{"elementGlobalId":100941,"circumscripConfidence":{"id":1,"circumscripConfidenceDescEn":"1 - Strong","circumscripConfidenceDescEs":"1 - Fuerte","circumscripConfidenceDescFr":"1 – Forte"},"classificationLevel":{"id":7,"classificationLevelNameEn":"Species","classificationLevelNameEs":"Especies","classificationLevelNameFr":"Espèce"},"classificationStatus":{"id":1,"classificationStatusDescEn":"Standard","classificationStatusDescEs":"Estándar","classificationStatusDescFr":"Standard"},"iucn":{"id":11,"iucnDescEn":"Least concern","iucnDescEs":"Menos preocupante","iucnDescFr":"Moins préoccupante","iucnCode":"LC"},"nameCategory":{"id":1,"nameCategoryDescEn":"Vertebrate Animal","nameCategoryDescEs":"Animal vertebrado","nameCategoryDescFr":"Animal vertébré","nameTypeCd":"A","nameTypeDesc":"Zoological"},"rankMethodUsed":{"id":7,"rankMethodUsedDescEn":" Rank calculation - Biotics v2","rankMethodUsedDescEs":null,"rankMethodUsedDescFr":null,"rankMethodUsedExternalDescEn":"Ranked by calculator","rankMethodUsedExternalDescEs":null,"rankMethodUsedExternalDescFr":null},"formattedScientificName":"<i>Cynomys ludovicianus</i>","scientificName":"Cynomys ludovicianus","scientificNameAuthor":"(Ord, 1815)","primaryCommonName":"Black-tailed Prairie Dog","relatedItisNames":"<i>Cynomys ludovicianus</i> (Ord, 1815) (TSN 180186)","uniqueId":"ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.100941","elcode":"AMAFB06010","conceptRefFullCitation":"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/.","conceptName":"<i>Cynomys ludovicianus</i>","taxonomicComments":"Hall (1981) listed two subspecies of black-tailed prairie dog, the nominate form and the Arizona prairie dog (<i>C. ludovicianus arizonensis</i>). Genetic study suggests that the Arizona form does not qualify for subspecies status (Chesser 1979). Hoffmeister (1986) regarded the species as monotypic. Thorington and Hoffmann (in Wilson and Reeder 2005) nevertheless recognized two subspecies (<i>arizonensis </i>and <i>ludovicianus</i>).","roundedGRank":"G4","conservationStatusFactorsEditionDate":"2024-08-12","conservationStatusFactorsEditionAuthors":"K. Hunting (2024)","primaryCommonNameLanguage":"EN","recordType":"SPECIES","elementNationals":[{"elementNationalId":164468,"classifConfidence":null,"nation":{"id":225,"nameEn":"United States","nameEs":"Estados Unidos","nameFr":"États-Unis","isoCode":"US","region":"United States"},"roundedNRank":"N4","elementSubnationals":[{"elementSubnationalId":370465,"subnation":{"id":35,"nameEn":"North Dakota","nameEs":"Dakota del Norte","nameFr":"Dakota du Nord","subnationCode":"ND","dnationId":225},"roundedSRank":"SU","dataSensitive":{"id":2,"dataSensitiveDescEn":"No","dataSensitiveDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveDescFr":null,"dataSensitiveCode":"N"},"dataSensitiveCategory":null,"srank":"SU","speciesSubnational":{"elementSubnationalId":370465,"hybrid":false,"exotic":false,"native":true}},{"elementSubnationalId":314521,"subnation":{"id":6,"nameEn":"Arizona","nameEs":"Arizona","nameFr":"Arizona","subnationCode":"AZ","dnationId":225},"roundedSRank":"SX,S1","dataSensitive":{"id":2,"dataSensitiveDescEn":"No","dataSensitiveDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveDescFr":null,"dataSensitiveCode":"N"},"dataSensitiveCategory":null,"srank":"SX,S1","speciesSubnational":{"elementSubnationalId":314521,"hybrid":false,"exotic":false,"native":true}},{"elementSubnationalId":271252,"subnation":{"id":49,"nameEn":"South Dakota","nameEs":"Dakota del Sur","nameFr":"Dakota du Sud","subnationCode":"SD","dnationId":225},"roundedSRank":"S4","dataSensitive":{"id":2,"dataSensitiveDescEn":"No","dataSensitiveDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveDescFr":null,"dataSensitiveCode":"N"},"dataSensitiveCategory":null,"srank":"S4","speciesSubnational":{"elementSubnationalId":271252,"hybrid":false,"exotic":false,"native":true}},{"elementSubnationalId":380333,"subnation":{"id":33,"nameEn":"Montana","nameEs":"Montana","nameFr":"Montana","subnationCode":"MT","dnationId":225},"roundedSRank":"S3","dataSensitive":{"id":2,"dataSensitiveDescEn":"No","dataSensitiveDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveDescFr":null,"dataSensitiveCode":"N"},"dataSensitiveCategory":null,"srank":"S3","speciesSubnational":{"elementSubnationalId":380333,"hybrid":false,"exotic":false,"native":true}},{"elementSubnationalId":272236,"subnation":{"id":8,"nameEn":"Colorado","nameEs":"Colorado","nameFr":"Colorado","subnationCode":"CO","dnationId":225},"roundedSRank":"S3","dataSensitive":{"id":2,"dataSensitiveDescEn":"No","dataSensitiveDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveDescFr":null,"dataSensitiveCode":"N"},"dataSensitiveCategory":null,"srank":"S3","speciesSubnational":{"elementSubnationalId":272236,"hybrid":false,"exotic":false,"native":true}},{"elementSubnationalId":371859,"subnation":{"id":43,"nameEn":"Oklahoma","nameEs":"Oklahoma","nameFr":"Oklahoma","subnationCode":"OK","dnationId":225},"roundedSRank":"S3","dataSensitive":{"id":2,"dataSensitiveDescEn":"No","dataSensitiveDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveDescFr":null,"dataSensitiveCode":"N"},"dataSensitiveCategory":null,"srank":"S3","speciesSubnational":{"elementSubnationalId":371859,"hybrid":false,"exotic":false,"native":true}},{"elementSubnationalId":323512,"subnation":{"id":36,"nameEn":"Nebraska","nameEs":"Nebraska","nameFr":"Nebraska","subnationCode":"NE","dnationId":225},"roundedSRank":"S3","dataSensitive":{"id":3,"dataSensitiveDescEn":"Conditional","dataSensitiveDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveDescFr":null,"dataSensitiveCode":"C"},"dataSensitiveCategory":null,"srank":"S3","speciesSubnational":{"elementSubnationalId":323512,"hybrid":false,"exotic":false,"native":true}},{"elementSubnationalId":403787,"subnation":{"id":21,"nameEn":"Kansas","nameEs":"Kansas","nameFr":"Kansas","subnationCode":"KS","dnationId":225},"roundedSRank":"S3","dataSensitive":{"id":2,"dataSensitiveDescEn":"No","dataSensitiveDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveDescFr":null,"dataSensitiveCode":"N"},"dataSensitiveCategory":null,"srank":"S3","speciesSubnational":{"elementSubnationalId":403787,"hybrid":false,"exotic":false,"native":true}},{"elementSubnationalId":371860,"subnation":{"id":59,"nameEn":"Wyoming","nameEs":"Wyoming","nameFr":"Wyoming","subnationCode":"WY","dnationId":225},"roundedSRank":"S2","dataSensitive":{"id":2,"dataSensitiveDescEn":"No","dataSensitiveDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveDescFr":null,"dataSensitiveCode":"N"},"dataSensitiveCategory":null,"srank":"S2","speciesSubnational":{"elementSubnationalId":371860,"hybrid":false,"exotic":false,"native":true}},{"elementSubnationalId":309622,"subnation":{"id":51,"nameEn":"Texas","nameEs":"Texas","nameFr":"Texas","subnationCode":"TX","dnationId":225},"roundedSRank":"S3","dataSensitive":{"id":2,"dataSensitiveDescEn":"No","dataSensitiveDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveDescFr":null,"dataSensitiveCode":"N"},"dataSensitiveCategory":null,"srank":"S3","speciesSubnational":{"elementSubnationalId":309622,"hybrid":false,"exotic":false,"native":true}},{"elementSubnationalId":338919,"subnation":{"id":39,"nameEn":"New Mexico","nameEs":"Nuevo México","nameFr":"Nouveau-Mexique","subnationCode":"NM","dnationId":225},"roundedSRank":"S2","dataSensitive":{"id":1,"dataSensitiveDescEn":"Yes","dataSensitiveDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveDescFr":null,"dataSensitiveCode":"Y"},"dataSensitiveCategory":null,"srank":"S2","speciesSubnational":{"elementSubnationalId":338919,"hybrid":false,"exotic":false,"native":true}}],"nrank":"N4","nrankReviewYear":2006,"speciesNational":{"elementNationalId":164468,"exotic":false,"native":true}},{"elementNationalId":168668,"classifConfidence":null,"nation":{"id":38,"nameEn":"Canada","nameEs":"Canadá","nameFr":"Canada","isoCode":"CA","region":"Canada"},"roundedNRank":"N2","elementSubnationals":[{"elementSubnationalId":1049763,"subnation":{"id":60,"nameEn":"Alberta","nameEs":"Alberta","nameFr":"Alberta","subnationCode":"AB","dnationId":38},"roundedSRank":"SNA","dataSensitive":{"id":1,"dataSensitiveDescEn":"Yes","dataSensitiveDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveDescFr":null,"dataSensitiveCode":"Y"},"dataSensitiveCategory":{"id":2,"dataSensitiveCategoryDescEn":"Proprietary Data","dataSensitiveCategoryDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveCategoryDescFr":null,"nsStandardInd":true},"srank":"SNA","speciesSubnational":{"elementSubnationalId":1049763,"hybrid":false,"exotic":true,"native":false}},{"elementSubnationalId":335968,"subnation":{"id":70,"nameEn":"Saskatchewan","nameEs":"Saskatchewan","nameFr":"Saskatchewan","subnationCode":"SK","dnationId":38},"roundedSRank":"S2","dataSensitive":{"id":2,"dataSensitiveDescEn":"No","dataSensitiveDescEs":null,"dataSensitiveDescFr":null,"dataSensitiveCode":"N"},"dataSensitiveCategory":null,"srank":"S2","speciesSubnational":{"elementSubnationalId":335968,"hybrid":false,"exotic":false,"native":true}}],"nrank":"N2","nrankReviewYear":2022,"speciesNational":{"elementNationalId":168668,"exotic":true,"native":true}}],"lastModified":"2026-10-02T21:34:59.427951Z","lastPublished":"2026-10-02T21:32:08.892226Z","promotionalDescription":null,"conceptLineageSummary":null,"nsxUrl":"/Taxon/ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.100941/Cynomys_ludovicianus","grankAdjustmentReasons":null,"grank":"G4","grankChangeDate":"2006-03-08","grankReasons":"This species still occupies a relatively large range in the Plain’s region of central North America, is represented by many occurrences, and an overall comparably large population. Historical habitat losses will never be replaced but this species appears to be sustaining viable populations in many areas although losses continue in some parts of its range. Threats to this species are managed in most areas and though still exerting pressure on some populations, appear to be below population-level effects as evidenced by population stability and increased occupied range in recent years.","grankReviewDate":"2024-08-12","rankInfo":{"elementGlobalId":100941,"aooPercentGood":null,"enviromentalSpecificity":{"id":8,"enviromentalSpecificityDescEn":"Moderate.  Generalist or community with some key requirements scarce.","enviromentalSpecificityDescEs":"Moderado.  Generalista o comunidad con algunos requisitos claves escasos.","enviromentalSpecificityDescFr":"Modéré. Généralistes ou communautés répondant à certains critères clés sont rares."},"intrinsicVulnerability":{"id":4,"intrinsicVulnerabilityDescEn":"Moderately vulnerable","intrinsicVulnerabilityDescEs":"Moderadamente vulnerable","intrinsicVulnerabilityDescFr":"Moyennement vulnérable"},"longTermTrend":{"id":1,"longTermTrendDescEn":"Decline of >90%","longTermTrendDescEs":"Disminución de >90%.","longTermTrendDescFr":"Diminution de >90 %"},"numberEos":{"id":15,"numberEosDescEn":"> 300","numberEosDescEs":"> 300","numberEosDescFr":"> 300"},"numberGoodEos":{"id":19,"numberGoodEosDescEn":"Many (41-125)","numberGoodEosDescEs":"Muchos (41-125)","numberGoodEosDescFr":"Plusieurs (de 41 à 125)"},"numberProtEos":{"id":12,"numberProtEosDescEn":"Several to very many (4 to >40) occurrences appropriately protected and managed","numberProtEosDescEs":"De varios a muchos casos (4 a >40) adecuadamente protegidos y controlados","numberProtEosDescFr":"De plusieurs à beaucoup d’occurrences (de 4 à >40) protégées et contrôlées convenablement"},"popSize":{"id":36,"popSizeDescEn":">1,000,000 individuals","popSizeDescEs":">1.000.000 de individuos","popSizeDescFr":">1 000 000 individus"},"rangeExtent":{"id":35,"rangeExtentDescEn":">2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)","rangeExtentDescEs":">2.500.000 kilómetros cuadrados (más ","rangeExtentDescFr":">2 500 000 km carrés (plus de 1 000 000 miles carrés)"},"shortTermTrend":{"id":40,"shortTermTrendDescEn":"Relatively Stable (<=10% change)","shortTermTrendDescEs":"Relativamente estable (variación = <10%)","shortTermTrendDescFr":"Relativement stable (variation = <10 %)"},"threatImpactAssigned":{"id":5,"threatImpactAssignedDescEn":"High","threatImpactAssignedDescEs":"Alto","threatImpactAssignedDescFr":"Élevé"},"rangeExtentComments":"In Canada, this species is limited to the Frenchman River Valley in southeastern Saskatchewan. In the U.S, this species occurs in the midwestern states from eastern and central Montana (Montana Prairie Dog Working Group 2002) and western North Dakota south through eastern Wyoming, eastern Colorado, western and central South Dakota, most of Kansas and western Oklahoma, eastern New Mexico, and western and central Texas (Schmidly and Bradley 2016). This species was extirpated from Arizona by the 1960’s and has since been re-introduced to native and restored habitat in the southeast corner of the state (Arizona Wildlife Conservation Strategy 2015). In Mexico, as of 1993 this species occupied about entirely within the state of Chihuahua (Ceballos et al. 1993). The range extent of this species was estimated by prescribing a concave hull polygon around recent observations to arrive at a range extent of about 2,560,000 km2.","areaOfOccupancy":{"id":98,"areaOfOccupancyType":{"id":4,"areaOfOccupancyTypeDescEn":"4-km2 grid cells","areaOfOccupancyTypeDescEs":"Células de la cuadrícula de 4 km2","areaOfOccupancyTypeDescFr":"Cellules de grille de 4 km2"},"areaOfOccupancyDescEn":"2,501 to >12,500","areaOfOccupancyDescEs":"De 2.501 a >12.500","areaOfOccupancyDescFr":"De 2 501 à >12 500","bioticsKey":45},"areaOfOccupancyComments":"The area of occupancy of this colonial species varies significantly in space and time. This species is thought to occupy between 10% and 20% of its range each year in response to a variety of factors including the efficacy of management actions, levels of persecution, annual forage production, predation, and other factors.","numberEosComments":"The number of occurrences of this species is unknown but represented by a very large number of occurrences or subpopulations.","popSizeComments":"The current population size of this species is unknown but was estimated at between 8,000,000 and 9,000,000 individuals in 1999 (USFWS 1999).","viabilityComments":"Most occurrences of this species are represented by relatively small populations (Luce 2003). While the number of these occurrences are viable in the long-term is unknown, there appear to be many occurrences with good viability (USFWS 2009).","threatImpactComments":"The primary threats to this species are habitat loss and fragmentation resulting from conversion of prairie grasslands to agricultural uses including grazing and annual crops and urban development (Luce et al 2003, Parks Canada Agency 2021, Ceballos et al 1993) although range-wide loss to urban uses appears to be limited to about 2% of the current range (USFWS 2009). Historical losses of habitat to agricultural were substantial but have slowed occurring at varying rates in some parts of this species range. Displacement of colonies and loss of habitat through development and operation of energy projects (Oil and Gas, Wind) may be a local factor in some parts of this species range but energy facilities may also serve to increase occupancy (USFWS 2009). Persecution for management of injury risk to livestock and competition for forage is likely now a local threat or impact although populations of this species apparently recover from control efforts rapidly (USFWS 2009). Disease outbreaks were a recent threat to this species. Sylvatic plaque, a highly infectious bacterial disease caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis to which prairie dogs are particularly susceptible and which can be manifested in 90% colony mortality, reduced populations in some parts of its range. USFWS (2009) concluded threats from this disease remain and could be exacerbated in the future by the effects of climate change, but this threat has not resulted in recent population declines.","shortTermTrendComments":"The short-term trend of this species reflects stability in most areas and local decline in some parts of its range. USFWS (2009) states that occupied habitat for this species in the U.S. has increased by over 600% since the 1960’s. In a comprehensive assessment of this species in the U.S., Luce (2003) describes significant historical declines and increasing habitat availability and suitability in the short-term. However, decreases are well documented in a few states, Mexico and Canada. In Montana, the range of this species was estimated in the late 20th century at 120,000 to 130,000 acres (485 to 526 km2) and in 2002 it was estimated at 90,000 acres (364 km2) (Montana Prairie Dog Working Group 2002). In Texas, habitat for this species was reported to have declined by 61% between 1980 and 2000 (Schmidly and Bradley 2016). This species was extirpated from Arizona and subsequently re-established beginning in 2008 (Arizona Wildlife Conservation Strategy 2015). USFWS (2009) reports conservation target objectives of maintaining occupied habitat acreage following the 1999 Conservation Assessment (see Luce 2003), increasing occupied habitat in the U.S., and maintaining current (as of 1999) occupied habitat acreage in at least 2 complexes greater than 5,000 acres (20 km2) have been met suggesting an overall stable trend.","longTermTrendComments":"The long-term trend of this species reflects decline. At the beginning of the 20th century, this species was found in Sonora, Mexico, where it has since been eradicated and occurred within a 5,600 km2 range representing a 90% reduction there (Ceballos et al (1993). In Canada, records indicate this species historically occupied about 1240 km2 which has been reduced to the present range of about 475 km2, a reduction of about 65%. In Montana, this species is reported to have occupied 1,500,000 acres (60,700 km2) in 1901 and about 120,000 to 130,000 acres (485 to 526 km2) in 2002; a reduction of about 92% (Montana Prairie Dog Working Group 2002). In North Dakota this species currently occupies about 20% of its historical occupied habitat (Dyke et al 2015). USFWS (2009) reports a range-wide reduction in occupied habitat of between 97% and 98% when compared to historical estimates.","inventoryNeeds":null,"numberProtEosComments":"The occupied range of this species currently includes colonies in national parks, state parks, and other protected lands, most of which prohibit prairie dog control/eradication. This threat factor is also closely monitored in other states. Management of occupied lands through voluntary agreements has also resulted in protection of some colonies.","protectionNeeds":null,"otherConsiderations":null,"intrinsicVulnerabilityComments":"Reproduce slowly (for a rodent) and survivorship is low (see Ecology Comments), despite popular belief (Hoogland 2001).","enviromentalSpecificityComments":null},"animalCharacteristics":{"elementGlobalId":100941,"majorHabitat":{"id":3,"majorHabitatDescEn":"Terrestrial","majorHabitatDescEs":"Terrestre","majorHabitatDescFr":"Terrestre"},"nonMigrant":true,"localMigrant":false,"longDistanceMigrant":false,"mobilityMigrationComments":null,"foodHabitsComments":"This species is granivorous prefer primarily consuming greases and herbs (Koford 1958, Hansen and Gold 1977, Uresk 1984, Krueger 1986). The proportion of other forage types in the diet varies with season, location, and vegetative composition (Koford 1958, Hansen and Gold 1977, Uresk 1984, Krueger 1986, Summers and Linder 1978, Bonham and Lerwick 1976, Fagerstone et al. 1981).","animalPhenologyComments":"May reduce activity in winter, but torpor was not observed in any season in a field study in Colorado (Bakko et al. 1989). In summer, active during day, but rests in burrows during the hottest part of day and at night. In summer spends about 1/3-1/2 of day feeding.","colonialBreeder":false,"length":42,"width":null,"weight":1360,"animalPhenologies":[{"animalCagPhenologyId":101147,"animalPhenology":{"id":1,"animalPhenologyDescEn":"Hibernates/aestivates","animalPhenologyDescEs":"Hibernación/Estivación","animalPhenologyDescFr":"Hiberne/estive","displayOrder":1},"adult":true,"immature":true},{"animalCagPhenologyId":101148,"animalPhenology":{"id":3,"animalPhenologyDescEn":"Diurnal","animalPhenologyDescEs":"Diurno","animalPhenologyDescFr":"Diurne","displayOrder":3},"adult":true,"immature":true}],"animalFoodHabits":[{"animalCagFoodHabitsId":102216,"foodHabits":{"id":4,"foodHabitsDescEn":"Herbivore","foodHabitsDescEs":"Herbívoro","foodHabitsDescFr":"Herbivore","displayOrder":4},"adult":true,"immature":true}]},"occurrenceDelineations":[{"eoSpecsDetailId":1403,"locationUseClass":{"id":1,"locationUseClassDescEn":"Not applicable","locationUseClassDescEs":"No se aplica","locationUseClassDescFr":"Sans objet","displayOrder":1},"eoSpecGroupName":null,"subtypes":null,"inferredExtentDistance":null,"inferredExtentNotes":"Home ranges are too small to justify an IE distance.","minimumEoCriteria":"Evidence of historical presence, or current and likely recurring presence of a prairie dog town or town complex at a given location. Evidence of historical presence, or current and likely recurring presence of a prairie dog town or town complex at a given location.","mappingGuidance":"Mapping guidance provided by Grasslands National Park (2020).<br /><br />The extent of each BTPD colony should be measured by walking the perimeter using a handheld GPS unit to record waypoints and track logs around the outermost active burrows of a colony. Burrows that have been dug by other species, such as American Badger and Richardson’s Ground Squirrel, should be included in a colony as burrow occupancy can be difficult to confirm and they may be occupied by BTPDs. Features not mapped as part of a colony would be permanent or semi-permanent water bodies and dugouts, ditches and ephemeral watercourses, and roads.<br /><br />Colonies should be mapped as separate sites when a clear division is evident in which BTPDs are not utilizing an area or routinely moving through it, as noted above. A review of colony mapping data from GNP in 2000 indicated that satellite colonies were typically separated by distances of 30-80 m (mean = 48.5 m; n = 6). Following Cully et al. (2010), colony sections or satellite colonies located &lt;75 meters apart will be treated as a single colony. Satellite colonies or colony sections &gt;75 meters apart can be mapped as sub EOs if they are within the separation distances (1 and 5 km).","separationBarriers":"Major water barriers; greater than 300 meters wide, or narrower if evidence or professional judgement indicates little or no dispersal across.","separationDistanceUnsuitableHabitatat":1.0,"separationDistanceSuitableHabitatat":5.0,"altSeparationProcedure":"None.","separationJustification":"In spring, individual yearling males and adult females disperse an average 2.4 kilometers (Garrett and Franklin 1988); dispersal is generally less than 8 kilometers (Knowles 1985). Genetic data suggest that dispersal occurs on a regular basis among prairie dog colonies after initial colonization (colonies were 1.4-5.7 km apart) (Roach et al. 2001).<br /><br />Natural drainages may function as dispersal corridors because colonies typically are located in swales and seasonally wet lowlands (Roach et al. 2001).","versionDate":"2020-10-30","versionAuthor":"Canadian EO Specifications Working Group with expertise provided from Grasslands National Park","versionNotes":"Previous version by Cannings, S., and G. Hammerson (2005)","lastModified":"2020-11-11T02:03:57.810271Z"}],"plantCharacteristics":null,"elementManagement":{"elementGlobalId":100941,"eoManagementGroupName":null,"stewardshipOverview":"See Luce (2003) for a detailed, state-by-state description of management actions for colonies in the U.S. and Parks Canada Agency (2021) for recommended actions in Canada.","impacts":"Effects on Plant Communities and Vegetation<br/><br/>Prairie dogs regulate communities by changing plant and animal species composition, diversity, and production (Koford 1958, Bonham and Lerwick 1976, Agnew et al. 1986, Coppock et al. 1983, Uresk 1984, Sharps and Uresk 1990, Whicker and Detling 1988a, Reading et al. 1989).<br/><br/>Plant species composition is generally altered through replacement or reduction in the dominance value of mid to tall species, thereby allowing the encroachment and/or expansion of short species and/or short morphs of species (Osborn 1942, Koford 1958, Detling and Painter 1983, Archer et al. 1984, Archer et al. 1987).<br/><br/>Plant community composition is also affected by changes in relative percentages in annuals versus perennials (Bonham and Lerwick 1976, Archer et al. 1987). In South Dakota mixed prairie, perennial grasses were replaced primarily by annual forbs (Archer et al. 1987). In New Mexico, diversity of both perennials and annuals increased under prairie dog herbivory (Stinnett 1981); these data should be viewed with caution because only one colony was sampled and not all colony plant species were accounted for.<br/><br/>Prairie dog effects on plant diversity depend on the type of plant-soil community and colony age (Bonham and Lerwick 1976, Stinnett 1981, Coppock et al. 1983, Krueger 1986). Sites that are strongly dominated by one species are likely to increase in diversity once prairie dogs move in, while diverse sites are likely to remain at their level of diversity prior to disturbance or lose diversity (Bonham and Lerwick 1976, Agnew et al. 1986). Elevated diversity is often found on young colonies and on young portions of colonies (Coppock et al. 1983, Krueger 1986). Thus, diversity may increase to a threshold associated with a given intensity and duration of prairie dog activity, but decrease beyond that threshold as one or two species dominate (Coppock et al. 1983, Archer et al. 1984, Krueger 1986, Steuter 1992). Other factors that affect diversity include availability of plant species propagules, herbivory by other wild and domestic animals, and prairie dog demographics. As for demographics, towns with low prairie dog densities and/or a population that is maintained well below carrying capacity are least likely to push a plant community into a low state of diversity.<br/><br/>End-of-season standing crop is primarily affected by the severity of herbivory, the response of plant species, and colony age (Bonham and Lerwick 1976, Coppock et al. 1983,b, Krueger 1986). Under heavy grazing by prairie dogs and light grazing by ungulates, annual net aboveground primary production (ANPP) does not appear to differ between on- and off-colony areas (Whicker and Detling 1988). Thus, prairie dogs may actually elevate ANPP by stimulating shoot production.<br/><br/>As a result of intensive above-ground vegetation removal by prairie dogs, vegetative and litter cover are lower in on- than off-colony areas, whereas amount of bare ground is higher on a colony (Knowles et al. 1982, Coppock et al. 1983, Archer and Detling 1986, Archer et al. 1987). These changes result in significant microsite-level impacts on colonies, including elevated soil temperature (Archer and Detling 1986), altered nutrient cycling (Whicker and Detling 1988), and possibly altered erosion and runoff patterns. By removing above-ground growth and elevating surface temperatures (Archer and Detling 1986), prairie dogs may facilitate green-up of cool season forages earlier in spring and later in fall than usual. Higher soil temperatures (Archer and Detling 1986) may also result in longer growing season for warm season plants.<br/><br/>Interactions with Ungulates<br/><br/>In relation to ungulates, the most important change effected by prairie dogs across their range is probably reduction in ungulate forage availability. However, nutrient density may be increased for large ungulates and they may prefer colonies until forage quantity becomes limiting (Steuter 1992). See Hansen and Gold (1977), O'Meilia et al. (1982), and Vanderhye, in Whicker and Detling (1985, unpubl. mans.) Bison, elk and pronghorn (<i>Antilocapra americana</i>) preferentially use prairie dog towns (Coppock et al. 1983, Wydeven and Dahlgren 1985, Krueger 1986), but they may experience little or no weight gain when doing so (Hansen and Gold 1977; O'Meilia et al. 1982). Increased diversity and abundance of certain forage types (forbs for pronghorn) and elevated forage quality (bison, elk, pronghorn) may attract the ungulates (Koford 1958, Coppock et al. 1983, Krueger 1986).<br/><br/>Effects on Mammals, Birds, and Other Wildlife<br/><br/>Colonies generally show increased biomass and unaffected or reduced diversity of small mammals (Hansen and Gold 1977, Clark et al. 1982, O'Meilia et al. 1982, Sharps and Uresk 1990). Density and biomass of other rodents is greater on than off colony, as a result of higher forage quality, greater forb seed availability, and more cover (burrows) on-colony. Increases are usually accounted for by a small number of species, including the northern grasshopper mouse (<i>Onychomys leucogaster</i>) and deer mouse (<i>Peromyscus maniculatus</i>) (O'Meilia et al. 1982, Agnew et al. 1986). Vole biomass is greater off colony, where graminoid cover (preferred vole habitat) is usually greater (Agnew et al. 1986). Data conflict for some species, such as the thirteen-lined ground squirrel (<i>Spermophilus tridecemlineatus</i>), of which biomass was lower on-colony (Agnew et al. 1986) in mixed prairie and off-colony in shortgrass (O'Meilia et al. 1982). Plant diversity may have impacted the ground squirrel, as off-colony diversity was higher on mixed prairie and lower on shortgrass. Cottontail (<i>Sylvilagus</i> spp.) density is higher on-colony when prairie dog burrows are available (Dano 1952, in Koford 1958; Hansen and Gold 1977). Jackrabbits (LEPUS spp.) show no favoritism to colonies, possibly because of the lack of aboveground cover (Koford 1958). Swift foxes (<i>Vulpes velox</i>) show a degree of dependence on prairie dogs (Uresk and Sharps 1986, in Sharps and Uresk 1990).<br/><br/>Birds commonly associated with colonies include the burrowing owl (<i>Athene cunicularia</i>), mountain plover (<i>Charadrius montanus</i>), horned lark (<i>Eremophila alpestris</i>), lark bunting (<i>Calamospiza melanocorys</i>), western meadowlark (<i>Sturnella neglecta</i>), mourning dove (<i>Zenaida macroura</i>), killdeer (<i>Charadrius vociferus</i>), barn swallow (<i>Hirundo rustica</i>), and various blackbirds (Koford 1958, Clark et al. 1982, Agnew et al. 1986, Sharps and Uresk 1990, Apa et al. 1991). The mountain plover, a species of high conservation concern, selects prairie dog colonies for the proper nesting conditions of low vegetation and relatively high bare ground coverage (Knowles et al. 1982). Plovers preferentially use prairie dog towns for breeding, feeding, and rearing young. Knowles et al. (1982) speculated that prairie dog extermination has largely contributed to plover decline. Prairie dog burrows are important roosting and nesting sites for burrowing owls (Koford 1958, Cheatheam 1977, Tyler 1983). Prairie dogs are not an important food source for burrowing owls, which rely heavily on arthropods (Tyler 1983). In mixed prairie, biomass and diversity of birds was greater on-colony than off (Agnew et al. 1986, Reading et al. 1989). Elevated abundance of birds on-colony may be a result of the increase in prolific seed producing plants and greater visibility with easier insect and seed detection (Agnew et al. 1986).<br/><br/>Insect biomass is typically much lower on- than off-colony as a result of elevated bird and small mammal (e.g., grasshopper mouse) activity (O'Meilia et al. 1982). With few exceptions insects account for a very small portion of prairie dog diet (Koford 1958). Harvester ant (<i>Pogonomyrmex occidentalis</i>) activity appears to be facilitated by prairie dog activity (Koford 1958, O'Meilia et al. 1982), presumably because ants like the worked soil of prairie dog mounds. Conversely, prairie dogs may prefer the disturbed soil around ant mounds for burrowing (Koford 1958).<br/><br/>Based on a review of recent island biogeography concepts, Reading et al. (1989) implied that prairie dog colony complexes are critical to regional grassland biodiversity. Further, they suggested that colony complexes be managed as prairie dog ecosystems composed of \"metapopulations\" of prairie dogs and associated fauna.<br/><br/>Effects on Soils<br/><br/>Prairie dogs may extensively alter colony soils by mixing upper and lower layers throughout almost a whole colony (Thorp 1949). In the process 30-40 tons of subsoil material may be brought to the surface, while over time soil texture may be changed (Thorp 1949). Soil mixing per burrow system may amount to 200-225 kg of soil (Whicker and Detling 1988). Mixing and prairie dog activities affect nutrients, as soil P and N under burrows are typically higher and lower, respectively, than mound-edge soils (Carlson and White 1987). Soil P accumulation is apparently a result of breakdown of prairie dog waste and bones. Nitrogen reduction may be caused by reduction in plant material growing in the mound. While total N may be decreased, the rate of N turnover is more important in terms of site productivity (Wedin 1992). The turnover rate increases with herbivory and disturbance. Carlson and White (1987) investigated colony soils on the edges of mounds, but not in intermound areas.<br/><br/>See also Oldemeyer et al. (1993) for information on effects on soils.","restorationPotential":"A prairie dog colony is generally readily restored or reinvigorated following catastrophe (see ecology and management sections). Pet prairie dogs have flourished in back yards since at least the late 1800s (Otero 1987). Given forage and protection from threats, they usually prosper and rebound.","siteConservationPlansConsidered":"As with other squirrels, prairie dogs are an especially resilient mammal in relationships with man. They prosper adjacent to railroads (Mearns 1907, Merriam 1902), highways, auto roads, and businesses where little or no buffer zone occurs. A colony in a small area can prosper for years without human interference as long as a forage base is available and except when one of the above threats or severe predation intercedes (R. Wallace, pers. obs., Lubbock, Texas). Thus, protection to the outer edge of a colony or colony complex will usually be sufficient. However, to ensure protection, the inclusion of a buffer zone is recommended. The size of the buffer zone will depend upon local conditions; for example, colonies that occur in urban areas should have a relatively larger buffer zone than colonies that occur in remote areas unpopulated by humans. Furthermore, if stewardship calls for colony expansion, then a land area substantially greater than the existing colony size should be managed accordingly. Expansion areas must have the proper habitat requirements as well (see other sections).","managementMethods":"Although prairie dogs are common, management is important for several reasons: 1) prairie dogs are still often viewed with disdain by humans managing for other purposes, and are thus constantly threatened, 2) the loss of one colony in an area may seem insignificant, but such losses, if extensive enough, amount to the loss of a significant genetic resource, and 3) prairie dogs are an important component of North American grasslands by virtue of their interactions with soils, flora, and fauna. Specifically, colonies and colony complexes can enhance the biodiversity of an area larger than the colony itself, depending upon the size of the grassland encompassing the colony(ies) (for example, see Reading et al. 1989). <br/><br/>Protection as a Management Tool <br/><br/>Because prairie dogs are resilient, self-managing creatures, protective management means assuring the exclusion of plague, control, and habitat loss, and monitoring prairie dog and associated floral/faunal trends (see other sections). <br/><br/>Reintroduction Plan <br/><br/>Plan Goal: Establishment of a long-term self-sustaining prairie dog colony functioning as a natural patch in grassland or savannah. <br/><br/>Plan Procedures - Site Characteristics: <br/><br/>1) Slope - < 10% (Koford 1958, Dalsted et al. 1981, Hillman et al. 1979). <br/><br/>2) Soil - No sands, sandy loam to heavier okay (Thorp 1949, Koford 1958, Bishop and Culbertson 1976). <br/><br/>3) Vegetation - Short to mixed grass (Bonham and Lerwick 1976, Coppock et al. 1983, Archer et al. 1987, Stinnett 1981). <br/><br/>4) Expansion area - Habitat allowed for expansion should primarily be of the ideal habitat. Colony encroachment into areas with an important woody component is possible if management is committed to facilitating the encroachment by initially and repeatedly top-removing resprouting woodies as needed (Osborn 1942, Player and Urness 1982, Weltzin 1990). <br/><br/>5) Dispersal area, New colony initiation - If new colony growth is allowed, areas within 3 km (Garrett and Franklin 1988) of the original colony should include ideal habitat. Both unvegetated travel lanes (Knowles 1986) and vegetated, pathless areas (Garrett and Franklin 1988) should be provided for travel to other areas of ideal habitat. Unvegetated travel lanes may include dirt roads, cow paths, ephemeral watercourses, and should radiate from a colony in at least four main directions. Roads and trails may lead dispersing animals to disturbed sites which might be suitable for colonization (Knowles 1986). As off colony vegetation density decreases and bare ground increases, the frequency and cover of unvegetated travel lanes can decrease as well. Vegetated, pathless areas may be important in providing cover for dispersing prairie dogs (Garrett and Franklin 1988). <br/><br/>Initial Establishment: Extant vegetation should be reduced to about 5-15 cm above ground level (Player and Urness 1982). This will leave forage available while allowing visibility. Vegetation should be artificially maintained at this height until the prairie dogs are abundant enough to regulate the height. A buffer zone around the prairie dogs of vegetation maintained low is necessary to inhibit predator concealment. <br/><br/>Animal Characteristics: <br/><br/>1) Age - Young adults at 2 years of age should be used as they can breed and might breed in the spring of the introduction (Hoogland and Foltz 1982). If 1-year-old animals must be used, it is preferable that they be males, which tend to disperse at age 1 anyway (Garrett and Franklin 1988). <br/><br/>2) Male:female, coterie size - Release a 1:3 or 1:4 ratio, based on typical coterie make-up (Hoogland and Foltz 1982). If male influence is higher, there may be too much fighting and stress. <br/><br/>3) Animal density - A proper release density is 12 animals per hectare, which is close to the average of adult and juvenile dogs in natural populations (Koford 1958; King 1959; Powell, unpubl. mans.). Given a male:female ratio of 1:3, this density provides 3 coteries per hectare. For reference, in two successful reintroductions the density of animals initially released was less than (Hansen and Gold 1977) and equal to (O'Meilia et al. 1982) 12/ha. <br/><br/>4) Animal source - Prairie dogs should be obtained from within the same climatic/vegetation region and from the closest possible colony (Cully 1992). This provides the best chance of obtaining a match between the habitat and the prairie dogs and reduces the odds of introducing diseases (Cully 1992). Cully (1992) recommended that the seed colony be checked for plague and overall health and seed colonies with high rates of disease be avoided. He also recommended that all individuals be quarantined for control of disease. <br/><br/>Release Schedule: <br/><br/>1) Time of year - Animals should be transplanted in spring when the majority of cool season species are resprouting in response to top removal but dense grass growth has not yet accumulated (Brown et al. 1974). Successful spring reintroductions were documented by Hansen and Gold (1977) and O'Meilia et al. (1982). High quality forage with moisture should be available and temperatures should not be stressful. Artificial or livestock-induced maintenance of low vegetation stature may be required if vegetation growth rate is high following resprouting. If regrowth rate is very rapid, consider introduction at time of year when growth rate may be slower (e.g., in response to reduced soil moisture). (Note: At this writing one case in which establishment under slightly different conditions from those recommended here is known. Utah prairie dogs were successfully established in early summer (late June) on a 25-31 cm rainfall site at 2200 m elevation (Player and Urness 1982).) <br/><br/>2) Number of animals released - Based on data on Utah prairie dogs, a large number of animals (about 50) released at one time is apparently not a problem (Player and Urness 1982). Whether an even larger number of animals can be released simultaneously on one site and successfully establish is unclear; more information is needed. As many as 184 to 200 animals have been released on adjacent sites (as many as 50/ha) in the same spring (O'Meilia et al. 1982) and summer (Player and Urness 1982). Animals are commonly released over consecutive years, with the largest number released during the first year (Hansen and Gold 1977, O'Meilia et al. 1982). <br/><br/>Number of Burrow Entrances: Given that only one burrow entrance is usually found in one burrow system (Stromberg 1978), at least three potential burrow entrances per coterie should be provided to ensure that the animals find a burrow entrance they like. Three burrows per coterie and three coteries per hectare yield nine potential burrow entrances per hectare. However, this is a very low figure for natural populations, which commonly have about 30-100 burrows/ha. Naturally dispersing prairie dogs obviously begin without mounds, but population levels are very low (probably about 2-5 animals). In reintroduction, dozens of animals may be released within the same season, if not simultaneously (O'Meilia et al. 1982, Player and Urness 1982). Thus, an excess of burrow mound entrances would be ideal, such as 30-40/ha. This decision will reside with a manager based on needs and limitations at the time. <br/><br/>Structure of Burrows: Burrows should be initiated by digging 10- 15-cm-wide holes about one meter deep (Sheets et al. 1971, Player and Urness 1982). Holes should be at steep angles, such as 10-40 degrees (Brown et al. 1974, Player and Urness 1982). A power auger is ideal for digging (Player and Urness 1982). Soil from holes need not be mounded around the hole perimeter, but an auger would accomplish this on its own to some degree. Cover, in the form of wooden boxes with a small entrance (about 15 x 15 cm), or other predator- and weather-proof structure, should be provided for at least some of the prairie dogs (about 25-50%) until the animals rely strictly on their burrows (Carpenter and Martin 1969, Player and Urness 1982, Siminski 1992). Cover boxes should be placed over burrow holes (Carpenter and Martin 1969, Player and Urness 1982). <br/><br/>Site Preparation: Ideally a site should be assessed by disturbing it one year in advance and monitoring floral and faunal response (Player and Urness 1982). Vegetation should be repeatedly top- clipped and the soil disturbed somewhat, such as several patches per hectare, with each patch exceeding burrow mound diameter (> 1 m). Soil disturbance might encourage species that are initially unwanted in an establishing prairie dog colony, such as predators. Monitoring should search for such species and managers must be willing to remove them as necessary. <br/><br/>If a site is disturbed a year in advance, a year-long pre- introduction study on colony vegetation should be conducted to help clarify the feasibility of an introduction. Feasibility would be determined by establishing whether forage quality and quantity are adequate and if other objectives (e.g., elevated diversity) might be met. Vegetation should be monitored by season for changes in production, diversity, and composition. Monitoring on adjacent control (undisturbed) sites should proceed as well. <br/><br/>Introductions often work when a site is disturbed immediately prior to prairie dog release (Carpenter and Martin 1969), but prior assessment of site response to disturbance is highly recommended, especially for major, costly reintroduction attempts aimed at establishing a large, fully functional colony. (Note: Reports emphasizing the ease of establishment of prairie dogs [Otero 1987, Carpenter and Martin 1987] often stem from cases where the animals were highly managed, in that the animals were walled in, watched every day, and daily provided with food.) <br/><br/>Initial Release: Consider enclosing some prairie dogs in cages over artificial holes to discourage prairie dog wandering and predation (Player and Urness 1982). Trap predators until all prairie dogs are living in burrows. <br/><br/>Initial Monitoring and Care: To help ensure animal safety and success of introduction, monitor prairie dog numbers and activity (Player and Urness 1982) until the animals appear unreliant on cover boxes. Then shift to monitoring about every three days. The length of the intensive monitoring period will depend upon site-specific conditions and feasibility. Where feasible and necessary, remove all predators until the year when a majority of the adults have contributed to a cohort of weanlings. However, this may not be necessary if the supply of introduced prairie dogs is very large. Consider forage supplements (e.g., high protein pellets) at release and during stressful periods (dry spells, extreme cold), until weaning success is high. If dry feed is supplied, consider providing open water or moist feed as well. In areas of grassland with no cacti or woody component, consider providing succulent or green material outside of the growing season. <br/><br/>Laws Affecting Introduction: Managers should be aware of laws regarding import, transport, introduction, and control of rodents. Laws may apply regarding possible disease transmission. Many states (e.g., Texas, New Mexico, South Dakota) have laws requiring prairie dog control when they are a pest. Such laws may have statements affecting introduction attempts. <br/><br/>Responsible Handling of Prairie Dogs: Managers should be apprised of humane transport and housing techniques (more information is needed), as well as steps necessary for protection from disease transmission from animal to humans. Seed colonies should be dusted to insecticidally control any extant fleas prior to handling prairie dogs. <br/><br/>Trapping for Reintroduction Garrett and Franklin (1988) used National double-door live traps for adults and yearlings and National single-door traps for juveniles. They baited traps with oats and located them at burrow entrances. <br/><br/>Pressurized water with suds (Elias et al. 1974, Lewis et al. 1979) and water alone (Carpenter and Martin 1969) can be applied to burrows. In the former case (Elias et al. 1974), the foaming suds fill the burrows, reducing the amount of water needed. An average capture rate of 10 prairie dogs per hour has been recorded. Without suds, 29 prairie dogs were taken in two hours. <br/><br/>Control as a Management Tool <br/><br/>In cases where colony expansion or initiation is inappropriate, numerous effective tried-and-true control measures exist. Non-lethal methods include establishment of visual barriers to control direction and rate of expansion (Franklin and Garrett 1989), chemosterilants in artificially provided forages to reduce levels of fertilization and natality (Garrett and Franklin 1983), and deferment of ungulate grazing to allow vegetative growth to exceed the acceptable limits of prairie dogs (Snell and Hlavachick 1982, in Cable and Timm 1987). On high-condition mixed prairie, fire may also discourage colony expansion (Klukas 1987). When off-colony areas are burned, attracting ungulates away from colonies (Coppock and Detling 1986), prairie dogs may have difficulty suppressing on-colony vegetation until ungulates return (Klukas 1987). <br/><br/>Lethal control measures include strychnine and zinc phosphide laced grain baits and phosphine and other gases, all of which are highly effective inducers of mortality in prairie dogs and certain other granivores as well (Deisch et al. 1990). Animal Damage Control recommends poison application as follows (ADC, no date). Toxic bait, the most widely used control agent, should be applied when vegetation is not green, in order to avoid foraging competition. Pre-bait with 1 teaspoon of untreated oats at each burrow to get the prairie dogs on the grain. Once most of the grain is consumed, which may take a few days, apply 1 teaspoon of baited grain per burrow. To ensure that non-target animals will not take poisoned grain, do not apply poisoned bait until the prairie dogs are readily consuming the pre-bait. Prairie dogs that survive the toxic grain can be gassed by inserting gas-releasing cartridges or tablets into burrows and plugging the burrows. (Note: Zinc-phosphide and some other toxins can be used only by individuals certified as pesticide applicators in their state.) The poisons can affect some non-target species. Within four days of application, strychnine baits reduced horned lark (EREMOPHILA ALPESTRIS) densities by 55-66% (Apa et al. 1991). However, when zinc-phosphide was used no effect was observed on horned larks. Zinc-phosphide is toxic to horned larks, but the birds are repelled by its taste and smell. The control of prairie dogs also caused a long-term depression of horned larks as the colony vegetation grew to a height and density disfavored by the birds. <br/><br/>Zinc-phosphide will cause mortality of deer mice (Deisch et al. 1990), while zinc-phosphide and strychnine will reduce ant and wolf spider numbers, respectively (Deisch et al. 1989). However, over the long term, control results in elevated numbers of wolf spiders and ground beetles. See Uresk et al. (1988) for further information on effects of toxins on wildlife. <br/><br/>Significantly, prairie dog control is so expensive that in many areas of prairie dog range the forage benefits derived by livestock are not enough to result in recovery of costs of control (Collins et al. 1984, Sharps 1988, Miller et al. 1990). On shortgrass range, Collins et al. (1984) found that forage increases following control amounted to only 51 kg/ha/year. If each year prairie dogs repopulated at least 30% of the area originally treated, total costs were not recovered because of the added cost of yearly maintenance control. Initial treatment costs range from $16-17/ha ($6.50-6.90/acre), with yearly maintenance costs of about 75% of initial control costs (Collins et al. 1984). <br/><br/>Where the federal government is paying for control, the associated cost to the taxpayer led Sharps (1987) to propose that control programs be abandoned in favor of sport shooting of prairie dogs as a way to boost local economies. In South Dakota in 1986, 46,000 hunter days were expended in shooting prairie dogs (Sharps 1987). Sport shooting is an inefficient control measure, but it does limit prairie dog expansion if regularly used (Reading et al. 1989). Most importantly, shooting does not present the risk offered by toxins to nontarget wildlife. <br/><br/>For further details on lethal control measures see Deisch et al. (1990), ADC control pamphlets (ADC, no date), and/or contact local animal control offices. ADC is with USDA-APHIS (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service). <br/><br/>Flea Control in Prairie Dog Colonies <br/><br/>In areas where prairie dogs are close to humans, colony fleas are killed with insecticidal dusts (e.g., pyroperm, carbaryl [sevin]) to prevent transmission to domestic dogs and cats (which carry plague to human homes). Flea control also should limit the chance of disease transmission through the prairie dog colony. Pyroperm does not seem to damage the prairie dogs, even if it touches the animals directly (Brown 1992). <br/><br/>Animal Damage Control (ADC) recommends that when controlling prairie dogs, fleas are controlled as well (ADC, no date). If fleas are not controlled prior to prairie dog control, the fleas may seek the next available living being (e.g., humans) once the prairie dogs are controlled.","monitoringMethods":"On a range-wide basis prairie dogs are common and apparently exist in relatively stable numbers, but long-term monitoring may be appropriate for assessing population trends. Frequent monitoring may be needed in some circumstances. For example, if monitoring occurs only once per year plague-related declines might not be caught early enough. However, knowledge of plague activity in an area should give managers the necessary lead time to avert a plague disaster. <br/><br/>Monitoring is conducted on fine and coarse resolution. Fine scale or on-site monitoring includes 1) prairie dog counts, 2) mark-recapture, and 3) indices to population levels, including active burrow entrance estimates, active burrow mound estimates, and active burrow mound density estimates. To estimate the adult (plus yearling) population, counts should be made in late winter, prior to emergence of the young of the year. Total population estimates should be made in the spring after the young of the year have emerged but before extensive juvenile mortality occurs. In this way maximum population size is estimated, as well as reproductive success, litter size, male:female ratio, and adult:juvenile ratio. Visual counts entail observation of prairie dogs during peak activity (morning or evening). Results of visual count estimates of white-tailed prairie dogs often correlate well with results of mark-recapture estimates (Fagerstone and Biggins 1986, Menkens et al. 1990), indicating that visual counts may be used in place of the more tedious and time consuming mark-recapture technique. However, there are many sources of variability (location on colony, time of day, between year variation) that potentially weaken the accuracy of visual count estimates. For example, Powell (unpubl. mans.) found that extensive high cloud cover delayed emergence of prairie dogs. However, he found no differences in estimates conducted in morning versus evening. Regardless, great care should be taken in replicating conditions from count to count (Menkens et al. 1990). When care is taken, visual counts should be used for population size estimate rather than mark-recapture. Managers should develop a visual count scheme that is periodically checked against mark-recapture data. See Menkens et al. (1990) and Fagerstone and Biggins (1986) for details on establishing and conducting visual counts and mark-recapture estimates. See Severson and Plumb (1998) for a comparison of methods to estimate population density. <br/><br/>Burrow counts do not accurately reflect population size (Powell, unpubl. mans.) because prairie dogs open some burrows but do not use them, a few burrows may be utilized by one prairie dog, and one burrow may be utilized by several prairie dogs. Thus burrow-related indices should only be used as a crude index to population size and prairie dog activity. The most valuable piece of information from such indices is probably related to colony expansion, when long-term counts are made of new burrow mounds occurring on a colony perimeter. <br/><br/>Coarse-level monitoring entails aerial photography to detect colonies and assess colony size, number of burrows, burrow density, and, by viewing sequential images from year to year, colony expansion/contraction (Bishop and Culbertson 1976; Cheatheam 1977; Dalsted et al. 1981; Conley and Conley, no date; Powell, unpubl. mans.). Powell (unpubl. mans.) found that color aerial photos at a scale of 1:20,000, backed up by contact with local knowledgeable people, were adequate to detect prairie dog colonies larger than 2 ha. Additionally, prairie dog towns were easily identified near the end of the growing season in August, when a deep green color associated with greater canopy cover off-colony contrasted sharply with a weak green color produced by reduced canopy cover on-colony. Conversely, in November, when vegetation was dormant and brown, canopy cover differences did not show up as well. November photos were usable but at reduced accuracy. Using black-and-white photos at 1:7920, Cheatheam (1977) easily detected colonies, even in sparsely vegetated areas where colony/off-colony contrast was minimal. Rapid expansion of colonies at Wind Cave National Park required more rapid colony monitoring techniques than on-site inspection (Dalsted et al. 1981). Aerial photos using color, black- and-white, and color infrared (CIR) film were taken at 1:15,840. While color and black-and-white allowed detection and delineation of colonies, CIR was much more sensitive to vegetation differences, making accurate boundary determination much easier. However, CIR did not detect towns smaller than 0.5 ha. Cost of CIR ($3.70/ha) was only 60% of on-site assessment ($6.20/ha). Finally, using MSS Landsat images Conley and Conley (no date) found that colonies smaller than 50 ha could not be detected. (Note: Which of the above fine- or coarse-scale techniques should be employed will depend on site- specific needs as outlined by the manager.) <br/><br/>Land managers should keep abreast of control efforts in their regions to ensure that control does not lead to local/regional endangerment of prairie dogs.","managementProgramContacts":"Al Steuter of the TNC Niobrara Preserve in Nebraska manages a mixed prairie community with a bison and fire regime. The area has several prairie dog colonies, thus Al is very familiar with relationships of ungulates and prairie dogs. See addresses for Larry Hays (Wind Cave National Park, South Dakota), Richard Klukas (NPS- Midwest Regional Office), and Bob Oakleaf (Wyoming Game and Fish) in MONIT.PROG and MGMT.RSRCH.PROG. See same sections for individuals who can recommend contacts. Additional information is available in the Montana Prairie Dog Management Guidelines (BLM 1988), Utah Prairie Dog Recovery Plan (USFWS 1991), and Arizona reintroduction proposal (Brown 1974).","monitoringProgramContacts":"As of 1993, colony and habitat monitoring were occurring in Arizona, South Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming. Arizona was assessing areas for black-tailed prairie dog and possibly ferret reintroduction, though the state has healthy Gunnison's prairie dog numbers (van Pelt 1992). Extensive monitoring has been conducted in the past at Wind Cave National Park (WCNP), though today substantially less is being done. For information on WCNP monitoring and research contact Richard Klukas (past Research Biologist) in Nebraska or Larry Hays (current Natural Resources Specialist) at WCNP. Montana and Wyoming are leaders in ferret information and ferret reintroduction planning, thus colony monitoring is on-going. <br/><br/>Recommended contacts include individuals involved in or who are familiar with monitoring activities. Official titles are in capital letters. <br/><br/>CONTACTS: <br/><br/>ARIZONA: Bill van Pelt, Biologist, Arizona Game and Fish, 2222 W. Greenway Road, Phoenix, AZ 85023. N.L. Slobodchikoff, Biologist, Department of Biology, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011. <br/><br/>COLORADO: Dean Biggins, Biologist, USFWS, National Ecology Research Center, 4512 McMurry Ave, Fort Collins, CO 80525-3400. John Oldemeyer, Biologist, same address as Dean Biggins. <br/><br/>IDAHO: T. W. Clark, Biologist, Northern Rockies Conservation Cooperative, Box 2705, Jackson, WY 83001. <br/><br/>MONTANA: Ron Crete, Biologist, USFWS, Fish and Wildlife Enhancement, 301 South Park, Box 10023, Helena, MT 59626. Arnold Dood, Biologist, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717-0001. <br/><br/>NEBRASKA: Richard Klukas, Biologist, NPS-Midwest Region, Division of Natural Resources, 1709 Jackson St., Omaha, NE 68102. <br/><br/>NEW MEXICO: Ted Brown, Environmental Specialist, New Mexico Environmental Division, Santa Fe, NM. Jack (Buck) F. Cully, Jr., Wildlife Biologist, USFWS, New Mexico Ecol. Serv. Field Office, Suite D, 3530 Pan American Hwy NE., Albuquerque, NM 87107. John Hubbard, Endangered Species Biologist, New Mexico Game and Fish Dept., Santa Fe, NM. <br/><br/>SOUTH DAKOTA: Larry Hays, Natural Resources Specialist, Wind Cave National Park, Hot Springs, SD. Daniel W. Uresk, Biologist, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, South Dakota School of Mines, Rapid City, SD 57701. <br/><br/>UTAH: Rodney Player, Biologist, Range Sci. Dept., Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322. Phil Urness, same address as Rodney Player. <br/><br/>WYOMING: Bob Oakleaf, Biologist, Wyoming Game and Fish Dept., 260 Buena Vista, Lander, WY 82520. <br/><br/>MEXICO: Gerardo Ceballos-G., Biologist, Centro de Ecologia, Delegacion Coyoacan, Univ. Auton. de Mex., Mexico D.F. CP04510, MEXICO.","managementResearchPrograms":"Tim W. Clark, Northern Rockies Conservation Cooperative, Box 2705, Jackson, Wyoming 83001 - ecology, ferret relationships (research may primarily be in Montana and Wyoming). <br/><br/>James K. Detling, Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory, Dept. Biol., Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 - ecology. <br/><br/>William L. Franklin, Dept. Biol., Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa - behavior (not currently conducting prairie dog research). <br/><br/>For Montana and Wyoming ferret research and associated prairie dog research, see also Montana and Wyoming contacts listed under MONIT.PROG. <br/><br/>A body of important prairie dog research has emerged from Wind Cave National Park (WCNP), South Dakota, though today substantially less research is being conducted there. For information on monitoring and research at WCNP contact Richard Klukas (past Research Biologist) in Nebraska or Larry Hays (current Natural Resources Specialist) at WCNP.","managementResearchNeeds":"The most important areas of need, not in order of significance, are 1) plague ecology (Cully 1992), 2) interactions between prairie dogs and ungulates on shortgrass and the more arid portions of the range, 3) impacts of prairie dogs on the ecosystem, 4) trends in total numbers, and 5) genetic interaction in colony complexes (see Reading et al. [1989] for information on metapopulations). Good work has been done in all these areas, but bodies of work large enough to develop highly supported generalizations do not exist. Other areas where work is needed are prairie dog/predator interactions (what are the most important predators, how important are they), long-term effects of prairie dogs on communities (flora, fauna, soils), and prairie dog subspecies status. Specific questions might compare soil characteristics in very old colonies, young colonies, and uncolonized areas, and ANPP on and off colony. Research is desperately needed on floral/faunal interactions in the less studied portions of the prairie dog's range, such as southern and northern range limits.","biologicalResearchNeeds":null,"additionalTopics":null},"occurrenceViabilities":[{"eoRankSpecsDetailId":102501,"eoRankSpecsGroupName":null,"locationUseClass":{"id":1,"locationUseClassDescEn":"Not applicable","locationUseClassDescEs":"No se aplica","locationUseClassDescFr":"Sans objet","displayOrder":1},"excellentViability":null,"goodViability":null,"fairViability":null,"poorViability":null,"viabilityJustification":"Use the Generic Guidelines for the Application of Occurrence Ranks (2008).<br>The Key for Ranking Species Occurrences Using the Generic Approach provides a step-wise process for implementing this method.","versionDate":null,"versionAuthor":null,"versionNotes":null,"lastModified":"2020-05-14T02:17:42.252264Z"}],"references":[{"id":115587,"citation":"Agnew, W., D. W. Uresk and R. M. Hansen. 1986. Flora and fauna associated with prairie dog colonies and adjacent ungrazed mixed-grass prairie in western South Dakota. Journal of Range Management 39:135-9.","shortCitationAuthor":"Agnew et al.","shortCitationYear":1986,"referenceCode":"A86AGN01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":1151804,"citation":"American Society of Mammalogists (ASM). 2025. Mammal Diversity Database (Version 1.13) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10595931. Online. Available: https://www.mammaldiversity.org/","shortCitationAuthor":"American Society of Mammalogists (ASM)","shortCitationYear":2025,"referenceCode":"W25ASM01NAUS","lastModified":"2025-04-04T21:45:15.526109Z"},{"id":144782,"citation":"Anderson, N. H. 1976b. The distribution and biology of the Oregon Trichoptera. Oregon State University Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 134. 152 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Anderson","shortCitationYear":1972,"referenceCode":"A72AND0200LA","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":134258,"citation":"Animal Damage Control (ADC). No date. Prairie dogs and their control. New Mexico Animal Damage Control Program, APHIS, U.S. Department of Agriculture.","shortCitationAuthor":"Animal Damage Control (ADC)","shortCitationYear":null,"referenceCode":"NNDANI01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":150336,"citation":"Anthony, A. and D. Foreman. 1951. Observations on the reproductive cycle of the black-tailed prairie dog (CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS). Physiol. Zool. 24:242-8.","shortCitationAuthor":"Anthony and Foreman","shortCitationYear":1951,"referenceCode":"A51ANT01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":127185,"citation":"Apa, A. D., D. W. Uresk, and R. L. Linder. 1990. Black-tailed prairie dog populations one year after treatment with rodenticides. Great Basin Nat. 50:107-113.","shortCitationAuthor":"Apa et al.","shortCitationYear":1990,"referenceCode":"A90APA01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":142732,"citation":"Apa, A. D., D. W. Uresk, and R. L. Linder. 1991. Impacts of black-tailed prairie dog rodenticides on nontarget passerines. Great Basin Nat. 51:301-309.","shortCitationAuthor":"Apa et al.","shortCitationYear":1991,"referenceCode":"A91APA01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":139607,"citation":"Archer, S. and J. K. Detling. 1986. Evaluation of potential herbivore mediation of plant water status in a North American mixed-grass prairie. Oikos 47:287-91.","shortCitationAuthor":"Archer and Detling","shortCitationYear":1986,"referenceCode":"A86ARC01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":144920,"citation":"Archer, S., M. G. Garrett and J. K. Detling. 1987. Rates of vegetation change associated with prairie dog (CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS) grazing in North American mixed grass prairie. Vegetatio 72:159-66.","shortCitationAuthor":"Archer et al.","shortCitationYear":1987,"referenceCode":"A87ARC01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":124484,"citation":"Archer, S. R., I. D. Lebreton, M. G. Garrett, and J. K. Detling. 1984. Structural changes in a mixed-grass prairie plant community as a function of prairie dog colonization history. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Am. 65:162.","shortCitationAuthor":"Archer et al.","shortCitationYear":1984,"referenceCode":"A84ARC01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":1143287,"citation":"Arizona Game and Fish Department (AZGFD). 2024. Arizona Wildlife Conservation Strategy. Species of Greatest Conservation Need. https://awcs.azgfd.com/species","shortCitationAuthor":"AZGFD","shortCitationYear":2024,"referenceCode":"W24AZG02NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:02.988039Z"},{"id":154712,"citation":"Bailey, V. 1905. Biological survey of Texas. Bur. Biol. Sur. North American Fauna 25. U.S. Department of Agriculture. 222 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Bailey","shortCitationYear":1905,"referenceCode":"N05BAI01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":142246,"citation":"Bakko, E. B., W. P. Porter, and B. A. Wunder. 1989. Body temperature patterns in black-tailed prairie dogs in the field. Can. J. Zool. 66:1783-1789.","shortCitationAuthor":"Bakko et al.","shortCitationYear":1989,"referenceCode":"A88BAK01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":119122,"citation":"Banfield, A. W. F. 1974. The mammals of Canada. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Canada. 438 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Banfield","shortCitationYear":1974,"referenceCode":"B74BAN01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:12:03.631914Z"},{"id":125706,"citation":"Beckstead, M. 1977. Digestibility of common forage plants and energetic requirements of the black-tailed prairie dog. South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD. M.S. Thesis. Unpublished. 39 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Beckstead","shortCitationYear":1977,"referenceCode":"NNDBEC01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":138908,"citation":"Bevers, M., J. Hoff, D. W. Uresk, and G. L. Schenbeck. 1997. Spatial optimization of prairie dog colonies for black-footed ferret recovery. Operations Research 45(4):495-507.","shortCitationAuthor":"Bevers et al.","shortCitationYear":1997,"referenceCode":"A97BEV01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":140365,"citation":"Biggins, D. E., and M. Y. Kosoy. 2001. Influences of introduced plague on North American mammals: implications from ecology of plague in Asia. Journal of Mammalogy 82:906-916.","shortCitationAuthor":"Biggins and Kosoy","shortCitationYear":2001,"referenceCode":"A01BIG01NACA","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":140667,"citation":"Biggins, D. E. and R. A. Crete. 1989. Black-footed ferret recovery. Pp. 59-63 in A. J. Bjugstad, D. W. Ursek, and R. H. Hamre (technical coordinators). 9th Great Plains Wildlife Damage Control Workshop Proceedings. Fort Collins, CO. USFS GTR-RM-171.","shortCitationAuthor":"Biggins and Crete","shortCitationYear":1989,"referenceCode":"N89BIG01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":105307,"citation":"Bintz, G. L. 1984. Water balance, water stress, and the evolution of seasonal torpor in ground-dwelling sciurids. Pp. 142-65 in J. O. Murie and G. R. Michener (eds.). The Biology of Ground-dwelling Sciurids. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE.","shortCitationAuthor":"Bintz","shortCitationYear":1984,"referenceCode":"A84BIN01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":763102,"citation":"Biodiversity Legal Foundation and J. C. Sharps. 1994. Petition to classify the Black-tailed Prairie Dog (CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS) as a Category 2 Candidate species pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act and the intent of the Endangered Species Act. P.O. Box 18237, Boulder, Colorado 80308. 82 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Biodiversity Legal Foundation and Sharps","shortCitationYear":1994,"referenceCode":"D94BLF61HQUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":114298,"citation":"Bishop, N. G. and J. L. Culbertson. 1976. Decline of prairie dog towns in southwestern North Dakota. Journal of Range Management 29:217-20.","shortCitationAuthor":"Bishop and Culbertson","shortCitationYear":1976,"referenceCode":"A76BIS01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":132195,"citation":"Bonham, C. D. and A. Lerwick. 1976. Vegetation changes induced by prairie dogs on shortgrass range. Journal of Range Management 29:221-25.","shortCitationAuthor":"Bonham and Lerwick","shortCitationYear":1976,"referenceCode":"A76BON01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":151129,"citation":"Brown, D. E., et al. 1974. Proposal for the reintroduction of the black-tailed prairie dog into Arizona. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, AZ. Project W-53-R-24. 11 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Brown et al.","shortCitationYear":1974,"referenceCode":"N74BRO01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":102332,"citation":"Brown, Ted. 1992. Environmental Specialist, New Mexico Environmental Improvement Division.","shortCitationAuthor":"Brown","shortCitationYear":1992,"referenceCode":"PNDBRO01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":139654,"citation":"Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1988. Montana prairie dog management guidelines. Bureau of Land Management Montana Office. BLM-MT-GI-88-002-4352.","shortCitationAuthor":"BLM","shortCitationYear":1988,"referenceCode":"N88BLM01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":142922,"citation":"Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 1990. Working toward recovery. Bureau of Land Management, Montana/Dakotas.","shortCitationAuthor":"BLM","shortCitationYear":1990,"referenceCode":"N90BLM01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":124011,"citation":"Burns, J. A., D. L. Flath and T. W. Clark. 1989. On the structure and function of white-tailed prairie dog burrows. Great Basin Nat. 49:517-24.","shortCitationAuthor":"Burns et al.","shortCitationYear":1989,"referenceCode":"A89BUR08NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":134440,"citation":"Burt, W. H. 1976. A field guide to the mammals. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts. 289 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Burt","shortCitationYear":1976,"referenceCode":"B76BUR01HQUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":141901,"citation":"Cable, K. A. and R. M. Timm. 1988. Efficacy of deferred grazing in reducing prairie dog reinfestation rates. Pp. 46-9 in D. W. Uresk, G. L. Schenbeck and R. Cefkin (technical coordinators). Fort Collins, CO. USFS-GTR-RM-154.","shortCitationAuthor":"Cable and Timm","shortCitationYear":1988,"referenceCode":"N88CAB01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":132784,"citation":"Cahalane, V. H. 1954. Status of the black-footed ferret. Journal of Mammalogy 35:418-24.","shortCitationAuthor":"Cahalane","shortCitationYear":1954,"referenceCode":"A54CAH01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":148377,"citation":"Cain, S. A. et. al. 1971. Predator control - 1971. Report to the Council on Environmental Quality and the Department of the Interior by the Advisory Committee on Predator Control. Institute for Environmental Quality, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 207 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Cain et al.","shortCitationYear":1971,"referenceCode":"R71CAI01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":102597,"citation":"Caire, W., J. D. Tyler, B. P. Glass, and M. A. Mares. 1989. Mammals of Oklahoma. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Oklahoma. 567 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Caire et al.","shortCitationYear":1989,"referenceCode":"B89CAI01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:12:05.975685Z"},{"id":765469,"citation":"Campbell, T. M., III., and T. W. Clark. 1980. Colony characteristics and vertebrate associates of white-tailed and black-tailed prairie dogs in Wyoming. American Midland Naturalist 105:269-276.","shortCitationAuthor":"Campbell and Clark","shortCitationYear":1980,"referenceCode":"A80CAM71HQUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":140532,"citation":"Carlson, D. C. and E. M. White. 1987. Effects of prairie dogs on mound soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 51:389-3.","shortCitationAuthor":"Carlson and White","shortCitationYear":1987,"referenceCode":"A87CAR05NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":141343,"citation":"Carpenter, J. W., and R. P. Martin. 1969. Capturing prairie dogs for transplanting. J. Wildl. Manage. 33:1024.","shortCitationAuthor":"Carpenter and Martin","shortCitationYear":1969,"referenceCode":"A69CAR01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":128616,"citation":"Carr, A. F., Jr. 1940. A contribution to the herpetology of Florida. Univ. Florida Biol. Sci. Ser. 3:1.118.","shortCitationAuthor":"Carr","shortCitationYear":1940,"referenceCode":"A40CAR01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":1147667,"citation":"Ceballos, G., E. Mellink, and L.R. Hanebury. 1993. Distribution and Conservation Status of Prairie Dogs <i>Cynomys mexicanus</i> and Cynomys ludovicianus in Mexico. Biological Conservation 63(2): 105-112. Online. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/0006-3207(93)90497-O","shortCitationAuthor":"Ceballos et al.","shortCitationYear":1993,"referenceCode":"A93CEB01NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:02.988039Z"},{"id":111340,"citation":"Ceballos-G., G. y D. Wilson. 1985. Cynomys mexicanus. Mamm. Species, 248: 1-3.","shortCitationAuthor":"Ceballos-G. and Wilson","shortCitationYear":1985,"referenceCode":"A85CEB0100LA","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":763297,"citation":"Cheatham, C. K. 1977. Density and distribution of the black-tailed prairie dog in Texas. Texas J. Science 29:33-40.","shortCitationAuthor":"Cheatham","shortCitationYear":1977,"referenceCode":"A77CHE61HQUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":154013,"citation":"Cheatheam, L. K. 1977. Density and distribution of the black-tailed prairie dog in Texas. Texas J. Sci. 29:33-40.","shortCitationAuthor":"Cheatheam","shortCitationYear":1977,"referenceCode":"A77CHE01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":111431,"citation":"Chesser, R. 1979. Genetic variablility of <i>Cynomys ludovicianus</i> in New Mexico. Final report to New Mexico Game and Fish Department, Santa Fe, NM.","shortCitationAuthor":"Chesser","shortCitationYear":1979,"referenceCode":"R79CHE01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":115590,"citation":"Cincotta, R. P. 1989. Note on mound architecture of the black-tailed prairie dog. Great Basin Naturalist 49:621-3.","shortCitationAuthor":"Cincotta","shortCitationYear":1989,"referenceCode":"A89CIN01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":108524,"citation":"Cincotta, R. P., D. W. Uresk, and R. M. Hansen. 1987. Demography of black-tailed prairie dog populations reoccupy-ing site treated with rodenticide. Great Basin Nat. 47:339-343.","shortCitationAuthor":"Cincotta et al.","shortCitationYear":1987,"referenceCode":"A87CIN01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":763306,"citation":"Clark, T. W., J. Grensten, M.Gorges, R. Crete, and J. Gill. 1987. Analysis of black-footed ferret translocation sites in Montana. The Prairie Naturalist 19(1):43-56.","shortCitationAuthor":"Clark et al.","shortCitationYear":1987,"referenceCode":"A87CLA61HQUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":113221,"citation":"Clark, T.W., R.S. Hoffmann, and C.F. Nadler. 1971. <i>Cynomys leucurus</i>. Mammalian Species, 7:1-4.","shortCitationAuthor":"Clark et al.","shortCitationYear":1971,"referenceCode":"A71CLA01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":133335,"citation":"Clark, T. W., T. M. Campbell III, D. G. Socha and D. E. Casey. 1982. Prairie dog colony attributes and associated vertebrate species. Great Basin Naturalist 1982:?","shortCitationAuthor":"Clark et al.","shortCitationYear":1982,"referenceCode":"A82CLA02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":156061,"citation":"Clippinger, N. W. 1989. Habitat suitability index models: black-tailed prairie dog. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82(10.156). 21 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Clippinger","shortCitationYear":1989,"referenceCode":"B89CLI01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":119872,"citation":"Collins, A. R., J. P. Workman, and D. W. Uresk. 1984. An ecomonic analysis of black-tailed prairie dog (CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS) control. Journal of Range Management 37:358-61.","shortCitationAuthor":"Collins et al.","shortCitationYear":1984,"referenceCode":"A84COL02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":1147668,"citation":"Colorado Parks and Wildlife. 2020. Colorado Black-tailed Prairie Dog Range Wide Monitoring 2020. Species of Special Concern Document Access. Online. Available: https://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/WildlifeSpecies/SpeciesOfConcern/BlackTailedPrairieDog/BTPD-Monitoring-Report-2020.pdf","shortCitationAuthor":"Colorado Parks and Wildlife","shortCitationYear":2020,"referenceCode":"R20COL01NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:02.989143Z"},{"id":108158,"citation":"Conley, M. R. and W. Conley. No date. Remote sensing for locating and monitoring of black-tailed prairie dog (CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS) colonies in the Tularosa Basin, New Mexico. New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Santa Fe, NM.","shortCitationAuthor":"Conley and Conley","shortCitationYear":null,"referenceCode":"NNDCON01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":1147669,"citation":"Cooper, J., and L. Gabriel. 2005. South Dakota Black-Tailed Prairie Dog Conservation and Management Plan. Final Draft. 68 pp. Online. Available: https://gfp.sd.gov/UserDocs/nav/prairiedog-management-plan.pdf","shortCitationAuthor":"Cooper and Gabriel","shortCitationYear":2005,"referenceCode":"N05COO01NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:02.989889Z"},{"id":108942,"citation":"Coppock, D. L. and J. K. Detling. 1986. Alteration of bison and blacktailed prairie dog grazing interaction by prescribed burning. Journal of Wildlife Management 50:452-5.","shortCitationAuthor":"Coppock and Detling","shortCitationYear":1986,"referenceCode":"A86COP01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":154996,"citation":"Coppock, D. L., J. E. Ellis, J. K. Detling and M. I. Dyer. 1983b. Plant-herbivore interactions in a North American mixed-grass prairie. Part II, Responses of bison to modification of vegetation by prairie dogs. Oecologia 56:10-5.","shortCitationAuthor":"Coppock et al.","shortCitationYear":1983,"referenceCode":"A83COP02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":137552,"citation":"Coppock, D. L., J. K. Detling, J. E. Ellis, and M. I. Dyer. 1983a. Plant-herbivore interactions in a North American mixed-grass prairie. Part I, Effects of black-tailed prairie dogs on intraseasonal aboveground plant biomass and nutrient dynamics and plant species diversity. Oecologia 56:1-9.","shortCitationAuthor":"Coppock et al.","shortCitationYear":1983,"referenceCode":"A83COP01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":1147670,"citation":"COSEWIC. 2000. COSEWIC Assessment and Update Status Report on the Black-tailed Prairie Dog <i>Cynomys ludovicianus</i> in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 21 pp. Online. Available: https://www.registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/cosewic/sr_black_tailed_prairie_dog_1100_e.pdf","shortCitationAuthor":"COSEWIC","shortCitationYear":2000,"referenceCode":"N00COS02NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:03.001998Z"},{"id":115938,"citation":"Crocker-Bedford, D. C., and J. J. Spillett. 1977. Home ranges of Utah prairie dogs. Journal of Mammalogy 58:672-73.","shortCitationAuthor":"Crocker-Bedford and Spillett","shortCitationYear":1977,"referenceCode":"A77CRO01NACA","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":139858,"citation":"Cully, J. F., Jr. 1989. Plague in prairie dog ecosystems: importance for black-footed ferret management. Pp. 47-55 in T. W. Clark, D. Hinckley and T. Rich (eds.). The prairie dog ecosystem: managing for biological diversity. Montana Bureau of Land Management Wildl. Tech. Bull. No. 2, Billings, MT. BLM-MT-PT-89-004-4352.","shortCitationAuthor":"Cully","shortCitationYear":1989,"referenceCode":"R89CUL01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":155487,"citation":"Cully, J. F., Jr. 1992. Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.","shortCitationAuthor":"Cully","shortCitationYear":1992,"referenceCode":"PNDCUL01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":144165,"citation":"Cully, J. F., Jr., and E. S. Williams. 2001. Interspecific comparisons of sylvatic plague in prairie dogs. Journal of Mammalogy 82:894-905.","shortCitationAuthor":"Cully and Williams","shortCitationYear":2001,"referenceCode":"A01CUL01NACA","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":1067050,"citation":"Cully, J.F., Jr, S.K. Collinge, R.E. VanNimwegen, C. Ray, W.C. Johnson, B. Thiagarajan, D.B. Conlin, and B.E. Holmes. 2010, Spatial variation in keystone effects: small mammal diversity associated with black-tailed prairie dog colonies. Ecography, 33: 667-677. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2009.05746.x","shortCitationAuthor":"Cully et al","shortCitationYear":2010,"referenceCode":"A10CUL01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-11-11T02:03:57.810271Z"},{"id":1068066,"citation":"Cully Jr, J.F., T.L. Johnson, T.L., S.K. Collinge, and C. Ray. 2010. Disease limits populations: plague and black-tailed prairie dogs. Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases 10(1): 7-15.","shortCitationAuthor":"Cully et al.","shortCitationYear":2010,"referenceCode":"A10CUL02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-11-11T02:03:57.810271Z"},{"id":120970,"citation":"Daley, J. G. 1992. Population reductions and genetic variability in black-tailed prairie dogs. Journal of Wildlife Management 56:212-20.","shortCitationAuthor":"Daley","shortCitationYear":1992,"referenceCode":"A92DAL03NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":100492,"citation":"Dalsted, K. J., et al. 1981. Application of remote sensing to prairie dog management. Journal of Range Management 34:218-23.","shortCitationAuthor":"Dalsted et al.","shortCitationYear":1981,"referenceCode":"A81DAL01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":116242,"citation":"Dano, L. 1952. Cottontail rabbit (SYLVILAGUS AUDOBONII BAILEYI) populations in relation to prairie dog (CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS LUDOVICIANUS ) towns. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. M.S. Thesis.","shortCitationAuthor":"Dano","shortCitationYear":1952,"referenceCode":"N52DAN01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":107122,"citation":"Day, T. A., and J. K. Detling. 1994. Water relations of Agropyron smithii and Bouteloua gracilis and community evapotranspiration following long-term grazing by prairie dogs. Am. Midl. Nat. 132:381-393.","shortCitationAuthor":"Day and Detling","shortCitationYear":1994,"referenceCode":"A94DAY01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":155983,"citation":"Deisch, M. S., D. W. Uresk, and R. L. Linder. 1990. Effects of prairie dog rodenticides on deer mice in western South Dakota. Great Basin Naturalist 50:347-353.","shortCitationAuthor":"Deisch et al.","shortCitationYear":1990,"referenceCode":"A90DEI01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":117031,"citation":"Detling, J. K. and E. L. Painter. 1983. Defoliation responses of western wheatgrass populations with diverse histories of prairie dog grazing. Oecologia 57:65-71.","shortCitationAuthor":"Detling and Painter","shortCitationYear":1983,"referenceCode":"A83DET01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":1002978,"citation":"Dyke, S.R., S.K. Johnson, and P.T. Isakson. 2015. North Dakota State Wildlife Action Plan. North Dakota Game and Fish Department, Bismarck, ND, 468 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Dyke et al.","shortCitationYear":2015,"referenceCode":"R15DYK01NAUS","lastModified":"2024-07-06T01:58:20.298318Z"},{"id":111935,"citation":"Elias, D. J., J. K. Crier, and H. P. Teitjen. 1974. A technique for capturing prairie dogs. Southwest. Nat. 18:473-4.","shortCitationAuthor":"Elias et al.","shortCitationYear":1974,"referenceCode":"A74ELI01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":109082,"citation":"Eskey, C. R. and V. H. Haas. 1940. Plague in the western part of the United States. Public Health Bulletin 254:1-83.","shortCitationAuthor":"Eskey and Haas","shortCitationYear":1940,"referenceCode":"A40ESK01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":138663,"citation":"Fagerstone, K. A. and D. E. Biggins. 1986. Comparison of capture-recapture and visual count indices of prairie dog densities in black-footed ferret habitat. Great Basin Naturalist Mem. 8:94-8.","shortCitationAuthor":"Fagerstone and Biggins","shortCitationYear":1986,"referenceCode":"A86FAG01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":124990,"citation":"Fagerstone, K. A. and O. Williams. 1982. Use of C3 and C4 plants by black-tailed prairie dogs. Journal of Mammalogy 63:328-31.","shortCitationAuthor":"Fagerstone and Williams","shortCitationYear":1982,"referenceCode":"A82FAG01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":119223,"citation":"Fagerstone, K. A., H. P. Tietjen and O. Williams. 1981. Seasonal variation in the diet of black-tailed prairie dogs. Journal of Mammalogy 62:820-4.","shortCitationAuthor":"Fagerstone et al.","shortCitationYear":1981,"referenceCode":"A81FAG01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":141770,"citation":"Franklin, W. L. 1992. Biologist/behaviorist (not official title). Iowa State University, Ames, IA.","shortCitationAuthor":"Franklin","shortCitationYear":1992,"referenceCode":"PNDFRA02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":141446,"citation":"Franklin, W. L., and M. G. Garrett. 1989. Nonlethal control of prairie dog colony expansion with visual barriers. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 17:426-430.","shortCitationAuthor":"Franklin and Garrett","shortCitationYear":1989,"referenceCode":"A89FRA01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":123987,"citation":"Garrett, M. G. and W. L. Franklin. 1983. Diethylstilbestrol as a temporary chemosterilant to control black-tailed prairie dog populations. Journal of Range Management 36:753-6.","shortCitationAuthor":"Garrett and Franklin","shortCitationYear":1983,"referenceCode":"A83GAR02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":104123,"citation":"Garrett, M. G., and W. L. Franklin. 1988. Behavioral ecology of dispersal in the black-tailed prairie dog. J. Mamm. 69:236-250.","shortCitationAuthor":"Garrett and Franklin","shortCitationYear":1988,"referenceCode":"A88GAR01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":103796,"citation":"Garrett, M. G., J. L. Hoogland, and W. L. Franklin. 1982. Demographic differences between an old and a new colony of black-tailed prairie dogs (CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS LUDOVICIANUS). Amer. Midl. Nat. 108:51-9.","shortCitationAuthor":"Garrett et al.","shortCitationYear":1982,"referenceCode":"A82GAR02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":107338,"citation":"Garst, W. 1962. Technique for capturing young prairie dogs. Journal of Wildlife Management 26:108.","shortCitationAuthor":"Garst","shortCitationYear":1962,"referenceCode":"A62GAR01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":1137646,"citation":"Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). 2024. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) data portal. Online. Available: https://www.gbif.org/ (accessed 2024).","shortCitationAuthor":"GBIF","shortCitationYear":2024,"referenceCode":"W24GBI01HQUS","lastModified":"2024-01-05T23:15:07.149253Z"},{"id":102320,"citation":"Goodwin, H. T. 1995a. Pliocene-Pleistocene biogeographic history of prairie dogs, genus <i>Cynomys</i> (Sciuridae). Journal of Mammalogy 76:100-122.","shortCitationAuthor":"Goodwin","shortCitationYear":1995,"referenceCode":"A95GOO01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":1068067,"citation":"Grasslands National Park. 2020. Monitoring area of occurrence of Black-tailed prairie dog (<i>Cynomys ludovicianus</i>) in Grasslands National Park. Resource Conservation Protocol. Grasslands National Park, Saskatchewan, Canada.","shortCitationAuthor":"Grasslands National Park","shortCitationYear":2020,"referenceCode":"G20GNP01NACA","lastModified":"2020-11-11T02:03:57.810271Z"},{"id":119546,"citation":"Hall, E. R. 1981a. The Mammals of North America, second edition. Vols. I &amp; II. John Wiley &amp; Sons, New York, New York. 1181 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hall","shortCitationYear":1981,"referenceCode":"B81HAL01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T14:38:13.267235Z"},{"id":135450,"citation":"Halpin, Z. T. 1984. The role of olfactory communication in the social systems of ground-dwelling sciurids. Pp. 201-25 in J. O. Murie and G. R. Michener (eds.). The Biology of Ground-dwelling Sciurids. University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.","shortCitationAuthor":"Halpin","shortCitationYear":1984,"referenceCode":"A84HAL01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":104208,"citation":"Hansen, R. M. and B. R. Cavender. 1973. Food intake and digestion by black-tailed prairie dogs under laboratory conditions. Acta Theriologica 18:191-200.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hansen and Cavender","shortCitationYear":1973,"referenceCode":"A73HAN01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":149570,"citation":"Hansen, R. M. and I. K. Gold. 1977. Blacktail prairie dogs, desert cottontails and cattle trophic relations on shortgrass range. Journal of Range Management 30:210-4.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hansen and Gold","shortCitationYear":1977,"referenceCode":"A77HAN01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":110133,"citation":"Harper, J. L. 1977. Population biology of plants. Academic Press, New York, NY.","shortCitationAuthor":"Harper","shortCitationYear":1977,"referenceCode":"B77HAR01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T16:29:00.195293Z"},{"id":763815,"citation":"Henderson, F. R., and R. J. Little. 1973. Status of the black-footed ferret and black-tailed prairie dog in Kansas. Pp. 34-40 in: Black-footed Ferret and Prairie Dog Workshop Proceedings, Brookings, South Dakota.","shortCitationAuthor":"Henderson and Little","shortCitationYear":1973,"referenceCode":"A73HEN62HQUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":125087,"citation":"Hillman, C. N., R. L. Linder, and R. B. Dahlgren. 1979. Prairie dog (CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS) distribution in areas inhabited by black-footed ferrets (MUSTELA NIGRIPES). Am. Midl. Nat. 102:185-7.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hillman et al.","shortCitationYear":1979,"referenceCode":"A79HIL01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":124949,"citation":"Hobbs, N. T. and D. S. Schimel. 1984. Fire effects on nitrogen mineralization and fixation in mountian shrub and grassland communities. Journal of Range Mangement 37:402-?.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hobbs and Schimel","shortCitationYear":1984,"referenceCode":"A84HOB01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":117118,"citation":"Hollister, N. 1916. A systematic account of the prairie-dogs. North American Fauna 40:1-37.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hollister","shortCitationYear":1916,"referenceCode":"B16HOL01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":123413,"citation":"Hoogland, J. L. 1982. Prairie dogs avoid extreme inbreeding. Science 215:1639-41.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hoogland","shortCitationYear":1982,"referenceCode":"A82HOO03NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":117547,"citation":"Hoogland, J. L. 1985. Infanticide in prairie dogs: lactating females kill offspring of close kin. Science 230:1037-40.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hoogland","shortCitationYear":1985,"referenceCode":"A85HOO01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":141091,"citation":"Hoogland, J. L. 1995. The black-tailed prairie dog. Social life of a burrowing mammal. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. xiv + 557 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hoogland","shortCitationYear":1995,"referenceCode":"B95HOO01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":118391,"citation":"Hoogland, J. L. 1996. <i>Cynomys ludovicianus</i>. Mammalian Species (535):1-10.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hoogland","shortCitationYear":1996,"referenceCode":"A96HOO01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-11-11T02:03:57.810271Z"},{"id":139233,"citation":"Hoogland, J. L. 2001. Black-tailed, Gunnison's, and Utah Prairie Dogs reproduce slowly. Journal of Mammalogy 82:917-927.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hoogland","shortCitationYear":2001,"referenceCode":"A01HOO02NACA","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":155356,"citation":"Hoogland, J. L. and D. W. Folts. 1982. Variance in male and female reproductive success in a harem-polygynous mammal, the black-tailed prairie dog (Sciuridae: CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 11:155-63.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hoogland and Folts","shortCitationYear":1982,"referenceCode":"A82HOO04NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":104160,"citation":"Hoogland, J. L. et. al. 1988. Demography and population dynamics of prairie dogs. Pp. 18-22 in D. W. Uresk, G. L. Schenbeck and R. Cefkin. (technical coordinators). 8th Great Plains Wildlife Damage Control Workshop Proceedings, Fort Collins, CO. USFS GTR RM-154. 231 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hoogland et al.","shortCitationYear":1988,"referenceCode":"A88HOO02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":115236,"citation":"Hubbard, J. P. and C. G. Schmitt. 1984. The black-footed ferret in New Mexico. Final report submitted to Bureau of Land Management, Santa Fe, NM. Contract NM-910-CT1-7.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hubbard and Schmitt","shortCitationYear":1984,"referenceCode":"R84HUB01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":118520,"citation":"Hubbard, J. P. Endangered Species Biologist, New Mexico Department of Game and Fish.","shortCitationAuthor":"Hubbard","shortCitationYear":null,"referenceCode":"PNDHUB01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":114521,"citation":"Ingham, R. E. and J. K. Detling. 1984. Plant-herbivore interactions in a North American mixed-grass prairie. Part III, Soil nematode populations and root biomass dynamics on CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS colonies and adjacent uncolonized areas. Oecologia 73:307-13.","shortCitationAuthor":"Ingham and Detling","shortCitationYear":1984,"referenceCode":"A84ING01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":153617,"citation":"Jones, J. K., Jr., D. M. Armstrong, R. S. Hoffmann, and C. Jones. 1983. Mammals of the Northern Great Plains. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, Nebraska.","shortCitationAuthor":"Jones et al.","shortCitationYear":1983,"referenceCode":"B83JON01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:12:36.538628Z"},{"id":156383,"citation":"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.","shortCitationAuthor":"Jones et al.","shortCitationYear":1992,"referenceCode":"B92JON01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T14:38:17.880059Z"},{"id":1147671,"citation":"Kansas Black-Tailed Prairie Dog Working Group. 2002. Kansas Black-Tailed Prairie Dog Conservation and Management Plan. 3 pp. Online. Available: https://ksoutdoors.com/content/download/2632/12731/version/1/file/PDogPlan101102.pdf","shortCitationAuthor":"Kansas Black-Tailed Prairie Dog Working Group","shortCitationYear":2002,"referenceCode":"N02KAN01NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:02.992099Z"},{"id":112300,"citation":"King. J. A. 1955. Social behaivor, social organization, and population dynamics in a black-tailed prairie dog town in the Black Hills of South Dakota. Univ. Mich. Contrib. Lab. Vert. Viol. 67:1-123.","shortCitationAuthor":"King","shortCitationYear":1955,"referenceCode":"A55KIN01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":150676,"citation":"King, J. A. 1959. The social behavior of prairie dogs. Sci. Amer. 201:128-40.","shortCitationAuthor":"King","shortCitationYear":1959,"referenceCode":"A59KIN01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":109355,"citation":"Klatt, L. E. and D. Hein. 1978. Vegetative differences among active and abandoned towns of black-tailed prairie dogs (CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS). Journal of Range Mangement 31:315-7.","shortCitationAuthor":"Klatt and Hein","shortCitationYear":1978,"referenceCode":"A78KLA01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":139882,"citation":"Klukas, R. 1988. Management of prairie dog populations in Wind Cave National Park. Pp. 50-2 in D. W. Uresk, G. L. Schenbeck and R. Cefkin (technical coordinators). 8th Great Plains Wildlife Damage Control Workshop Proceedings, Fort Collins, CO. USFS GTR RM-154.","shortCitationAuthor":"Klukas","shortCitationYear":1988,"referenceCode":"R88KLU01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":133232,"citation":"Knowles, C. J. 1982. Habitat affinity, populations, and control of black-tailed prairie dogs on the Charles M. Russel National Wildlife Refuge. University of Montana, Missoula, MT. Ph.D. Diss. Unpublished. 171 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Knowles","shortCitationYear":1982,"referenceCode":"NNDKNO01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":111548,"citation":"Knowles, C. J. 1985. Observations on prairie dog dispersal in Montana. Prairie Nat. 17:33-40.","shortCitationAuthor":"Knowles","shortCitationYear":1985,"referenceCode":"A85KNO01NACA","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":117351,"citation":"Knowles, C. J. 1986. Some relationships of black-tailed prairie dogs to livestock grazing. Great Basin Naturalist 46:198-203.","shortCitationAuthor":"Knowles","shortCitationYear":1986,"referenceCode":"A86KNO01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":113267,"citation":"Knowles, C. J. 1987. Reproductive ecology of black-tailed prairie dogs in Montana. Great Basin Naturalist 47:202-206.","shortCitationAuthor":"Knowles","shortCitationYear":1987,"referenceCode":"A87KNO01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":146045,"citation":"Knowles, C. J. 1988. An evaluation of shooting and habitat alteration for control of black-tailed prairie dogs. Pp. 53-6 in D. W. Uresk, G. L. Schenbeck and R. Cefkin. (technical coordinators). 8th Great Plains Wildlife Damage Control Workshop Proceedings, Fort Collins, CO. USFS GTR RM-154.","shortCitationAuthor":"Knowles","shortCitationYear":1988,"referenceCode":"A88KNO02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":137404,"citation":"Knowles, C. J., C. J. Stoner and S. P. Geib. 1982. Selective use of black-tailed prairie dog towns by mountian plovers. Condor 84:71-4.","shortCitationAuthor":"Knowles et al.","shortCitationYear":1982,"referenceCode":"A82KNO01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":112478,"citation":"Koford, C. B. 1958. Prairie dogs, whitefaces and blue gramma. Wildl. Monogr. 3:6-78.","shortCitationAuthor":"Koford","shortCitationYear":1958,"referenceCode":"A58KOF01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":136228,"citation":"Krueger, K. 1986. Feeding relationships among bison, pronghorn, and prairie dogs: an experimental analysis. Ecology 67:760-70.","shortCitationAuthor":"Krueger","shortCitationYear":1986,"referenceCode":"A86KRU01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":764125,"citation":"Lee, C.D., and R. F. Henderson. 1989. Kansas attitudes on prairie dog control. Pp. 162-165 in: Ninth Great Plains Wildlife Damage Control Workshop Proceedings.","shortCitationAuthor":"Lee and Henderson","shortCitationYear":1989,"referenceCode":"A89LEE61HQUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":139856,"citation":"Lewis, J. C., et al. [?] 1979. Techniques used to establish and limit prairie dog towns. Proc. Oklahoma Acad. Sci. 59:27-30.","shortCitationAuthor":"Lewis et al.","shortCitationYear":1979,"referenceCode":"A79LEW01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":122976,"citation":"Licht, D. S., and K. D. Sanchez. 1993. Association of black-tailed prairie dog colonies with cattle point attractants in the northern Great Plains. Great Basin Nat. 53:385-389.","shortCitationAuthor":"Licht and Sanchez","shortCitationYear":1993,"referenceCode":"A93LIC01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":131809,"citation":"Lomolino, M. V., and G. A. Smith. 2001. Dynamic biogeography of prairie dog (CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS) towns near the edge of their range. Journal of Mammalogy 82:937-945.","shortCitationAuthor":"Lomolino and Smith","shortCitationYear":2001,"referenceCode":"A01LOM01NACA","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":124737,"citation":"Long, C. A., and C. A. Killingley. 1983. The badgers of the world. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois. xxiv + 404 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Long and Killingley","shortCitationYear":1983,"referenceCode":"B83LON01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":153343,"citation":"Lopez-Soto, J. H. 1980. Datos ecologica del Tlalcoyote TAXIDEA TAXUS BERLANDIERI Baird (1858), en el Ejido Tokio Gleana, Nuevo Leon, Mexico. Universidad Auton. De Nuevo Leon, Monterrey, Mexico. M.S. Thesis.","shortCitationAuthor":"Lopez-Soto","shortCitationYear":1980,"referenceCode":"N80LOP01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":1147672,"citation":"Luce, R. J. 2003. A Multi-State Conservation Plan for The Black-tailed Prairie Dog, <i>Cynomys ludovicianus</i>, in the United States – an addendum to the Black-tailed Prairie Dog Conservation Assessment and Strategy. 58 pp. Online. Available: https://wafwa.org/wpdm-package/a-multi-state-conservation-plan-for-the-black-tailed-prairie-dog/?ind=1653408589273&filename=BTPD_Addendum2002.pdf&wpdmdl=23746&refresh=669e817c8b7871721663868","shortCitationAuthor":"Luce","shortCitationYear":2003,"referenceCode":"N03LUC01NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:02.992951Z"},{"id":158374,"citation":"Mammalian Species, nos. 1-604. Published by the American Society of Mammalogists.","shortCitationAuthor":"American Society of Mammalogists","shortCitationYear":null,"referenceCode":"JNDAME0100LA","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:12:05.991304Z"},{"id":764287,"citation":"Marsh, R. E. 1984. Ground squirrels, prairie dogs and marmots as pests on rangelands. Pp. 195-208 in: Proceedings of a conference on the organization and practice of vertebrate pest control, Hampshire, England, August 30 - September 3, 1982. ICI Plant Protection Division, Fernherst, England.","shortCitationAuthor":"Marsh","shortCitationYear":1984,"referenceCode":"A84MAR62HQUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":103915,"citation":"Martin, S. J., M. H. Schroeder, and H. Tietjen. 1984. Burrow plugging by prairie dogs in response to Siberian polecats. Great Basin Naturalist 44:447-9.","shortCitationAuthor":"Martin et al.","shortCitationYear":1984,"referenceCode":"A84MAR02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":1147673,"citation":"McCain, L. 2007. Petition to the Secretary of Interior and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to List the Black-tailed Prairie Dog as an Endangered or Threatened Species Under the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et Seq. (1973 as amended), and to Designate Critical Habitat. Prepared on Behalf of Forest Guardians, Biodiversity Conservation Alliance, Center for Native Ecosystems, and Rocky Mountain Animal Defense. 140 pp. Online. Available: https://pdf.wildearthguardians.org/support_docs/petition_black-tailed-prairie-dog_8-1-07.pdf","shortCitationAuthor":"McCain","shortCitationYear":2007,"referenceCode":"N07MCC01NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:02.99386Z"},{"id":139712,"citation":"Mearns, E. A. 1907. Mammals of the Mexican boundary of the U.S. Smithsonian Inst. Bull. 56:1-530.","shortCitationAuthor":"Mearns","shortCitationYear":1907,"referenceCode":"A07MEA01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":139327,"citation":"Menkens, G. E., Jr., D. E. Biggens, and S. H. Anderson. 1990. Visual counts as an index of white-tailed prairie dog density. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 18:290-296.","shortCitationAuthor":"Menkens et al.","shortCitationYear":1990,"referenceCode":"A90MEN01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":153237,"citation":"Merriam, C. H. 1902. The prairie dog of the Great Plains. Pp. 257-70 in USDA Yearbook Agriculture for 1901, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.","shortCitationAuthor":"Merriam","shortCitationYear":1902,"referenceCode":"A02MER01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":120437,"citation":"Messing, H. J. 1986. A late Pleistoncene-Holocene fauna from Chihuahua, Mexico. Southwest Nat. 31:277-88.","shortCitationAuthor":"Messing","shortCitationYear":1986,"referenceCode":"A86MES01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":138402,"citation":"Miles, V. I. et. al. 1952. Plague in Colorado and Texas. Part II, Rodent plague in the Texas South Plains 1947-1949 with ecological considerations. Public Health Monograph 6:41-53.","shortCitationAuthor":"Miles et al.","shortCitationYear":1952,"referenceCode":"A52MIL02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":764385,"citation":"Miller, B., G. Ceballos, and R. Reading. 1994. The prairie dog and biotic diversity. Conservation Biology 8(3):677-681.","shortCitationAuthor":"Miller et al.","shortCitationYear":1994,"referenceCode":"A94MIL61HQUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":118348,"citation":"Miller, S. D., and J. F. Cully, Jr. 2001. Conservation of Black-tailed Prairie Dogs (CYNOMYS LUDOVICIANUS). Journal of Mammalogy 82:889-893.","shortCitationAuthor":"Miller and Cully","shortCitationYear":2001,"referenceCode":"A01MIL01NACA","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":101591,"citation":"Milner, J., C. Jones, and J. K. Jones, Jr. 1990. <i>Nyctinomops macrotis</i>. Am. Soc. Mamm., Mammalian Species No. 351:1-4.","shortCitationAuthor":"Milner et al.","shortCitationYear":1990,"referenceCode":"A90MIL01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":104104,"citation":"Minta, S. C. and T. W. Clark. 1989. Habitat suitability analysis of potential translocation sites for black-footed ferrets in northcentral Montana. Pp. 29-45 in T. W. Clark, D. Hinckley and T. Rich (eds.). The prairie dog ecosystem: managing for biological diversity. Montana Bureau of Land Management Wildl. Tech. Bull. No. 2., Billings, MT. BLM-MT-PT-89-004-4352.","shortCitationAuthor":"Minta and Clark","shortCitationYear":1989,"referenceCode":"A89MIN02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":1147674,"citation":"Montana Prairie Dog Working Group. 2002. Conservation Plan for Black-tailed and White-tailed Prairie Dogs in Montana. Helena, MT. Montana Department of Fish and Wildlife. https://myfwp.mt.gov/getRepositoryFile?objectID=31186#:~:text=The%20MPDWG%20was%20organized%20in,to%20complete%20a%20conservation%20plan","shortCitationAuthor":"Montana Prairie Dog Working Group","shortCitationYear":2002,"referenceCode":"N02MON02NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:02.99386Z"},{"id":114185,"citation":"Nelson, E. W. 1919. Annual report of chief of biological survey. Pp. 275-98 in Annual Reports of the Department of Agriculture for the Year Ended June 30, 1919.","shortCitationAuthor":"Nelson","shortCitationYear":1919,"referenceCode":"A19NEL01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":1147676,"citation":"Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Unit. 2017. Prairie Dog Ecology and Management in Oklahoma. Cooperative Extension Publication NREM-9014. 4 pp. Online. Available: https://extension.okstate.edu/fact-sheets/print-publications/nrem/prairie-dog-ecology-and-management-in-oklahoma-nrem-9014.pdf","shortCitationAuthor":"Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Unit","shortCitationYear":2017,"referenceCode":"N17OKL01NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:02.995846Z"},{"id":1147675,"citation":"Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation (ODWC). 2016. Oklahoma Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy: A Strategic Conservation Plan for Oklahoma’s Rare and Declining Species. Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation. 422 pp. https://www.wildlifedepartment.com/sites/default/files/2021-11/Oklahoma%20Comprehensive%20Wildlife%20Conservation%20Strategy.pdf","shortCitationAuthor":"ODWC","shortCitationYear":2016,"referenceCode":"N16ODW01NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:27:09.282354Z"},{"id":134038,"citation":"Oldemeyer, J. L., et al. 1993. Proceedings of the symposium on the management of prairie dog complexes for the reintroduction of the black-footed ferret. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 13. iii + 96 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Oldemeyer et al.","shortCitationYear":1993,"referenceCode":"B93OLD01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":129298,"citation":"Oldemeyer, J. L., et al. 1994. Proceedings of a symposium for the management of prairie dog complexes for the reintroduction of the black-footed ferret. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 13. 96 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Oldemeyer et al.","shortCitationYear":1994,"referenceCode":"B94OLD01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":115848,"citation":"O'Meilia, M. E., F. L. Knopf, and J. C. Lewis. 1982. Some consequences of competition between prairie dogs and beef cattle. Journal of Range Management 35:580-5.","shortCitationAuthor":"O'Meilia et al.","shortCitationYear":1982,"referenceCode":"A82OME01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":151086,"citation":"Osborn, B. 1942. Prairie dogs in shinnery (oak scrub) savannah. Ecology 23:110-5.","shortCitationAuthor":"Osborn","shortCitationYear":1942,"referenceCode":"A42OSB01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":115470,"citation":"Osborn, B. and P. F. Allan. 1949. Vegetation of an abandoned prairie dog town in tallgrass prairie. Ecology 30:322-32.","shortCitationAuthor":"Osborn and Allan","shortCitationYear":1949,"referenceCode":"A49OSB01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":138021,"citation":"Otero, M. A. 1987. My life on the frontier: 1864-1882. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, NM.","shortCitationAuthor":"Otero","shortCitationYear":1987,"referenceCode":"B87OTE01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":137542,"citation":"Owings, D. H. and D. F. Hennessy. 1984. The importance of variation in sciurid visual and vocal communication. Pp. 169-200 in Murie, J. O. and G. R. Michener (eds.). The Biology of Ground-dwelling Sciurids. University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.","shortCitationAuthor":"Owings and Hennessy","shortCitationYear":1984,"referenceCode":"A84OWI01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":1147677,"citation":"Parks Canada Agency (PCA). 2021. Recovery Strategy and Action Plan for the Black-tailed Prairie Dog (<i>Cynomys ludovicianus</i>) in Canada [Proposed]. Species at Risk Act Recovery Strategy Series. Parks Canada Agency, Ottawa. vi + 49 pp. Online. Available: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/species-risk-public-registry/recovery/black-tailed-prairie-dog-recovery-strategy-action-plan-proposed-2021.html#toc0","shortCitationAuthor":"PCA","shortCitationYear":2021,"referenceCode":"N21PCA01NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:02.995846Z"},{"id":137696,"citation":"Pizzimenti, J., and G. D. Collier. 1975. Cynomys parvidens. Mammalian Species 52:1-3.","shortCitationAuthor":"Pizzimenti and Collier","shortCitationYear":1975,"referenceCode":"A75PIZ01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":128290,"citation":"Pizzimenti, J.J. and R.S. Hoffmann. 1973. <i>Cynomys gunnisoni</i>. Mammalian Species, 25:1-4.","shortCitationAuthor":"Pizzimenti and Hoffmann","shortCitationYear":1973,"referenceCode":"A73PIZ01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-11-11T02:03:57.810271Z"},{"id":155546,"citation":"Player, R. L. and P. J. Urness. 1982. Habitat manipulation of reestablishment of Utah prairie dogs in Capitol Reef National Park. Great Basin Naturalist 42:517-23.","shortCitationAuthor":"Player and Urness","shortCitationYear":1982,"referenceCode":"A82PLA01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":106487,"citation":"Powell, K. L. 1992. Prairie dog distribution, habitat characteristics, and population monitoring in Kansas: implications for black-footed ferret recovery. Unpublished M.S. thesis, Kansas State Univ., Manhattan, KS. 131 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Powell","shortCitationYear":1992,"referenceCode":"NNDPOW01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":142941,"citation":"Reading, R. 1990. Prairie dogs - a link in the chain. In Bureau of Land Management, Working toward recovery. Bureau of Land Mangement, Montana/Dakotas.","shortCitationAuthor":"Reading","shortCitationYear":1990,"referenceCode":"N90REA01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":119753,"citation":"Reading, R. P., S. R. Beissinger, J. J. Grensten, and T. W. Clark. 1989. Attributes of black-tailed prairie dog colonies in northcentral Montana, with management recommendations for conservation of biodiversity. Pp. 13-27 in T. W. Clark, D. Hinckley, and T. Rich (eds.). The prairie dog ecosystem: Managing for biological diversity. Wildl. Tech. Bull. No. 2., Montana Bureau of Land Management, Billings, MO. BLM-MT-PT-89-004-4352.","shortCitationAuthor":"Reading et al.","shortCitationYear":1989,"referenceCode":"A89REA01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":121356,"citation":"Roach, J. L., P. Stapp, B. Van Horne, and M. F. Antolin. 2001. Genetic structure of a metapopulation of Black-tailed Prairie Dogs. Journal of Mammalogy 82:946-959.","shortCitationAuthor":"Roach et al.","shortCitationYear":2001,"referenceCode":"A01ROA01NACA","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":126591,"citation":"Savage, M. J. and K. Vermeulen. 1983. Microclimate modification of tall moist grasslands of Natal by spring burning. Journal of Range Mangement 36:172-?.","shortCitationAuthor":"Savage and Vermeulen","shortCitationYear":1983,"referenceCode":"A83SAV01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":113842,"citation":"Scheffer, T. H. 1945. Historical encouters and accounts of the Plains prairie dog. Kans. Hist. Quart. 13:527-37.","shortCitationAuthor":"Scheffer","shortCitationYear":1945,"referenceCode":"A45SCH02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":142020,"citation":"Schmidly, D. J. 1977. The mammals of Trans-Pecos Texas including Big Bend National Park and Guadalupe Mountains National Park. Texas A & M University Press, College Station.","shortCitationAuthor":"Schmidly","shortCitationYear":1977,"referenceCode":"B77SCH01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:12:05.975685Z"},{"id":1053894,"citation":"Schmidly, D. J., and R. D. Bradley. 2016. The mammals of Texas. Seventh edition. University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas. 720 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Schmidly and Bradley","shortCitationYear":2016,"referenceCode":"B16SCH01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T21:02:21.926573Z"},{"id":153471,"citation":"Scifres, C. J. 1980. Brush management. Texas A&M University Press. College Station, TX.","shortCitationAuthor":"Scifres","shortCitationYear":1980,"referenceCode":"B80SCI01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":117390,"citation":"Severson, K. E., and G. E. Plumb. 1998. Comparison of methods to estimate population densities of black-tailed prairie dogs. Wildlife Society Bulletin 26:859-866.","shortCitationAuthor":"Severson and Plumb","shortCitationYear":1998,"referenceCode":"A98SEV01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":117064,"citation":"Sharps, J. 1988. Politics, prairie dogs, and the sportsman. Pp. 117-8. In D. W. Uresk, G. L. Schenbeck and R. Cefkin. (technical coordinators). 8th Great Plains Wildlife Damage Control Workshop Proceedings, Fort Collins, CO. USFS GTR RM-154.","shortCitationAuthor":"Sharps","shortCitationYear":1988,"referenceCode":"A88SHA02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":140237,"citation":"Sharps, J. C. and D. W. Uresk. 1990. Ecological review of black-tailed prairie dogs and associated species in western South Dakota. Great Basin Naturalist 50:339-45.","shortCitationAuthor":"Sharps and Uresk","shortCitationYear":1990,"referenceCode":"A90SHA04NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":108605,"citation":"Sheets, R. G., R. L. Linder and R. B. Dahlgren. 1971. Burrow systems of prairie dogs in South Dakota. Journal of Mammalogy 52:451-3.","shortCitationAuthor":"Sheets et al.","shortCitationYear":1971,"referenceCode":"A71SHE01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":124821,"citation":"Sidle, J. G., D. H. Johnson, and B. R. Euliss. 2001. Estimated areal extent of colonies of Black-tailed Prairie Dogs in the northern Great Plains. Journal of Mammalogy 82:928-936.","shortCitationAuthor":"Sidle et al.","shortCitationYear":2001,"referenceCode":"A01SID01NACA","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":117165,"citation":"Siminski, Peter. 1992. Zoologist (not official title), Arizona-Sonoran Desert Museum.","shortCitationAuthor":"Siminski","shortCitationYear":1992,"referenceCode":"PNDSIM01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":113218,"citation":"Sims, P. L. and J. S. Singh. 1978. The structure and function of ten western North American grasslands. Part III, Net primary productivity, turnover, and efficiencies of energy capture and water use. J. Ecol. 66:573-97.","shortCitationAuthor":"Sims and Singh","shortCitationYear":1978,"referenceCode":"A78SIM02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":133285,"citation":"Smith, R. E. 1958. Natural history of the prairie dog in Kansas. Kansas University Museum of Natural History State Biol. Surv. Misc. Publ. No. 16. 36 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Smith","shortCitationYear":1958,"referenceCode":"N58SMI01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":139910,"citation":"Snell, G. P. and B. D. Hlavachick. 1980. Control of prairie dogs: the easy way. Rangelands 2:239-40.","shortCitationAuthor":"Snell and Hlavachick","shortCitationYear":1980,"referenceCode":"A80SNE01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":137605,"citation":"Stinnett, S. S. 1981. Food habits and effects of Gunnison's, Zuni, and black-tailed prairie dogs on plant communities in New Mexico. NMSU, Las Cruces, NM. M.S. Thesis. 138 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Stinnett","shortCitationYear":1981,"referenceCode":"N81STI01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":118591,"citation":"Stromberg. M. R. 1978. Subsurface burrow connections and entrance pattern of prairie dogs. Southwest. Nat. 23:173-80.","shortCitationAuthor":"Stromberg","shortCitationYear":1978,"referenceCode":"A78STR01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":155784,"citation":"Stromberg, M. R., et al. 1983. Black-footed ferret prey requirements: An energy balance estimate. Journal of Wildlife Management 47(1):67-73.","shortCitationAuthor":"Stromberg et al.","shortCitationYear":1983,"referenceCode":"A83STR01HQUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":117757,"citation":"Summers, C. A. and R. L. Linder. 1978. Food habits of the black-tailed prairie dog in western South Dakota. Journal of Range Management 31:134-6.","shortCitationAuthor":"Summers and Linder","shortCitationYear":1978,"referenceCode":"A78SUM01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":1147678,"citation":"Texas Black-Tailed Prairie Dog Working Group. 2004. Texas Black-Tailed Prairie Dog Conservation and Management Plan. Texas Parks and Wildlife. 56 pp. Online. Available: https://tpwd.texas.gov/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_pl_w7000_1100.pdf","shortCitationAuthor":"Texas Black-Tailed Prairie Dog Working Group","shortCitationYear":2004,"referenceCode":"N04TEX01NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:02.997875Z"},{"id":1141466,"citation":"Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD). 2015. Texas Conservation Action Plan. Species of greatest Conservation Need. https://tpwd.texas.gov/huntwild/wild/wildlife_diversity/nongame/tcap/","shortCitationAuthor":"TPWD","shortCitationYear":2015,"referenceCode":"N15TPW01NAUS","lastModified":"2024-05-31T22:10:04.241935Z"},{"id":114600,"citation":"Thorne, E. T., M. H. Schroeder, S. C. Forrest, T. M. Campbell III, L. Richardson, D. Biggins, L. R. H. Hanebury, D. Belitsky, and E. S. Williams. 1985. Capture, immobilization and care of black-footed ferrets for reasearch. Pp. 9.1-9.8 in S. H. Anderson and D. B. Inkley (eds.). Black-footed ferret workshop. Wyoming Game and Fish, Cheyenne, WY.","shortCitationAuthor":"Thorne et al.","shortCitationYear":1985,"referenceCode":"A85THO03NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":145364,"citation":"Thorp, J. 1949. Effects of certain animals that live in soils. Scientific Monthly 68:180-91.","shortCitationAuthor":"Thorp","shortCitationYear":1949,"referenceCode":"A49THO01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":152654,"citation":"Torres, J. R. 1973. The status of the black-tailed prairie dog and the black-footed ferret in North Dakota. Pp. 51-9 in Proceedings of the Black-footed ferret and prairie dog workshop. South Dakota State Univerity, Brookings, SD.","shortCitationAuthor":"Torres","shortCitationYear":1973,"referenceCode":"A73TOR01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":102242,"citation":"Turman, Hop. 1992. Biologist (not official title), USDA-ADC.","shortCitationAuthor":"Turman","shortCitationYear":1992,"referenceCode":"PNDTUR01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":440935,"citation":"Tyler, J. D. 1968. Distribution and vertebrate associates of the black-tailed prairie dog in Oklahoma. Ph.D dissertation, University of Oklahoma, Norman.","shortCitationAuthor":"Tyler","shortCitationYear":1968,"referenceCode":"U68TYL02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":133509,"citation":"Tyler, J. D. 1983. Notes on burrowing owl (<i>Athene cunicularia</i>) food habits in Oklahoma. Southwest. Nat. 28:100-2.","shortCitationAuthor":"Tyler","shortCitationYear":1983,"referenceCode":"A83TYL01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-11-11T02:03:57.810271Z"},{"id":103900,"citation":"Uresk, D. W. 1984. Black-tailed prairie dog food habits and forage relationships in western South Dakota. Journal of Range Management 37:325-9.","shortCitationAuthor":"Uresk","shortCitationYear":1984,"referenceCode":"A84URE01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":129652,"citation":"Uresk, D. W., and D. D. Paulson. 1988. Estimated carrying capacity for cattle competing with prairie dogs and forage utilization in western South Dakota. Pages 387-390 in B88SZA01NA.","shortCitationAuthor":"Uresk and Paulson","shortCitationYear":1988,"referenceCode":"A88URE01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":149259,"citation":"Uresk, D. W., and J. C. Sharps. 1986. Denning habitat and diet of the swift fox in western South Dakota. Great Basin Naturalist 46:249-253.","shortCitationAuthor":"Uresk and Sharps","shortCitationYear":1986,"referenceCode":"A86URE01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":117281,"citation":"Uresk, D. W., R. M. King, A. D. Apa, M. S. Deisch, and R. L. Linder. 1988. Rodenticidal effects of zinc phosphide and strychnine on nontarget speices. Pp 57-63 in D. W. Uresk, G. L. Schenbeck and R. Cefkin. (technical coordinators). 8th Great Plains Wildlife damage control workshop proceedings. Fort Collins, CO. USFS GTR RM-154.","shortCitationAuthor":"Uresk et al.","shortCitationYear":1988,"referenceCode":"A88URE02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":488876,"citation":"U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 18 August 2004. Finding for the resubmitted petition to list the black-tailed prairie dog as threatened. Federal Register 69(159):51217-51226.","shortCitationAuthor":"USFWS","shortCitationYear":2004,"referenceCode":"A04FWS03NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":111483,"citation":"U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1963. Inventory of areas occupied by prairie dogs in 1961. Branch of predator and rodent control. Circular.","shortCitationAuthor":"USFWS","shortCitationYear":1963,"referenceCode":"N63FWS01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":119412,"citation":"U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1988. Black-footed ferret recovery plan. Denver, CO. 154 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"USFWS","shortCitationYear":1988,"referenceCode":"N88FWS01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":154368,"citation":"U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1991. Utah prairie dog recovery plan. Denver, CO. 41 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"USFWS","shortCitationYear":1991,"referenceCode":"N91FWS01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":1147680,"citation":"U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1999. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; 90-day finding for a petition to list the black-tailed prairie dog as threatened. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal register 64(57):14424-14428.","shortCitationAuthor":"USFWS","shortCitationYear":1999,"referenceCode":"N99FWS07NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:02.998857Z"},{"id":102510,"citation":"U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2000. 12-month finding for a petition to list the black-tailed prairie dog as threatened. Federal Register 65(24):5476-5488.","shortCitationAuthor":"USFWS","shortCitationYear":2000,"referenceCode":"A00FWS05NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":157552,"citation":"U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2002. Candidate and listing priority assignment form: black-tailed prairie dog, <i>Cynomys ludovicianus</i>. Unpublished report, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6.","shortCitationAuthor":"USFWS","shortCitationYear":2002,"referenceCode":"U02FWS01NACA","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":1147679,"citation":"U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2009. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding on a Petition to List the Black-tailed Prairie Dog as Threatened or Endangered. Federal Register 74(231):63343-63366.","shortCitationAuthor":"USFWS","shortCitationYear":2009,"referenceCode":"N09FWS41NAUS","lastModified":"2024-12-06T23:31:02.998857Z"},{"id":137144,"citation":"Van Pelt, Bill. 1992. Biologist (not official title), Arizona Game and Fish.","shortCitationAuthor":"Van Pelt","shortCitationYear":1992,"referenceCode":"PNDVAN01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":141414,"citation":"Vaughan, T. A. 1978. Mammalogy. Second edition. Saunders Coll. Publ., Philadelphia, PA.","shortCitationAuthor":"Vaughan","shortCitationYear":1978,"referenceCode":"B78VAU01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.712161Z"},{"id":136031,"citation":"Wedin, D. 1992. Ecologist, Department Ecol. Behav. Biol., Univerity of Minnesota.","shortCitationAuthor":"Wedin","shortCitationYear":1992,"referenceCode":"PNDWED01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":106013,"citation":"Wells, H., W. Mason and J. R. Stewart. 1990. Prairie dog food preference and the photosynthetic pathway-selective herbivory hyptothesis. Bull. South. Calif. Acad. Sci. 89:97-108.","shortCitationAuthor":"Wells et al.","shortCitationYear":1990,"referenceCode":"A90WEL03NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":129208,"citation":"Weltzin, J. F. 1990. The potential role of prairie dogs in regulating honey mesquite population dynamics. Texas A&M University. M.S. Thesis. Unpublished. 63 pp.","shortCitationAuthor":"Weltzin","shortCitationYear":1990,"referenceCode":"NNDWEL01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":149068,"citation":"Whicker, A. D. and J. K. Detling. 1988. Ecological consequences of prairie dog disturbances. BioScience 38:778-85.","shortCitationAuthor":"Whicker and Detling","shortCitationYear":1988,"referenceCode":"A88WHI03NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.74351Z"},{"id":100810,"citation":"Whicker, A. D. and J. K. Detling. No date. Control of grassland ecosystem processes by prairie dogs. Unpublished manuscript.","shortCitationAuthor":"Whicker and Detling","shortCitationYear":null,"referenceCode":"NNDWHI01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":140868,"citation":"Whisenant, S. G., D. N. Ueckert and C. J. Scifres. 1984. Effects of fire on Texas wintergrass communities. Journal of Range Management 37:387-?","shortCitationAuthor":"Whisenant et al.","shortCitationYear":1984,"referenceCode":"A84WHI02NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.774626Z"},{"id":155638,"citation":"Williams, E. S. 1982a. Canine distemper. Pp. 10-3 in E. T. Thorne, N. Kingston, W. R. Jolley, and R. C. Bergstrom (eds.). Diseases of Wildlife in Wyoming (second edition). Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Cheyanne, WY.","shortCitationAuthor":"Williams","shortCitationYear":1982,"referenceCode":"A82WIL06NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":135887,"citation":"Williams, E. S., E. T. Thorne, M. J. G. Appel, and D. W. Belitsky. 1988a. Canine distempter in black-footed ferrets (MISTELA NIGRIPES) from Wyoming. J. Wildl. Dis. 24:385-98.","shortCitationAuthor":"Williams et al.","shortCitationYear":1988,"referenceCode":"A88WIL03NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"},{"id":117022,"citation":"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/.","shortCitationAuthor":"Wilson and Reeder","shortCitationYear":1993,"referenceCode":"B93WIL01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T14:38:17.880059Z"},{"id":477777,"citation":"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. [As modified by ASM the Mammal Diversity Database (MDD) at https://www.mammaldiversity.org/index.html]","shortCitationAuthor":"Wilson and Reeder","shortCitationYear":2005,"referenceCode":"B05WIL01NAUS","lastModified":"2022-07-02T00:44:59.638537Z"},{"id":116778,"citation":"Wilson, S. D. and J. M. Shay. 1990. Competition, fire, and nutrients in a mixed-grass prairie. Ecology 71:1959-67.","shortCitationAuthor":"Wilson and Shay","shortCitationYear":1990,"referenceCode":"A90WIL06NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.727874Z"},{"id":155170,"citation":"Wydeven, A. P. and R. B. Dahlgren. 1985. Ungulate habitat relationships in Wind Cave National Park. Journal of Wildlife Management 49:805-813.","shortCitationAuthor":"Wydeven and Dahlgren","shortCitationYear":1985,"referenceCode":"A85WYD01NAUS","lastModified":"2020-02-25T18:14:10.759031Z"}],"otherCommonNames":[{"id":144479,"name":"black-tailed prairie dog","language":"EN"},{"id":134736,"name":"Chien de prairie","language":"FR"},{"id":207232,"name":"Chien de prairie à queue noire","language":"FR"}],"speciesGlobal":{"elementGlobalId":100941,"cites":null,"cosewic":{"id":4,"cosewicDescEn":"Threatened","cosewicDescEs":"Amenazado","cosewicDescFr":"Menacée","cosewicCode":"T"},"fwsRegion":{"id":6,"fwsRegionDescEn":"Rocky Mountain","fwsRegionDescEs":"Montañas Rocosas/Rocallosas","fwsRegionDescFr":"Rocheuses"},"genusSize":{"id":2,"genusSizeDescEn":"Very small genus","genusSizeDescEs":"Un género muy pequeño","genusSizeDescFr":"Très petit genre"},"jurisEndem":{"id":5,"jurisEndemDescEn":"occurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations","jurisEndemDescEs":"Se encuentra en varias naciones (de manera regular, como un taxón nativo)","jurisEndemDescFr":"Se trouve dans plusieurs nations (de façon régulière, tel un taxon indigène)"},"nomenclaturallyEst":null,"usesa":null,"informalTaxonomy":{"informalTaxonomyId":6,"level1":"Animals","level2":"Vertebrates","level3":"Mammals","level":3,"hasChildren":false,"parentId":2,"distributionStatus":"complete","displayOrder":1090},"parentSpecies":null,"infraspecies":false,"kingdom":"Animalia","phylum":"Craniata","taxclass":"Mammalia","taxorder":"Rodentia","family":"Sciuridae","genus":"Cynomys","americanFisheriesStatus":null,"americanFisheriesStatusDate":null,"saraStatus":"Threatened/Menacée","saraStatusDate":"2003-06-05","cosewicDate":"2024-11-28","interpretedCosewic":null,"cosewicComments":"Reason for designation: In Canada, this medium-sized rodent is a prairie specialist found only in southern Saskatchewan. Its restricted distribution, vulnerability to increasing drought frequency and Sylvatic Plague - both of which may cause rapid population declines - threatens its persistence in Canada. Anticipated increases in drought frequency, which especially combined with severe winters, can negatively impact populations. Local knowledge suggests the species is resilient to drought based on their long experience in the area. Disease, especially Sylvatic Plague, is a significant potential threat, exacerbated by low genetic diversity and connectivity among colonies that facilitates disease transmission. However, conservation management actions and land stewardship mitigate this extirpation risk.<br/><br/>Status history: Designated Special Concern in April 1978. Status re-examined and confirmed in April 1988, April 1999 and November 2000. Status re-examined and designated Threatened in November 2011. Status re-examined and confirmed in November 2024.","usesaDate":null,"interpretedUsesa":null,"usesaComments":"In a 12-month petition finding, USFWS (2009) found that listing the black-tailed prairie dog as either threatened or endangered is not warranted. USFWS (2000) announced a 12–month finding that issuing a proposed rule to list this species was warranted but precluded by other higher priority actions, and the species was included in the list of candidate species. Two candidate assessments and resubmitted petition findings were completed in 2001 and 2002. USFWS (2004) completed a resubmitted petition finding for the black-tailed prairie dog concluding that listing the species was not warranted, and the species was removed from the candidate list.","completeDistribution":true,"synonyms":[],"infraspeciesList":[{"infraspeciesId":835595,"uniqueId":"ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.835595","formattedScientificName":"<i>Cynomys ludovicianus arizonensis</i>","scientificName":"Cynomys ludovicianus arizonensis","primaryCommonName":"Arizona Prairie Dog","nsxUrl":"/Taxon/ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.835595/Cynomys_ludovicianus_arizonensis"}],"ebarId":null,"ebarCanadianScope":false,"ebarGlobalScope":false,"ebarKbaGroup":"Mammals","caGeneralStatusId":"GS001644"},"speciesCharacteristics":{"elementGlobalId":100941,"reproductionComments":"Breeding system is harem-polygynous, with most females copulating with one male and males with several females (Hoogland and Foltz 1982). Females achieve estrous as early as the second week in March in Montana (Knowles 1987), March 1 in Colorado (Koford 1958), and the third week in January in Oklahoma (Anthony and Foreman 1951 in Koford 1958). Females are in estrous for several hours of only one day per year (Hoogland and Foltz 1982). Gestation averages 35 days (Hoogland 1985, Knowles 1987). Though almost all adult females achieve estrous and many become pregnant, juvenile mortality is high with only one half of copulating females weaning a litter (Hoogland and Foltz 1982). Minimum breeding age usually is two years for both sexes (Hoogland 1985, Knowles 1987). In Montana, most yearlings do not breed, but incidence of breeding among yearlings may reflect food abundance rather than age. <br/><br/>Litter size typically averages about 4 (Knowles 1987) (3 in yearlings, 5 in older females) (Koford 1958). Vegetation condition does not necessarily affect litter size, with adults producing an average litter size of 4.3 on \"fair\" rangeland and 5.7 on \"severely depleted\" rangeland (Koford 1958), but relatively large and small littes may follow high and low rainfall, respectively. Individual females produce one litter per year. <br/><br/>Pups stay underground until weaned (Hoogland 1985). Pups appear above ground in about 5-8 weeks (mid-May to early June in Montana). In the field, Hoogland (1985) found that the pups are weaned (and first emerge from burrows) at about 43 days. In the laboratory, weaning occurs at about 60 days (Johnson 1927). Due to forage availability and stress associated with crowding, the number of weaned juveniles increases as the number of adults and yearlings decreases, and vice-versa (Hoogland et al. 1987).","ecologyComments":null,"habitatComments":"The habitat of this species consists of dry, flat or gently sloping, open grasslands with low, relatively sparse vegetation, including areas overgrazed by cattle. The species occurs in open vacant lots at town edges in some areas. Habitat types represented by this species include all major grassland types--short (Bonham and Lerwick 1976), mixed (Coppock et al. 1983), and tall (Osborn 1942) and it is apparently most abundant and an important community member in the Mixed Grass Prairie and Short Grass Plains associations (Carpenter 1940, in Osborn 1942). By colonizing areas with low vegetative stature, this species often selects areas with past human (as well as other) disturbance. In North Dakota and Montana, colonies tended to be associated with areas heavily used by cattle, such as water tanks and long-term supplemental feeding sites (Licht and Sanchez 1993).","generalDescription":"Largest of all CYNOMYS species; 700-1500 g; 28-33 cm from nose tip to rear end (Burt and Grossenheider 1976, Hoogland and Foltz 1982); limbs, tail (7-10 cm), and ears are relatively small, with body and tail pelage generally dark cinnamon on the back and upper sides but buff colored on underside (Burt and Grossenheider 1976, Anderson 1977, Hall 1981); distal third of tail is black or dark brown (Hall 1981). Molt twice per year, prior to summer and prior to winter. Skull is about 60 cm long, with 22 teeth (Burt and Grossenheider 1976).","diagnosticCharacteristics":null,"speciesMarineHabitats":[],"speciesTerrestrialHabitats":[{"cagTerrHabId":-105782,"terrestrialHabitat":{"id":8,"terrestrialHabitatDescEn":"Savanna","terrestrialHabitatDescEs":"Sabana","terrestrialHabitatDescFr":"Savane","displayOrder":10}},{"cagTerrHabId":-105779,"terrestrialHabitat":{"id":9,"terrestrialHabitatDescEn":"Grassland/herbaceous","terrestrialHabitatDescEs":"Pastizales/cobertura herbácea","terrestrialHabitatDescFr":"Prairie/couverture herbacée","displayOrder":11}},{"cagTerrHabId":-105780,"terrestrialHabitat":{"id":11,"terrestrialHabitatDescEn":"Desert","terrestrialHabitatDescEs":"Desierto","terrestrialHabitatDescFr":"Désert","displayOrder":13}},{"cagTerrHabId":-105781,"terrestrialHabitat":{"id":19,"terrestrialHabitatDescEn":"Cropland/hedgerow","terrestrialHabitatDescEs":"Tierras cultivadas/cerco vivo","terrestrialHabitatDescFr":"Terre cultivée/haie","displayOrder":22}}],"speciesRiverineHabitats":[],"speciesPalustrineHabitats":[],"speciesLacustrineHabitats":[],"speciesSubterraneanHabitats":[],"speciesEstuarineHabitats":[]},"primaryReference":{"id":1151804,"citation":"American Society of Mammalogists (ASM). 2025. Mammal Diversity Database (Version 1.13) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10595931. Online. Available: https://www.mammaldiversity.org/","shortCitationAuthor":"American Society of Mammalogists (ASM)","shortCitationYear":2025,"referenceCode":"W25ASM01NAUS","lastModified":"2025-04-04T21:45:15.526109Z"},"predecessors":[],"elementGlobalThreatAssessments":[{"elementGlobalThreatAssessId":62140,"iucnThreatCategory":{"id":5,"iucnThreatCategoryCd":"2","iucnThreatCategoryDescEn":"Agriculture & aquaculture","iucnThreatCategoryDescEs":null,"iucnThreatCategoryDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"2 - Agriculture & aquaculture","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":50,"iucnThreat":"Y","parentThreatId":null,"iucnThreatLevel":1},"iucnThreatScope":{"id":2,"iucnThreatScopeDescEn":"Large: Affects most (31-70%) of the total population or occurrences or extent","iucnThreatScopeDescEs":null,"iucnThreatScopeDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Large (31-70%)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":2},"iucnThreatSeverity":{"id":3,"iucnThreatSeverityDescEn":"Moderate: Likely to moderately degrade/reduce affected occurrences or habitat, or reduce  population 11-30%","iucnThreatSeverityDescEs":null,"iucnThreatSeverityDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Moderate or 11-30% pop. decline","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3},"iucnThreatTiming":{"id":1,"iucnThreatTimingDescEn":"High: Continuing","iucnThreatTimingDescEs":null,"iucnThreatTimingDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"High (continuing)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":1},"threatImpactCalc":{"id":8,"threatImpactCalcCd":"C","threatImpactCalcDescEn":"Medium","threatImpactCalcDescEs":null,"threatImpactCalcDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"C = Medium","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3}},{"elementGlobalThreatAssessId":62141,"iucnThreatCategory":{"id":6,"iucnThreatCategoryCd":"2.1","iucnThreatCategoryDescEn":"Annual & perennial non-timber crops","iucnThreatCategoryDescEs":null,"iucnThreatCategoryDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"2.1 - Annual & perennial non-timber crops","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":60,"iucnThreat":"Y","parentThreatId":5,"iucnThreatLevel":2},"iucnThreatScope":{"id":2,"iucnThreatScopeDescEn":"Large: Affects most (31-70%) of the total population or occurrences or extent","iucnThreatScopeDescEs":null,"iucnThreatScopeDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Large (31-70%)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":2},"iucnThreatSeverity":{"id":3,"iucnThreatSeverityDescEn":"Moderate: Likely to moderately degrade/reduce affected occurrences or habitat, or reduce  population 11-30%","iucnThreatSeverityDescEs":null,"iucnThreatSeverityDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Moderate or 11-30% pop. decline","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3},"iucnThreatTiming":{"id":1,"iucnThreatTimingDescEn":"High: Continuing","iucnThreatTimingDescEs":null,"iucnThreatTimingDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"High (continuing)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":1},"threatImpactCalc":{"id":8,"threatImpactCalcCd":"C","threatImpactCalcDescEn":"Medium","threatImpactCalcDescEs":null,"threatImpactCalcDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"C = Medium","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3}},{"elementGlobalThreatAssessId":62142,"iucnThreatCategory":{"id":10,"iucnThreatCategoryCd":"3","iucnThreatCategoryDescEn":"Energy production & mining","iucnThreatCategoryDescEs":null,"iucnThreatCategoryDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"3 - Energy production & mining","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":240,"iucnThreat":"Y","parentThreatId":null,"iucnThreatLevel":1},"iucnThreatScope":{"id":3,"iucnThreatScopeDescEn":"Restricted: Affects some (11-30%) of the total population or occurrences or extent","iucnThreatScopeDescEs":null,"iucnThreatScopeDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Restricted (11-30%)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3},"iucnThreatSeverity":{"id":4,"iucnThreatSeverityDescEn":"Slight: Likely to only slightly degrade/reduce affected occurrences or habitat, or reduce population 1-10%","iucnThreatSeverityDescEs":null,"iucnThreatSeverityDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Slight or 1-10% pop. decline","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":4},"iucnThreatTiming":{"id":1,"iucnThreatTimingDescEn":"High: Continuing","iucnThreatTimingDescEs":null,"iucnThreatTimingDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"High (continuing)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":1},"threatImpactCalc":{"id":10,"threatImpactCalcCd":"D","threatImpactCalcDescEn":"Low","threatImpactCalcDescEs":null,"threatImpactCalcDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"D = Low","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":4}},{"elementGlobalThreatAssessId":62143,"iucnThreatCategory":{"id":11,"iucnThreatCategoryCd":"3.1","iucnThreatCategoryDescEn":"Oil & gas drilling","iucnThreatCategoryDescEs":null,"iucnThreatCategoryDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"3.1 - Oil & gas drilling","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":250,"iucnThreat":"Y","parentThreatId":10,"iucnThreatLevel":2},"iucnThreatScope":{"id":3,"iucnThreatScopeDescEn":"Restricted: Affects some (11-30%) of the total population or occurrences or extent","iucnThreatScopeDescEs":null,"iucnThreatScopeDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Restricted (11-30%)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3},"iucnThreatSeverity":{"id":4,"iucnThreatSeverityDescEn":"Slight: Likely to only slightly degrade/reduce affected occurrences or habitat, or reduce population 1-10%","iucnThreatSeverityDescEs":null,"iucnThreatSeverityDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Slight or 1-10% pop. decline","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":4},"iucnThreatTiming":{"id":1,"iucnThreatTimingDescEn":"High: Continuing","iucnThreatTimingDescEs":null,"iucnThreatTimingDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"High (continuing)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":1},"threatImpactCalc":{"id":10,"threatImpactCalcCd":"D","threatImpactCalcDescEn":"Low","threatImpactCalcDescEs":null,"threatImpactCalcDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"D = Low","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":4}},{"elementGlobalThreatAssessId":62144,"iucnThreatCategory":{"id":13,"iucnThreatCategoryCd":"3.3","iucnThreatCategoryDescEn":"Renewable energy","iucnThreatCategoryDescEs":null,"iucnThreatCategoryDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"3.3 - Renewable energy","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":270,"iucnThreat":"Y","parentThreatId":10,"iucnThreatLevel":2},"iucnThreatScope":{"id":3,"iucnThreatScopeDescEn":"Restricted: Affects some (11-30%) of the total population or occurrences or extent","iucnThreatScopeDescEs":null,"iucnThreatScopeDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Restricted (11-30%)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3},"iucnThreatSeverity":{"id":4,"iucnThreatSeverityDescEn":"Slight: Likely to only slightly degrade/reduce affected occurrences or habitat, or reduce population 1-10%","iucnThreatSeverityDescEs":null,"iucnThreatSeverityDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Slight or 1-10% pop. decline","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":4},"iucnThreatTiming":{"id":1,"iucnThreatTimingDescEn":"High: Continuing","iucnThreatTimingDescEs":null,"iucnThreatTimingDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"High (continuing)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":1},"threatImpactCalc":{"id":10,"threatImpactCalcCd":"D","threatImpactCalcDescEn":"Low","threatImpactCalcDescEs":null,"threatImpactCalcDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"D = Low","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":4}},{"elementGlobalThreatAssessId":62145,"iucnThreatCategory":{"id":19,"iucnThreatCategoryCd":"5","iucnThreatCategoryDescEn":"Biological resource use","iucnThreatCategoryDescEs":null,"iucnThreatCategoryDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"5 - Biological resource use","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":330,"iucnThreat":"Y","parentThreatId":null,"iucnThreatLevel":1},"iucnThreatScope":{"id":3,"iucnThreatScopeDescEn":"Restricted: Affects some (11-30%) of the total population or occurrences or extent","iucnThreatScopeDescEs":null,"iucnThreatScopeDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Restricted (11-30%)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3},"iucnThreatSeverity":{"id":9,"iucnThreatSeverityDescEn":"Moderate - slight","iucnThreatSeverityDescEs":null,"iucnThreatSeverityDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Moderate - slight","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":11},"iucnThreatTiming":{"id":1,"iucnThreatTimingDescEn":"High: Continuing","iucnThreatTimingDescEs":null,"iucnThreatTimingDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"High (continuing)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":1},"threatImpactCalc":{"id":10,"threatImpactCalcCd":"D","threatImpactCalcDescEn":"Low","threatImpactCalcDescEs":null,"threatImpactCalcDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"D = Low","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":4}},{"elementGlobalThreatAssessId":62146,"iucnThreatCategory":{"id":20,"iucnThreatCategoryCd":"5.1","iucnThreatCategoryDescEn":"Hunting & collecting terrestrial animals","iucnThreatCategoryDescEs":null,"iucnThreatCategoryDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"5.1 - Hunting & collecting terrestrial animals","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":340,"iucnThreat":"Y","parentThreatId":19,"iucnThreatLevel":2},"iucnThreatScope":{"id":3,"iucnThreatScopeDescEn":"Restricted: Affects some (11-30%) of the total population or occurrences or extent","iucnThreatScopeDescEs":null,"iucnThreatScopeDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Restricted (11-30%)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3},"iucnThreatSeverity":{"id":9,"iucnThreatSeverityDescEn":"Moderate - slight","iucnThreatSeverityDescEs":null,"iucnThreatSeverityDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Moderate - slight","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":11},"iucnThreatTiming":{"id":1,"iucnThreatTimingDescEn":"High: Continuing","iucnThreatTimingDescEs":null,"iucnThreatTimingDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"High (continuing)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":1},"threatImpactCalc":{"id":10,"threatImpactCalcCd":"D","threatImpactCalcDescEn":"Low","threatImpactCalcDescEs":null,"threatImpactCalcDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"D = Low","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":4}},{"elementGlobalThreatAssessId":62147,"iucnThreatCategory":{"id":107,"iucnThreatCategoryCd":"5.1.3","iucnThreatCategoryDescEn":"Persecution/control","iucnThreatCategoryDescEs":null,"iucnThreatCategoryDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"5.1.3 - Persecution/control","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":343,"iucnThreat":"Y","parentThreatId":20,"iucnThreatLevel":3},"iucnThreatScope":{"id":3,"iucnThreatScopeDescEn":"Restricted: Affects some (11-30%) of the total population or occurrences or extent","iucnThreatScopeDescEs":null,"iucnThreatScopeDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Restricted (11-30%)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3},"iucnThreatSeverity":{"id":9,"iucnThreatSeverityDescEn":"Moderate - slight","iucnThreatSeverityDescEs":null,"iucnThreatSeverityDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Moderate - slight","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":11},"iucnThreatTiming":{"id":1,"iucnThreatTimingDescEn":"High: Continuing","iucnThreatTimingDescEs":null,"iucnThreatTimingDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"High (continuing)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":1},"threatImpactCalc":{"id":10,"threatImpactCalcCd":"D","threatImpactCalcDescEn":"Low","threatImpactCalcDescEs":null,"threatImpactCalcDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"D = Low","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":4}},{"elementGlobalThreatAssessId":17165,"iucnThreatCategory":{"id":32,"iucnThreatCategoryCd":"8","iucnThreatCategoryDescEn":"Invasive & other problematic species,  genes & diseases","iucnThreatCategoryDescEs":null,"iucnThreatCategoryDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"8 - Invasive & other problematic species,  genes & diseases","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":590,"iucnThreat":"Y","parentThreatId":null,"iucnThreatLevel":1},"iucnThreatScope":{"id":2,"iucnThreatScopeDescEn":"Large: Affects most (31-70%) of the total population or occurrences or extent","iucnThreatScopeDescEs":null,"iucnThreatScopeDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Large (31-70%)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":2},"iucnThreatSeverity":{"id":3,"iucnThreatSeverityDescEn":"Moderate: Likely to moderately degrade/reduce affected occurrences or habitat, or reduce  population 11-30%","iucnThreatSeverityDescEs":null,"iucnThreatSeverityDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Moderate or 11-30% pop. decline","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3},"iucnThreatTiming":{"id":1,"iucnThreatTimingDescEn":"High: Continuing","iucnThreatTimingDescEs":null,"iucnThreatTimingDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"High (continuing)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":1},"threatImpactCalc":{"id":8,"threatImpactCalcCd":"C","threatImpactCalcDescEn":"Medium","threatImpactCalcDescEs":null,"threatImpactCalcDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"C = Medium","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3}},{"elementGlobalThreatAssessId":17166,"iucnThreatCategory":{"id":33,"iucnThreatCategoryCd":"8.1","iucnThreatCategoryDescEn":"Invasive non-native/alien species/diseases","iucnThreatCategoryDescEs":null,"iucnThreatCategoryDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"8.1 - Invasive non-native/alien species/diseases","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":600,"iucnThreat":"Y","parentThreatId":32,"iucnThreatLevel":2},"iucnThreatScope":{"id":2,"iucnThreatScopeDescEn":"Large: Affects most (31-70%) of the total population or occurrences or extent","iucnThreatScopeDescEs":null,"iucnThreatScopeDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Large (31-70%)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":2},"iucnThreatSeverity":{"id":3,"iucnThreatSeverityDescEn":"Moderate: Likely to moderately degrade/reduce affected occurrences or habitat, or reduce  population 11-30%","iucnThreatSeverityDescEs":null,"iucnThreatSeverityDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"Moderate or 11-30% pop. decline","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3},"iucnThreatTiming":{"id":1,"iucnThreatTimingDescEn":"High: Continuing","iucnThreatTimingDescEs":null,"iucnThreatTimingDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"High (continuing)","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":1},"threatImpactCalc":{"id":8,"threatImpactCalcCd":"C","threatImpactCalcDescEn":"Medium","threatImpactCalcDescEs":null,"threatImpactCalcDescFr":null,"displayValueEn":"C = Medium","displayValueEs":null,"displayValueFr":null,"displayOrder":3}}]}