Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70006431

Factors limiting the recovery of boreal toads ( Bufo b. boreas )

Abstract

Boreal toads ( Bufo b. boreas ) are widely distributed over much of the mountainous western United States. Populations in the Southern Rocky Mountains suffered extensive declines in the late 1970s through early 1980s (Carey, 1993). At the time, these mass mortalities were thought to be associated with a bacterial infection (Carey, 1993). Although the few populations that survived the mass die-offs were not systematically monitored until at least 1993, no mass mortalities had been observed until 1996 when die-offs were observed. A mycotic skin infection associated with a chytrid fungus is now causing mortality of toads in at least two of the populations (M.S. Jones and D.E. Green, unpublished data; Muths et al., 2003). Boreal toads are now absent throughout large areas of their former distribution in Colorado and southern Wyoming and may be extinct in New Mexico (Corn et al., 1989; Carey, 1993; Stuart and Painter, 1994). These toads are classified as “endangered” by Colorado and New Mexico and are designated as a protected non-game species in Wyoming. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has categorized the Southern Rocky Mountain populations for federal listing and is currently reviewing their designation as a “warranted but precluded” species for possible listing in the next few years. For the management of boreal toads and their habitats, a Boreal Toad Recovery Team was formed by the Colorado Division of Wildlife in 1995 as part of a collaborative effort with federal agencies within the United States’ departments of the Interior and Agriculture and with agencies in two adjoining states. To date, conservation agreements have been signed by eight state and federal agencies and by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program. Although boreal toads were considered common throughout their range in Colorado, no comprehensive surveys of the numbers and sizes of their populations were conducted prior to mass die-offs in the 1970s. Surveys completed in the late 1980s to early 1990s, however, indicated that the toads were still present in only one of 377 historical sites in parts of western Colorado (Hammerson, 1992) and in about 17% of previously known sites in the Colorado Front Range (Corn et al., 1989). Once common in Rocky Mountain National Park, boreal toads are now found at only seven localities, with just two or three of these populations likely to be reproducing successfully each year (Corn et al., 1997). Intensive surveys by the Boreal Toad Recovery Team since 1995 have found about 50 breeding sites comprising 25 distinct populations within Colorado (Loeffler, unpublished data). Of these populations, most are small (fewer than five egg clutches laid per year) and may not survive over the long term. Efforts to restore population sizes and expand the geographical distribution of boreal toads in the southern Rocky Mountains have involved considerable person-hours and financial commitments. Special care has been taken to protect habitats and, when feasible, to improve sites where breeding populations currently exist. However, initial attempts to repatriate these toads in historic habitats in which boreal toads were present before 1975 have generally proven unsuccessful (Carey, unpublished data; Muths et al., 2003). It is too early to determine if recent repatriations will establish breeding populations (Scherff-Norris, 1999), but these efforts will likely continue. Despite the best human intentions and efforts, the recovery of former population sizes and the historical distribution of boreal toads will greatly depend on its own life history characteristics. However, as we will review in this paper, environmental factors affect many life history attributes in a manner that poses serious obstacles for recovery.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 38.324420427006515° to 40.68063802521456° latitude; -107.75390625° to -105.2655029296875° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C. Carey, P.S. Corn, M.S. Jones, L.J. Livo, E. Muths, C.W. Loeffler. 2005. Factors limiting the recovery of boreal toads ( Bufo b. boreas ). https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70006431

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Loma salmonae and related species

Loma salmonae is a microsporidium that infects Pacific salmon and causes a gill inflammatory syndrome known as microsporidial gill disease of salmon. This disease has been mostly associated with netpen-farmed Chinook salmon ( Oncorhynchus tshawytscha ) in British Columbia, Canada. Clinical, diagnostic, pathological aspects of disease, as well as approaches for disease avoidance in salmon aquaculture are discussed. A laboratory infection model in rainbow trout was used to determine life cycle-stages, transmission dynamics, pathophysiology, influence of temperature, and to test therapeutics applicable to aquaculture. This experimental model has been informative on various approaches of disease control, including the development of a promising vaccine. In addition to improving fish health in salmon farming in North America, this L. salmonae model will be applicable to other microsporidial diseases that may be encountered in emerging aquaculture regions.

Book chapter

Cumulative effects of multiple stressors on marine mammals: Elephant seals as a model system

Noise exposure is a potential stressor for free-ranging marine mammals and is often studied in the absence of other environmental factors. Here, a multi-investigator, interdisciplinary effort was undertaken to examine the response of elephant seals to multiple stressors. An integrated physiological and ecological approach was taken, including immunology, stress physiology, toxicology, animal behavior, population biology, and life history theory, to examine the cumulative effects of exposure to multiple stressors in elephant seals. While we measured the response of individual animals, a population response can be predicted by incorporating these results into the long-term data on elephant seal demographics.

Book chapter

When is a parasite a problem?

A parasite’s perceived societal impact depends on the disease it causes and the perception of the affected host species. For instance, doctors and veterinarians have a mission to treat parasites that infect humans or that impact host species that have some utilitarian or aesthetic value for society. Marine scientists have different concerns than doctors. Although the number of parasites that marine scientists should be concerned about may vary, only 13% of parasites and 6% of host–parasite links might be considered “problematic” in a kelp forest food web. With regard to the many threats to marine ecosystems, these percentages suggest that most parasites and infectious diseases are inconsequential. A related issue is the common expectation that parasites and the impacts that they cause are increasing under stress as ocean environments across the globe degrade. Yet, reports of disease have not increased due to human impacts on the marine environment, where the factors that influence parasitism are more complex. Thus, the expectation that marine parasites create problems, and that the diseases they cause are getting worse, is more likely the exception than the rule.

Book chapter