CHEAT MOUNTAIN SALAMANDER (Plethodon neftiigi) RECOVERY PLAN Region Five U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service CHEAT MOUNTAIN SALAMANDER (Plethodon nettingi) RECOVERY PLAN Prepared by: Thomas K. Pauley Department of Biological Sciences Marshall University Huntington, WV 25755 for: Northeast Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Newton Corner, MA 02158 Approved: Regional Director, N east Regi U.S. Fish and WildV Service Date: * * * This recovery plan delineates reasonable actions needed to recover and/or protect the threatened Cheat Mountain Salamander. The plan does not necessarily represent the views or official position of any particular individuals or agencies involved in plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The proposals in this plan are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Objectives will be attained and funds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities, and other budgetary constraints. Literature citations should read as follows: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1991. Cheat Mountain Salamander Recovery Plan. Newton Corner, Massachusetts. 35 pp. Additional copies maybe purchased from: Fish and Wildlife Reference Service 5430 Grosvenor Lane, Suite 110 Bethesda, Maryland 20814 301-492-6403 or 1-800-582-3421 Fees vary according to number of pages. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Cheat Mountain Salamander Recovery Plan Current Species Status: The Cheat Mountain salamander is currentlyknown to exist at 68 sites within an approximately 700 square-mile area West Virginia. Most of these populations are small, in withless than ten salamanders observed. Although historicallevels are not known, it is likelythat the current population represents oniya smallportion of thespecies’ former distributionand population levels. Plethodon nettingi was listedas a threatened specieson September 28, 1989. Habitat Requirements and Limitiur Factors: This small woodland salamander is foundinred spruce and mixed deciduous forests above2,980 feet in microhabitats thathave relativelyhighhumidity, moist soils, and cool temperatures. The Cheat Mountain salamander’s decline is attributed primarily to extensive loss of and changes toits habitat fromcolonial days tothe present. Extant populations ofthespecies are threatened by removal ofthe forest canopy andwildfires, as wellas byroads and possibly trails which remove forestfloor litter, thus affecting the salamander’s territory. Recovery Objective: To removethe Cheat Mountain salamander from the list of Federally endangered and threatened species. Recovery Criteria: The species can bedelisted when: (a) monitoring often populations over a period of tenyears shows them tobe stable or expanding, (b) 100populations distributed throughout its range are inprotectedownership, (c) sufficient life history information exists to assure appropriate management as needed, and (d) monitoringand management programs are implemented on a continuing basis. Actions Needed 1. Population searches and monitoring 2. Delineation andprotection ofoccupied habitat 3. Habitat characterization 4. Other ecological andlife historystudies 5. Long-term monitoring and management 6. Educational and informational program Estimated Costs ofRecovery ($0O0’s’~ Need 1 Need 2 Need3 Need 4 Need5 Need 6 FYi 17 19 15 8 3 4 FY2 32 21 25 20 3 4 FY3 17 16 25 18 5 FY4-1O 60 64 20 10 TOTAL 126 120 85 46 21 8 Total Estimated Recovery Cost: $406,000 not including possibleland acquisition costs, which are -- unknown at this time. Date ofRecovery: If recovery task timetables are met, delistingshouldbe possible in 2002. :: TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I: INTRODUCTION • Description 1 2 Population Status and Distribution Habitat 7 Life History 8 Factors Affecting the Cheat Mountain Salamander 9 12 Conservation Measures 13 Recovery Strategy PART II: RECOVERY 15 Recovery Objective 15 ... Recovery Tasks 16 Literature Cited 25 Part III: IMPLEMENTATION 28 APPENDIX: Methodology for Salamander Surveys LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Figure 1. Distribution ofPlethodon nettingi populations 3 Table 1. Elevation and number ofPlethodon nettingi sites 5 Table 2. PotentialPlethodon nettingi areas needing additional surveys 18 PART I: INTRODUCTION The Cheat Mountain salamander (Plethodon nettingi Green) was listed as a threatened species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on September 28, 1989 (Federal Register, Vol. 53, No. 188:37814-37818). This smallwoodland salamander was first observed on White Top Mountain in West Virginia in 1935 by M. Graham Netting and Leonard Llewellyn (Brooks 1965). Dr. N. Bayard Green (1938) then described the species from specimens taken at Barton Knob in Randolph County, West Virginia. Although Highton and Grobman (1956) considered the Cheat Mountain salamander a subspecies of the ravine salamander (P. richmondi), Highton and Larson (1979) subsequently conducted electrophoretic studies and assigned it full species status. Description Plethodon nettingi reaches a maximum length of 4.0 inches (Conant 1975) and has 17-19 costal grooves (Highton 1971). Th’~ dorsal color is blackish, usually with brassy or white flecks. The venter is Tmly dark gray to black. Similar Species: Three salamander species found within its range bear some morphological resemblance to the Cheat Mountain salamander: the redback salamander (P. cinereus), Wehrle’s salamander (P. wehrlei), and the mountain dusky salamander (Desmognathus ochrophaeus). Of these, only the redback salamander and 1 mountain dusky salamander have been found to be associatedwith the Cheat Mountain salamander in all known populations (Pauley 1980). While typical specimens of each species are fairly easy to distinguish, there are phase and size variations that can be confusing, including the leadback phase of the redback salamander, and dark phases of the mountain dusky salamander and small Wehrle’s salamanders. The leadback phase of the redbacksalamander can be distinguished from the Cheat Mountain salamander by a mottled (salt and pepper) venter as opposed to the dark gray venter of the latter species. The mountain dusky salamander has a chunkier body, larger hind legs relative to the front, a white line or spotbetween the eyes and angle of the jaws, and 14 costal grooves. Juvenile Wehrle’s salamanders differ from the Cheat Mountain salamander by the presence of small orange spots on the dorsum, white spots along their sides, and a whitish chin and throat. Species outside but near the range of the Cheat Mountain salamander similar in appearance include the valley and ridge salamander (P. hoffinani) and the ravine salamander (P. richmondi). Both species have a longer tail (i.e., longer than the body) than P. nettingi and more costal grooves (19-22). Population Status and Distribution 2 area The current known range of the Cheat Mountain salamander is a 696 m1 falling entirely within West Virginia (Figure 1). The northernmost population was discovered in Blackwater Falls State Park (Tucker County) during 1989 field surveys (Pauley unpubi. data). The most southern extant population known is a small population found west of Bald Knob at the headwaters of Oats Run in Pocahontas County. 2 Co. A A AA ~ stK A 4 A’ 7 A V A ‘AA A WebsterC~. Pocahontas Co. Co. Plethodon nettinpi populations StK (Stuart Knob) DS (Dolly Sods) GK (Gaudineer Knob) SpK (Spruce Knob) Figure 1. Distribution ofPlethodon nettingi populations 3 Surveys conducted over the years have resulted in expansion of the known range since Brooks (1948) originally described it as an area extending from the headwaters of Condon Run in Randolph County south to Thorny Flat in Pocahontas County. Highton (1971) found that the salamander’s range extended to the higher elevations of the Allegheny Front inTucker County, and Pauley (1981) described the range as extending east of McGowan Mountain (Randolph County) to Dolly Sods (Tucker County), south to Spruce Knob (Pendleton and Pocahontas Counties), southwest to Thorny Flat (Pocahontas County), and north to Barton Knob (Randolph County). Prior to the 1989 surveys, a population found on Backbone Mountain just north of Blackwater Canyon in Tucker County extended the range northward by 3.9 miles (Pauley 1987). Despite this apparent expansion, the known range probably represents only a small portion of the historical distribution of the Cheat Mountain salamander. Vast acreages of forested salamander habitat have been cut and burned since the settlement of West Virginia began, as described in Factors Affecting the Cheat Mountain Salamander. During surveys conducted in 1980 and 1989, two known historical populations (Bald Knob and Thorny Flat) were found to be extirpated; these populations may have been destroyed by timbering activities. A third population located on Shavers Mountain east of Yokum Run was destroyed by the development of a deep coal mine in 1981 (Pauley unpubl. data). To date, surveys have been conducted at 499 siteswithin the known range of the Cheat Mountain salamander. P. nettingi has been found in 68 sites (Table 1; Pauleyunpubl. data), but other populations probably exist. Sixty (88.2) of the known populations occur on U.S. Forest Servicelands (MonongahelaNational Forest), three (4.4 ) occur within West Virginia state parks, and five (7.3) 4 Table 1. Elevation and number ofPlethodon nettingi sites. Sites are listed from north to south. Site Location Site Location Elevation Ranges Number of Sites (Quadrangle) (County) (in Feet) Blackwater Falls Tucker 3,980 4,100 2 - Blackbird Knob Tucker 3,840 4,140 1 - Parsons Tucker 3,728 1 Mozark Tucker 2,980 3,843 4 - Mountain Bowden Randolph 3,450 3,920 12 - Harman Randolph 4,430 1 Laneville Tucker/ 4,080 4,770 1 - Randolph Hopeville Pendleton 3,780 4,020 6 - Beverly East Randolph 3,600 3,955 9 - Whitmer Randolph 4,445 1 Widell Randolph/ 3,680 4,069 14 - Pocahontas Sinks of Gandy Randolph 4,675 1 Spruce Knob Pendleton 4,800 4,200 4 - Snyder Knob Randolph/ 4,434 4,640 3 - Pocahontas Durbin Randolph 4,200 4,520 3 - Cass Pocahontas 3,960 4,747 5 - occur on private lands. Of the 60 populations found on U.S. Forest Service lands, five are in Wilderness Areas, 14 are in areas designated as Management Prescription 6.2 (i.e., semiprimitive, nonmotorized areas for dispersed recreation with a low level of disturbance) in the Monongahela National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan, and two are in National Recreation Areas (since the 5