertivore, Scavenger
Food Comments: Metamorphosed toads eat various small terrestrial invertebrates. Larvae eat plankton initially, later small aquatic invertebrates and sometimes other amphibian larvae, including conspecifics.
Adult Phenology: Hibernates/aestivates, Nocturnal
Immature Phenology: Hibernates/aestivates, Nocturnal
Phenology Comments: Eastern spadefoots burrow underground in daytime and when conditions are cold or dry but may be active day and night during the brief breeding period.
Colonial Breeder: Y
Length: 8 centimeters
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Spadefoots

Use Class: Not applicable
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 larvae or eggs) in or near appropriate habitat where the species is presumed to be established and breeding.
Separation Barriers: Busy major highway, especially at night, such that toads rarely if ever cross successfully; urban development dominated by buildings and pavement; the largest, widest, fast-flowing rivers.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 1 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: Spadefoots can cross some fairly wide flowing rivers, so only the biggest rivers with strong current should be treated as barriers.

Detailed information on movements of these toads is not available, but opportunistic field observations of various species indicate that they readily move up to at least several hundred meters from breeding sites (G. Hammerson, pers. obs.). The separation distance for unsuitable habitat reflects the nominal minimum value of 1 km. The separation distance for suitable habitat reflects the good vagility of spadefoots, their ability to utilize ephemeral or newly created breeding sites, and the consequent likely low probability that two occupied locations separated by less than several kilometers of suitable habitat would represent truly independent populations over the long term.

Adults tend to exhibit high fidelity to breeding sites. For example, in Florida, inter-pond exchange of adults was minimal and short-distance (130 m; one was 416 m) (Greenberg and Tanner 2005), but recaptures were rare and some dispersals may have been missed. Additionally metamorphs may disperse large distances and probably sometimes eventually breed in distant non-natal pools. In Florida, Greenberg and Tanner (2005) did not track inter-pond movement by Scaphiopus holbrookii metamorphs, but it appeared likely that metamorphs ''rescue'' local populations by breeding-4 or 5 years later-in non-natal ponds as adults.

Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): .5 km
Inferred Minimum Extent Justification: Inferred extent distance refers to distance from breeding sites and is likely a conservative value.
Date: 15Apr2005
Author: Hammerson, G.
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: 08May2011
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Hammerson, G., and F. Dirrigl, Jr.
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 26Jan2010
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
  • Barbour, R. W. 1971. Amphibians and reptiles of Kentucky. Univ. Press of Kentucky, Lexington. x + 334 pp.

  • Behler, J. L., and F. W. King. 1979. The Audubon Society field guide to North American reptiles and amphibians. Alfred A. Knopf, New York. 719 pp.

  • Blackburn, L., P. Nanjappa, and M. J. Lannoo. 2001. An Atlas of the Distribution of U.S. Amphibians. Copyright, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, USA.

  • Bragg, A.N. 1965. Gnomes of the night. the spadefoot toads. 127 pp.

  • Burnley, J.M. 1971. Early date records of amphibians and reptiles on Long Island. Engelhardtia 4(1):1-7.

  • Burnley, J.M. 1971. Late date records of amphibians and reptiles on Long Island. Engelhardtia 4(3):17-22.

  • Burnley, J.M. 1973. Eastern spadefoots, Scaphiophus holbrooki, found on the South Fork of Long Island during 1973. Engelhardtia 6(1):10-11.

  • Chambers, R.E. 1983. Integrating timber and wildlife management. State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

  • Collins, J. T. 1990. Standard common and current scientific names for North American amphibians and reptiles. 3rd ed. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. Herpetological Circular No. 19. 41 pp.

  • Collins, J. T. 1991. Viewpoint: a new taxonomic arrangement for some North American amphibians and reptiles. SSAR Herpetol. Review 22:42-43.

  • Collins, J. T., and T. W. Taggart. 2002. Standard common and current scientific names for North American amphibians, turtles, reptiles, & crocodilians. Fifth edition. Publication of The Center for North American Herpetology, Lawrence, Kansas. iv + 44 pp.

  • Conant, R. and J. T. Collins. 1991. A field guide to reptiles and amphibians: eastern and central North America. Third edition. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, Massachusetts. 450 pp.

  • Conant, R., and J. T. Collins. 1998. A field guide to reptiles and amphibians: eastern and central North America. Third edition, expanded. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, Massachusetts. 616 pp.

  • Crother, B. I. (editor). 2008. Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico, with comments regarding confidence in our understanding. Sixth edition. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles Herpetological Circular 37:1-84.

  • Crother, B. I., J. Boundy, J. A. Campbell, K. de Queiroz, D. R. Frost, R. Highton, J. B. Iverson, P. A. Meylan, T. W. Reeder, M. E. Seidel, J. W. Sites, Jr., T. W. Taggart, S. G. Tilley, and D. B. Wake. 2000 [2001]. Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico, with comments regarding confidence in our understanding. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Herpetological Circular No. 29. 82 pp.

  • DeGraaf, R. M., and D. D. Rudis. 1983. Amphibians and reptiles of New England. Habitats and natural history. Univ. Massachusetts Press. vii + 83 pp.

  • DeGraaf, R.M. and D.D. Rudis. 1981. Forest habitat for reptiles and amphibians of the northeast. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Eastern Region, Milwaukee, WI. 239 pp.

  • DeKay, J.E. 1842. Zoology of New-York or the New-York fauna comprising detailed descriptions of all of the animals hitherto observed within the state of New-York, with brief notices of those occassionally found near its borders, and accompanied by appropriate illustrations. Part III Reptiles and Amphibia. Albany: W. and A. White and J. Visscher.

  • Frost, D. R. 1985. Amphibian species of the world. A taxonomic and geographical reference. Allen Press, Inc., and The Association of Systematics Collections, Lawrence, Kansas. v + 732 pp.

  • García-París, M., D.R. Buchholtz, and G. Parra-Olea. 2003. Phylogenetic relationships of Pelobatoidea re-examined using mtDNA. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 28:12-23.

  • Gibbs, J.P., A.R. Breisch, P.K. Ducey, G. Johnson, J.L. Behler, and R.C. Bothner. 2007. The amphibians and reptiles of New York State. Oxford University Press, NY.

  • Green, N. B., and T. K. Pauley. 1987. Amphibians and reptiles in West Virginia. University of Pittsburg Press, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. xi + 241 pp.

  • Greenberg, C. H., and G. W. Tanner. 2004. Breeding pond selection and movement patterns by eastern spadefoot toads (Scaphiopus holbrookii) in relation to weather and edaphic conditions. Journal of Herpetology 38:569-577.

  • Greenberg, C. H., and G. W. Tanner. 2005. Spatial and temproal ecology of easterb spadefoot toads on a Florida landscape. Herpetologica 61:20-28.

  • Johnson, T.R. 1977. The Amphibians of Missouri. University of Kansas Museum of Natural History, Public Education Series 6: ix + 134 pp.

  • Klemens, M. W. 1993. Amphibians and reptiles of Connecticut and adjacent regions. State Geological and Natural History Survey of Connecticut, Bulletin 112. xii + 318 pp.

  • Klemens, M.W. 1993. Amphibians and Reptiles of Connecticut and Adjacent Regions. State Geological and Natural History Survey of Connecticut, Bulletin No. 112.

  • Mathewson, R.F. 1955. Reptiles and amphibians of Staten Island. Proceedings of the Staten Island Institute of Arts and Sciences. 17(2):28-50.

  • Minton, S. A., Jr. 1972. Amphibians and reptiles of Indiana. Indiana Academy Science Monographs 3. v + 346 pp.

  • Mirarchi, R.E., editor. 2004. Alabama Wildlife. Volume 1. A checklist of vertebrates and selected invertebrates: aquatic mollusks, fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 209 pages.

  • Mount, R. H. 1975. The reptiles and amphibians of Alabama. Auburn University Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. vii + 347 pages.

  • Mount, R. H. 1975. The reptiles and amphibians of Alabama. Auburn University Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. vii + 347 pp.

  • New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Fish, Wildlife, and Marine Resources. 2006. New York State Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Albany, NY: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

  • New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 1985. Checklist of the amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals of New York State, including their protective status. Nongame Unit. Wildlife Resources Center. Delmar, NY.

  • Wasserman. A. O. 1968. Scaphiopus holbrookii. Cat. Am. Amph. Rep. 70.1-70.4.

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 October 2015.
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 © 2015 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. 2015. 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.