Sagebrush lizard (Scleoporus graciosus)

Description:

Sagebrush lizards are relatively small, narrow lizards with small spiny dorsal scales and a pale dorsolateral strip on each side. They are brown, olive or gray on their backs and undersides are white (Idaho Museum of Natural History 2016; MT Field Guide 2016). Adult males have blue patches on each side of the belly and their throat is mottled or streaked with blue. Adult females have only a pale blue coloration on their bellies, but may develop red or orange colors when gravid (MT Field Guide 2016; Natureserve 2016).

There is some dispute as to whether the subspecies, southern sagebrush lizard (S. g. vandenburgianus) should be treated as a separate subspecies (IUCN 2016; Natureserve 2016). The species in its entirety is discussed here.

Habitat:

Despite their common name, sagebrush lizards occur in a variety of habitats including deserts, open conifer forests, mixed forests, grasslands, sand dunes, and shrublands (WDFW 2015; Idaho Museum of Natural History 2016; IUCN 2016; MT Field Guide 2016; Natureserve 2016). Occupied areas often have open ground with some low shrubs (IUCN 2016; Natureserve 2016). Grass cover is usually less than 10% - 20%, and sites with extensive leaf and other litter are avoided (Green et al. 2001; MT Field Guide 2016). Sagebrush lizards regularly perch on rocks, logs or snags (IUCN 2016; MT Field Guide 2016; Natureserve 2016). They also burrow in soils, and will use rodent burrows, shrubs and logs for cover (IUCN 2016; MT Field Guide 2016; Natureserve 2016).

Population status:

The total population of the sagebrush lizard is unknown but is estimated to exceed 100,000 individuals (IUCN 2016; Natureserve 2016). The species is considered common throughout its range. Short-term population trends are stable or perhaps slightly declining. Long-term trends are unknown with both declines and increases reported (Natureserve 2016). The extent of occurrence, area of occupancy, and range-wide population size appear to be stable (IUCN 2016). The sagebrush lizard is considered a species of least concern by the IUCN based on its expansive range and large population sizes (IUCN 2016).

forb cover. of high grass and do not use areas sagebrush lizards However habitats. sagebrush undisturbed require an Umbrella? Both species Sage-grouse

OR, SD and WA Included in ND, SWAP Status

Designations Sensitive in OR Special

Least Concern IUCN Status

Quick Conservation Facts:

Map © Natureserve

Range of Sagebrush Lizard

Range:

The sagebrush lizard occurs in AZ, CA, CO, ID, MT, NE, NV, NM, ND, OR, SD, TX, UT, WA and WY (Natureserve 2016). It also extends into Mexico, although several organizations question the status of the southernmost distribution as potentially being a separate species (IUCN 2016; Natureserve 2016). Sagebrush lizards occur at elevations ranging from 500 feet to 10,500 feet (Natureserve 2016).

Natural History:

Sagebrush lizards are invertivores, eating beetles, flies, ants, caterpillars, aphids and other insects, as well as spiders, ticks, mites (Natureserve 2016) and scorpions (MT Field Guide 2016). They will occasionally cannibalize their hatchlings (MT Field Guide 2016). Sagebrush lizards are oviparous, laying 1 to 8 eggs. Most adult females produce 2 clutches annually but this may vary depending on latitudinal location, with northern lizards more likely to only produce only one clutch annually (Natureserve 2016). Sexual maturity of females is also influenced by latitude, with more northern lizards requiring 2 years to achieve this goal (MT Field Guide 2016). Faster growth rates in sagebrush lizards may be associated with the abundance of free water within their habitats (Sears and Angilletta 2003). Annual survival rates average 50 to 60 % for adults, but less than 30% in juveniles and eggs (Tinkle 1973; MT Field Guide 2016). They hibernate or become inactive during cold weather, but the duration of inactivity varies with latitudinal occurrence (Natureserve 2016).

Home range sizes are small, averaging around 500 square meters. Suitable areas of habitat are rapidly re-populated when extant individuals are removed (Natureserve 2016). Dispersal distances have not been documented (Natureserve 2016). Sagebrush lizards are gregarious and readily interact with other lizards (WDFW 2015). Predators of the sagebrush lizard include whip snakes, night snakes, other lizards and a variety of predatory birds including raptors and passerines (MT Field Guide 2016; Natureserve 2016).

Known Threats:

On a range-wide basis no major threats have been identified (IUCN 2016). Localized habitat loss and degradation may result in local declines or extirpation (Dykes et al. 2015; WDFW 2015; OR Draft Swap 2016). The use of off-road recreation vehicle traffic and increased road traffic associated with oil and gas development have been identified as potential conservation concerns for sagebrush lizards in SD, along with the use of pesticides (SDFGP 2014). Habitat for sagebrush lizards is also degraded with the incursion of invasive plants, such as cheatgrass (WDFW 2015) and removal of sagebrush cover to promote grass growth (MT Field Guide 2016). Excessive livestock grazing can also degrade habitat by damaging shrub structure, negatively affecting cover for lizards (WDFW 2015).

Recommended Management Actions:

Sagebrush reduction activities should retain a mosaic of cover conditions and occur at a relatively fine scale (MT Field Guide 2016). Occupied habitats should be protected from disturbance (WDFW 2015; OR

Draft SWAP 2016) and land use practices that increase non-native invasive plant species should be minimized (WDFW 2015). Active cheatgrass control should be implemented (WDFW 2015). In occupied habitats the overgrowth of shrubs and trees should be prevented (Dyke et al. 2015). Off-road vehicle use in occupied habitats should also be restricted (Dyke et al. 2015).

Research to understand habitat relationships, determine the effect of livestock grazing on sagebrush lizard habitats, and collect genetic information has been identified as a need (SDFGP 2014).

Interesting Facts:

• Sagebrush lizards are found at higher elevations in Yellowstone National Park, in association with geothermal features (MT Field Guide 2016).

• Sagebrush lizards do not like rain (WDFW 2015). SWAP Status:

• ND – Level 3 • OR – State sensitive • SD – Level 3 • WA – S3

References:

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.

International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red list of Threatened Species (IUCN). 2016. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/41413/0. Accessed October 26, 2016. Green, G.A., K.B. Livezey and R.L. Morgan. 2001. Habitat selection by northern sagebrush lizards (Sceloporus graciosus graciosus) in the Columbia Basin, Oregon. Northwestern Naturalist 82: 111-115. Montana Field Guide. 2016. Sagebrush lizard – Sceloporus graciosus. http://fieldguide.mt.gov/speciesDetail.aspx?elcode=AMABA01030. Accessed October 26, 2016. Natureserve. 2016. Sceloporus graciosus. http://explorer.natureserve.org. Accessed Oct. 26,

2016. Oregon Draft SWAP. 2016. Strategy species spreadsheet. Sears, M.W. and M.J. Angilletta, Jr. 2003. Life-history variation in the sagebrush lizard: phenotypic plasticity or local adaptation? Ecology 84: 1624-1634. South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks (SDGFP). 2014. South Dakota wildlife action plan. Pierre, South Dakota. 583 pp.

Tinkle, D.W. A population analysis of the sagebrush lizard, Sceloporus graciosus in southern Utah. Copeia 2: 284-296. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 2015. Washington’s State Wildlife Action Plan:

2016 Update. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. 1095 pp.

Greater short-horned lizard (Phrynosoma hernandesi)

Description:

Greater short-horned lizards are medium-sized ground lizards with spiny backs (MT Field Guide 2016) and that are characteristically flat and wide (Brennan 2008). They sport horn-like scales at the back of the head, which are as long as they are wide at their base (Brennan 2008; MT Field Guide 2016). They are cryptically colored, blending in with local soil colors. Their color varies regionally (MT Field Guide 2016). Males sport a proportionally longer tail than females (MT Field Guide 2016).

Genetic analyses do not support recognition of any subspecies (Natureserve 2016).

Habitat:

The greater short-horned lizard inhabits semi-arid open, shrubby or wooded areas with sparse vegetation and rocky to sandy soils (Natureserve 2016). They are often found on rocky outcrops, sun-baked soils and open flats with sparse vegetation (MT Field Guide 2016). While commonly found in areas dominated by sagebrush they are also found in open pinyon-juniper, pine-spruce and spruce-fir forests (NWAPT 2013).

Population status:

Total adult population size is unknown but thought to exceed 100,000 (IUCN 2016). The species is locally common, but may be difficult to find in some historic areas (IUCN 2016). The species is declining in Canada (Natureserve 2016). Considered abundant in Montana, the species is no longer considered common in that state (MT Field Guide 2016). The lack of adequate surveys limits any inferences on the population status of this species (MT Field Guide 2016).

Range:

In the United States the greater short-horned lizard occurs in ND, NE, SD, MT, WY, CO, NM, AZ,, TX, UT, ID, NV. The range extends into southern Alberta and Saskatchewan in Canada (IUCN 2016) and into Mexico.

Natural History:

The greater short-horned lizard is an invertivore, eating ants, beetles, grasshoppers, and other insects, as well as sowbugs, spiders, snails and

ecosystems.

sagebrush

intact healthy conservation of benefit from an Umbrella? Likely, both Sage-

grouse

and SD NV, MT, ND, Included in SWAP Status

FS and BLMspecies for the

Sensitive Canada; Designations Endangered in Special

Least Concern IUCN Status

Quick Conservation Facts:

Map © Naturserve

horned Lizard

Range of Greater Short-

Photo from Flicker

other invertebrates (MT Field Guide 2016; Natureserve 2016). They are viviparous, giving live birth to several young (range of 5 to 48, varies regionally) approximately 2 to 3 months after fertilization (Brennan 2008; MT Field Guide 2016). Young are born in an amniotic sac (Brennan 2008). Sexual maturity occurs in the second year (MT Field Guide 2016).

The adults of this species are diurnal, and active during the warmer daylight hours. Young of the year are not typically active during the mid-day hours and their activity may be influenced more by ambient temperatures versus substrate temperatures that influence adult activity (MT Field Guide 2016). While considered more cold tolerant than other horned lizards (NWAPT 2013), greater short-horned lizards do hibernate (MT Field Guide 2016; Natureserve 2016). They have small home ranges, typically less than an acre. Dispersal distances are poorly understood (Natureserve 2016). Greater short-horned lizards will burrow into soils and will occupy abandoned rodent burrows (Dyke et al. 2015).

Known Threats:

Habitat loss and degradation from urbanization and agricultural conversion have caused local declines, but threats on a range-wide basis are limited (Dyke et al. 2015; IUCN 2016; MT Field Guide 2016). Livestock grazing is not considered a serious threat, but rangeland treatments for the management of livestock, such as clearing of sagebrush could be locally detrimental (MT Field Guide 2016). Oil and gas development and associated facilities, and off-road vehicle use are considered detrimental to the species (MT Field Guide 2016; Natureserve 2016). In Canada habitat for the greater short-horned lizard is fragmented and less than 10 known locations for this species still remain (Natureserve 2016). The presence of anthropogenic features, such as busy roads and urbanized areas limit dispersal and connectivity. Natural features such as major rivers, lakes, or deep marshes may also limit movement (Natureserve 2016). There is limited interest in collecting the greater short-horned lizard for the commercial pet trade (MT Field Guide 2016). Greater short-horned lizards are also confused with the desert horned lizard, which is a valued species for the commercial pet trade (NWAPT 2013).

Recommended Management Actions:

In areas of sagebrush control, management should be designed to retain a network of sagebrush patches. Thinning of sagebrush in small patches is preferable to removing large stands of sagebrush due to the small home range of the greater short-horned lizard (MT Field Guide 2016).

Information regarding the abundance and distribution, species responses to and tolerance of habitat changes is necessary, including a better understanding of the habitat characteristics that affect prey distribution and abundance (NWAPT 2013; MT SWAP 2014; Dyke et al. 2015). Commercial collection rates need to be monitored so that appropriate regulations can be developed that maintain the viability and distribution of wild populations (NWAPT 2013).

Interesting Facts:

• Occasionally squirts blood from its eyes when threatened or captured. The blood is presumed to have a foul taste that deters predators. Other defenses are using the “horns” or inflating themselves (Brennan 2008).

• The head of the short-horned lizard appears heart-shaped when viewed from above (MT Field Guide 2016).

• Greater short-horned lizards will often gorge themselves on a single type of prey (MT Field Guide 2016).

SWAP Status:

• MT – S3 • ND – Level 2 • NV – G5 • SD – Level 3

References:

Brennan, T.C. 2008. Greater short-horned lizard (Phrynosoma hernandesi) – Reptiles of Arizona. http://reptilesofaz.org/Lizards-Subpages/h-p-hernandesi.html Accessed October 26, 2016.

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.

International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red list of Threatened Species (IUCN). 2016. http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/41413/0. Accessed October 26, 2016. Montana Field Guide. 2016. Greater short-horned lizard – Phrynosoma hernandesi. http://fieldguide.mt.gov/speciesDetail.aspx?elcode=AMABA01030. Accessed October 26, 2016. Montana’s State Wildlife Action Plan (MTSWAP). 2014. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks. Helena, MT. 444 pp. Natureserve. 2016. Phrynosoma hernandesi. http://explorer.natureserve.org. Accessed Oct. 26, 2016.

Nevada Wildlife Action Plan Team (NWAPT). 2013. The Nevada Wildlife Action Plan. Nevada Department of Wildlife, Reno, NV. South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks (SDGFP). 2014. South Dakota wildlife action plan. Pierre, South Dakota. 583 pp.