Ascaphus montanus

Taxonomy

Assessment Information

Geographic Range

Population

Habitat and Ecology

Threats

Conservation Actions

View Printer Friendly

Taxonomy [top]

Kingdom	Phylum	Class	Order	Family
ANIMALIA	CHORDATA	AMPHIBIA	ANURA	LEIOPELMATIDAE

Scientific Name:

Ascaphus montanus

Species Authority:

Mittleman and Myers, 1949

Common Name/s:

English

–

Inland Tailed Frog, Rocky Mountain Tailed Frog

Assessment Information [top]

Red List Category & Criteria:	Least Concern ver 3.1
Year Published:	2004
Assessor/s:	Geoffrey Hammerson, Michael Adams
Reviewer/s:	Global Amphibian Assessment Coordinating Team (Simon Stuart, Janice Chanson, Neil Cox and Bruce Young)
Contributor/s:
Justification: Listed as Least Concern in view of its wide distribution, presumed large population, and because it is unlikely to be declining fast enough to qualify for listing in a more threatened category.

Geographic Range [top]

Range Description:	This species ranges from extreme southeastern British Columbia south through western Montana to extreme southeastern Washington, northeastern Oregon, and south-central Idaho (Leonard et al. 1993, Nielson et al. 2001, Stebbins 2003). There are many extant occurrences in Montana and Idaho and two small population groups in British Columbia (L. Dupuis pers. comm., 2001).
Countries:	Native: Canada; United States
Range Map:	Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.

Population [top]

Population:	Total adult population size is unknown but is probably at least several thousand and might exceed 10,000. The species is still relatively common in Idaho and Montana. Long-term trend: Likely relatively stable in extent of occurrence, unknown degree of decline in population size, area of occurrence, and number/condition of occurrences. Short-term trend: Possibly declining based on habitat trends, but few population data are available.
Population Trend:	Unknown

Population:

Total adult population size is unknown but is probably at least several thousand and might exceed 10,000. The species is still relatively common in Idaho and Montana. Long-term trend: Likely relatively stable in extent of occurrence, unknown degree of decline in population size, area of occurrence, and number/condition of occurrences. Short-term trend: Possibly declining based on habitat trends, but few population data are available.

Population Trend:

Unknown

Habitat and Ecology [top]

Habitat and Ecology:	It lives in clear, cold swift-moving mountain streams with coarse substrate. It may occur primarily in older forest sites, but better information is needed; required microclimatic and microhabitat conditions are more common in older forests. It may be found on land during wet weather near water in humid forests or in more open habitat. During dry weather it stays on moist stream-banks. It lays eggs in long strings under stones in water.
Systems:	Terrestrial; Freshwater

Habitat and Ecology:

It lives in clear, cold swift-moving mountain streams with coarse substrate. It may occur primarily in older forest sites, but better information is needed; required microclimatic and microhabitat conditions are more common in older forests. It may be found on land during wet weather near water in humid forests or in more open habitat. During dry weather it stays on moist stream-banks. It lays eggs in long strings under stones in water.

Systems:

Terrestrial; Freshwater

Threats [top]

Major Threat(s):	Tailed frogs are sensitive to logging and road building (Leonard et al. 1993). Logging practices that increase water temperatures and siltation might have an adverse effect on tailed frog populations (Nussbaum et al. 1983). See also Bury and Corn (1988) and Corn and Bury (1989) for information on negative effects of timber harvest. Despite negative effects of logging, tailed frogs frequently occur in many young forests that have been harvested one or more times in the past. Sensitivity to timber harvest might depend on surface geology and harvest practices (Adams and Bury 2002, Welsh and Lind 2002). Diller and Wallace (1999) emphasized that current timber harvest practices are not as detrimental as those used in the past. Information on the responses of tailed frogs to timber harvest is based primarily on the coastal tailed frog, A. truei. Further information is needed on the responses of A. montanus. Apparently, low dispersal abilities might limit rate of recovery of depleted populations.

Major Threat(s):

Tailed frogs are sensitive to logging and road building (Leonard et al. 1993). Logging practices that increase water temperatures and siltation might have an adverse effect on tailed frog populations (Nussbaum et al. 1983). See also Bury and Corn (1988) and Corn and Bury (1989) for information on negative effects of timber harvest. Despite negative effects of logging, tailed frogs frequently occur in many young forests that have been harvested one or more times in the past. Sensitivity to timber harvest might depend on surface geology and harvest practices (Adams and Bury 2002, Welsh and Lind 2002). Diller and Wallace (1999) emphasized that current timber harvest practices are not as detrimental as those used in the past. Information on the responses of tailed frogs to timber harvest is based primarily on the coastal tailed frog, A. truei. Further information is needed on the responses of A. montanus. Apparently, low dispersal abilities might limit rate of recovery of depleted populations.

Conservation Actions [top]

Conservation Actions:	Occurs in Glacier National Park and several Wilderness Areas. There are many occurrences on National Forest or Bureau of Land Management lands, but these might not receive special management consideration, so protection is minimal. Maintenance of cool, forested, unsilted streams and stream corridors is a basic conservation need.

Conservation Actions:

Occurs in Glacier National Park and several Wilderness Areas. There are many occurrences on National Forest or Bureau of Land Management lands, but these might not receive special management consideration, so protection is minimal. Maintenance of cool, forested, unsilted streams and stream corridors is a basic conservation need.

Citation:	Geoffrey Hammerson, Michael Adams 2004. Ascaphus montanus. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2012.2. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 20 May 2013.
Disclaimer:	To make use of this information, please check the <Terms of Use>.
Feedback:	If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please fill in the feedback form so that we can correct or extend the information provided