Geographic patterns of at-risk species: A technical document supporting the USDA Forest Service Interim Update of the 2000 RPA Assessment

USDA Forest Service - General Technical Report RMRS-GTR

Volumn , Issue 211 RMRS-GTR, 2008, Pages 1-21

  Flather, Curtis H ^a   Knowles, Michael S ^b   McNees, Jason ^c  

^a ROCKY MOUNTAIN RESEARCH STATION   (United States)

^b Anadarko Industries LLC   (United States)

^c NATURESERVE   (United States)

Author keywords

At risk species; Conservation hotspots; Coterminous United States; Listing trends; Threatened and endangered species; Wildlife assessment

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION; ENDANGERED SPECIES; EXTINCTION RISK; GEOGRAPHICAL VARIATION; NATURAL RESOURCE; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; RISK ASSESSMENT; WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT;

EID: 46249113848     PISSN: 02775786     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. nd edition. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
2. Borrvall, C.; Ebenman, B.; Jonsson, T. 2000. Biodiversity lessens the risk of cascading extinction in model food webs. Ecology Letters 3:131-136.
3. Boyce, M. S. 1992. Population viability analysis. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 23:481-506.
4. Callicott, J. B. 1986. On the intrinsic value of nonhuman species. In Norton, B. G., ed. The preservation of species: the value of biological diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 138-172.
5. Cardinale, B. J.; Palmer, M. A.; Collins, S. L. 2002. Species diversity enhances ecosystem functioning through interspecific facilitation. Nature 415:426-428.
6. Chapin, F. S.; Sala, O. E.; Burke, I. C.; Grime, J. P.; Hooper, D. U.; Lauenroth, W. K.; Lombard, A.; Mooney, H. A.; Mosier, A. R.; Naeem, S.; Pacala, S. W.; Roy, J.; Steffen, W. L.; Tilman, D. 1998. Ecosystem consequences of changing biodiversity. BioScience 48:45-52.
7. Chapin, F. S.; Zavaleta, E. S.; Eviner, V. T.; Naylor, R. L.; Vitousek, P. M.; Reynolds, H. L.; Hooper, D. U.; Lavorel, S.; Sala, O. E.; Hobbie, S. E.; Mack, M. C.; Díaz, S. 2000. Consequences of changing biodiversity. Nature 405:234-242.
8. Chaplin, S. J.; Gerrard, R. A.; Watson, H. M.; Master, L. L.; Flack, S. R. 2000. The geography of imperilment. In Stein, B. A.; Kutner, L. S.; Adams, J. S., eds. Precious heritage: the status of biodiversity in the United States. New York, NY: Oxford University Press: 159-199.
9. Cohen, J. 1960. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 20:37-40.
10. Cohen, J. 1968. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin 70:213-220.
11. Committee on Scientific Issues in the Endangered Species Act. 1995. Science and the Endangered Species Act. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
12. Cottingham, K. L.; Brown, B. L.; Lennon, J. T. 2001. Biodiversity may regulate the temporal variability of ecological systems. Ecology Letters 4:72-85.
13. Crozier, R. H. 1997. Preserving the information content of species: genetic diversity, phylogeny, and conservation worth. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 28:243-268.
14. Dobson, A. P.; Rodriguez, J. P.; Roberts, W. M.; Wilcove, D. S. 1997. Geographic distribution of endangered species in the United States. Science 275:550-553.
15. Ellstrand, N. C.; Elam, D. R. 1993. Population genetic consequences of small population size: implications for plant conservation. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 24:217-242.
16. Flather, C. H.; Joyce, L. A.; Bloomgarden, C. A. 1994. Species endangerment patterns in the United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-241. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 42 p.
17. Flather, C. H.; Knowles, M. S.; Kendall, I. A. 1998. Threatened and endangered species geography: characteristics of hot spots in the conterminous United States. BioScience 48:365-376.
18. Flather, C. H.; Brady, S. J.; Knowles, M. S. 1999. Wildlife resource trends in the United States: a technical document supporting the 2000 USDA Forest Service RPA Assessment. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-33. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 79 p.
19. Flather, C. H.; Ricketts, T. H.; Sieg, C. H.; Knowles, M. S.; Fay, J. P.; McNees, J. 2004. Criterion 1: Conservation of biological diversity. Indicator 7: The status (threatened, rare, vulnerable, endangered, or extinct) of forest-dependent species at risk of not maintaining viable breeding populations, as determined by legislation or scientific assessment. In D. Darr, coordinator. Data report: a supplement to the national report on sustainable forests - 2003. FS-766A. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Available: http://www.fs.fed.us/research/sustain/.
20. Flather, C. H.; Sieg, C. H. 2007. Species rarity: definition, classification, and causes. In M. G. Raphael and R. Molina, eds. Conservation of rare or little-known species: biological, social, and economic considerations. Washington, DC: Island Press: 40-66.
21. Gärdenfors, U. 2001. Classifying threatened species at national versus global levels. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 16:511-516.
22. Harte, J.; Kinzig, A. P.; Green J. 1999. Self-similarity in the distribution and abundance of species. Science 284:334-336.
23. Hector, A.; Joshi, J.; Lawler, S. P.; Spehn, E. M.; Wilby, A. 2001. Conservation implications of the link between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Oecologia 129:624-628.
24. Hubbell, S. P. 2001. The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
25. Huston, M. A. 1997. Hidden treatments in ecological experiments: re-evaluating the ecosystem function of biodiversity. Oecologia 110:449-460.
26. IUCN - The World Conservation Union. 2001. IUCN Red List categories and criteria: Version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. ii + 30 p.
27. Johnson, C. N. 1998. Species extinction and the relationship between distribution and abundance. Nature 394:272-274.
28. Kaiser, J. 2000. Rift over biodiversity divides ecologists. Science 289:1282-1283.
29. Keeley, J. E.; Swift, C. C. 1995. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning in Mediterranean-climate California. In G. W. Davis, and D. M. Richardson, eds. Mediterranean-type ecosystems: the function of biodiversity. Ecological Studies, Vol 109. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag: 121-183.
30. Lande, R. 1995. Mutation and conservation. Conservation Biology 9:782-791.
31. Langner, L. L.; Flather, C. H. 1994. Biological diversity: status and trends in the United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-244. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. 24 p.
32. Lawton, J. H.; May, R. M., eds. 1995. Extinction rates. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
33. Loreau, M.; Naeem, S.; Inchausti, P.; Bengtsson, J.; Grime, J. P.; Hector, A.; Hooper, D. U.; Huston, M. A.; Raffaelli, D.; Schmid, B.; Tilman, D.; Wardle, D. A. 2001. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: current knowledge and future challenges. Science 294:804-808.
34. Lubchenco, J.; Olson, A. M.; Brubaker, L. B.; Carpenter, S. R.; Holland, M. M.; Subbell, S. P.; Levin, S. A.; MacMahon, J. A.; Matson, P. A.; Melillo, J. M.; Mooney, H. A.; Peterson, C. H.; Pulliam, H. R.; Real, L. A.; Regal, P. J.; Risser, P. G. 1991. The sustainable biosphere initiative: an ecological research agenda. Ecology 72:318-325.
35. Lundberg, P.; Ranta, E.; Kaitala, V. 2000. Species loss leads to community closure. Ecology Letters 3:465-468.
36. Mangel, M.; Tier, C. 1994. Four facts every conservation biologist should know about persistence. Ecology 75:607-614.
37. Master, L. L. 1991. Assessing threats and setting priorities for conservation. Conservation Biology. 5:559-563
38. Master, L. L.; Stein, B. A.; Kutner, L. S.; Hammerson, G. A. 2000. Vanishing assets: conservation status of U.S. species. In Stein, B. A.; Kutner, L. S.; Adams, J. S., eds. Precious heritage: the status of biodiversity in the United States. New York, NY: Oxford University Press: 93-118.
39. May, R. M. 1990. How many species? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, Biological Sciences. 330: 293-304.
40. Mittelbach, G. G.; Steiner, C. F.; Sheiner, S. M.; Gross, K. L.; Reynolds, H. L.; Waide, R. B.; Willig, M. R.; Dodson, S. I.; Gough, L. 2001. What is the observed relationship between species richness and productivity? Ecology 82:2381-2396.
41. Mosteller, F.; Parunak, A. 1985. Identifying extreme cells in a sizable contingency table: probabilistic and exploratory approaches. In Hoaglin, D. C.; Mosteller, F.; Tukey, J. W., eds. Exploring data tables, trends, and shapes. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons: 189-224.
42. Naeem, S. 2002. Biodiversity equals instability? Nature 416:23-24.
43. National Research Council. 2000. Ecological indicators for the nation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
44. NatureServe. 2004. NatureServe Central Databases - 9/9/04. NatureServe, Arlington, VA. (Metadata in Appendix and on file with Curtis H. Flather, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO).
45. Pimm, S. L.; Jones, H. L.; Diamond, J. 1988. On the risk of extinction. American Naturalist 132:757-785.
46. Pimm, S. L.; Lawton, J. H. 1998. Planning for biodiversity. Science 279:2068-2069.
47. Rieseberg, L. H. 1991. Hydridization in rare plants: insights from case studies in Cercocarpus and Helianthus. In D. A. Falk, and K. E. Holsinger, eds. Genetics and conservation of rare plants. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 171-181.
48. Rutledge, D. T.; Lepczyk, C. A.; Xie, J.; Liu, J. 2001. Spatiotemporal dynamics of endangered species hotspots in the United States. Conservation Biology 15:475-487.
49. SAS Institute. 2003. The SAS system for windows, Version 9.1. SAS Institute, Inc. Carry, NC.
50. Schwartz, M. W.; Brigham, C. A.; Hoeksema, J. D.; Lyons, K. G.; Mills, M. H.; van Mantgem, P. J. 2000. Linking biodiversity to ecosystem function: implications for conservation ecology. Oecologia 122:297-305.
51. Sisk, T. D.; Launer, A. E.; Switky K. R.; Ehrlich, P. R. 1994. Identifying extinction threats: global analyses of the distribution of biodiversity and the expansion of the human enterprise. BioScience 44:592-604.
52. Stein, B. A.; Master, L. L.; Morse, L. E.; Kutner, L. S.; Morrison, M. 1995. Status of U.S. species: setting conservation priorities. In LaRoe, T.; Farris, G. S.; Puckett, C. E.; Doran, P. D.; Mac, M. J., eds. Our living resources: a report to the nation on the distribution, abundance, and health of U.S. plants, animals, and ecosystems. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Biological Service: 399-400.
53. Tilman, D. 2000. Causes, consequences and ethics of biodiversity. Nature 405:208-211.
54. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 1979. Service lists 32 plants. Endangered Species Technical Bulletin 4(11): 1, 5-8.
55. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004a. Box Score: listings and recovery plans as of November 1, 2004. Endangered Species Bulletin 29(2) :44.
56. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 2004b. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; Review of species that are candidates or proposed for listing as endangered or threatened; Annual notice of findings on resubmitted petitions; Annual description of progress on listing actions. Federal Register 69(86):24876-24904.
57. van Ruijven, J.; De Deyn, G. B.; Berendse, F. 2003. Diversity reduces invasibility in experimental plant communities: the role of plant species. Ecology Letters 6:910-918.
58. Wright, S. 1977. Evolution and the genetics of populations. Vol. 3: experimental results and evolutionary deductions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.