(DRAFT) - Taxonomy
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

TAXONOMY

NAME - LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY

OTHER COMMON NAMES - LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY;LIZARD, SAND, FRINGE-TOED;LIZARD, SAND, FRINGE-FOOTED;LIZARD, FRINGE-FOOTED;LIZARD, SAND, COACHELLA;LIZARD, SAND, OCELLATED;LIZARD and SAND

ELEMENT CODE -

CATEGORY - Reptiles

PHYLUM AND SUBPHYLUM - CHORDATA,

CLASS AND SUBCLASS - REPTILIA,

ORDER AND SUBORDER - SQUAMATA,

FAMILY AND SUBFAMILY - IGUANIDAE,

GENUS AND SUBGENUS - UMA,

SPECIES AND SSP - INORNATA,

SCIENTIFIC NAME - UMA INORNATA

AUTHORITY -

TAXONOMY REFERENCES -

COMMENTS ON TAXONOMY -
Coachella Valley Fringe-toed Lizard

Uma inornata Cope, 1895

KINGDOM: Animal GROUP: Reptile

PHYLUM: Chordata CLASS: Reptilia
ORDER: Squamata FAMILY: Iguanidae

Uma inornata is a medium sized lizard with granular dorsal
scalation. The dorsal ground color is whitish-buff with a pattern of
black ring-like markings (ocelli, maculae) that form broken
longitudinal lines over the shoulder (01,02). Ventral color is white
with black bars on the underside of the tail and thin black gular
chevrons that are absent or faint in the mid-gular region. A black
ventrolateral blotch is absent or present as a minute cluster of black
dots in about 50% of individuals (01). Breeding coloration is present
from May to September (03) and consists of pinkish (also described as
reddish-orange) lateroventral suffusion between the axilla and groin
along the lateral fold and orange washes over the anterior
supralabials and infralabials and the posterior festoons of the eye
(01,04). There are usually 3 internasal scales and there are 23-32
(mean 26.5) fringes on the posterior edge of the fourth toe of the
hind foot. The fringes and lamallae are intercalated with small
Taxonomy - 1 (DRAFT) - Taxonomy
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

subdigital scales (01). Sexually mature males (80-122 mm snout-vent
length, mean 102 mm) are larger than mature females (70-99 mm
snout-vent length, mean 81 mm) and males always have 2 enlarged
postanal scales that are lacking in 97% of females (03).
The holotype was housed at the U.S. National Museum 16500, and is
now lost. The collector was C.R. Orcutt. The type locality was
given as "Colorado Desert San Diego County, California", but was in
error and was corrected to "Coachella Valley, Riverside County, CA" by
Heifetz, 1941 (10).
Uma inornata is a monotypic species.
Taxonomic descriptions can be found in: Cope (11); Heifets (10);
Smith (12); and Norris (01).
Pough (13) reviewed the taxonomy of U. inornata and provided the
following remarks: "Although it was adequately diagnosed by Cope
(1894, 1900) Uma inornata was long considered a synonym of U. notata,
probably as a result of the influential works of Camp (1916) and Van
Denburgh (1922). References to "Uma notata" published between 1916
and 1941, when U. inornata was resurrected (Heifetz, 1941), can be
correctly atributed to species only if detailed locality data or
photographs are included." The taxonomic relationships within the
genus Uma are subject to three interpretations: 1) U. inornata, U.
scoparia and U. notata represent a single species, U. notata; 2) U.
notata and U. scoparia are distinct species and U. inornata is a
subspecies of U. notata; and 3) U. inornata, U. scoparia and U. notata
are three separate species.
Adest (15) and Zalusky et al. (16) suggested that U. notata, U.
inornata and U. scoparia should all be regarded as a single species
(U. notata) on the basis of electrophoretic analysis of allelic
frequencies (15) and cranial osteology (16).
Schmidt (09) and Norris (01) analyzed phenotypic characters and
concluded that U. inornata was a subspecies of U. notata, but U.
scoparia was distinct from U. notata.
Mayhew (17) proposed that U. inornata be retained as a distinct
species and as evidence he presented a number of physiological and
behavioral differences between U. notata and U. inornata. In view of
the non-morphological evidence and allopatric relationship between
U. notata and U. inornata, Pough concurred with Mayhew that U.
inornata should be retained as a distinct species and that all three
forms should be recognized as separate species.
The fringe-toed lizard has been known by the scientific synonyms
Callisaurus inornatus Cope, 1896 (06); Uma notata (part) Camp, 1916
(07); Callisaurus notatus (part) Stejneger and Barbour, 1917 (08);
and Uma notata inornata Schmidt, 1953 (09).
A variety of common names have been used for the genus Uma in
general and for the species U. inornata: sand lizard; ocellated sand
lizard; Coachella sand lizard; fringe-footed lizard; fringe-footed
sand lizard; fringe-toed sand lizard; and Coachella Valley fringe-toed
lizard.

Taxonomy - 2 (DRAFT) - Status
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

STATUS

Coded Status

T: Federal Threatened
Commercial

COMMENTS ON STATUS -
U.S. STATUSES AND LAWS:
The Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard (Uma inornata) has been
designated a Threatened species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act
of 1973 (50 CFR 17.11; P.L. 93-205, 87 Stat. 884; 16 U.S.C.
1531-1540), as amended. The species has this status wherever found
including the State of California. Critical Habitat has been
designated in Riverside County, CA (50 CFR 17.95(c)).
This species is protected by the Lacey Act (P.L. 97-79, as
amended; 16 U.S.C. 3371 et seq.) which makes it unlawful to import,
export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any wild
animal (alive or dead including parts, products, eggs, or offspring):
(1) in interstate or foreign commerce if taken, possessed,
transported or sold in violation of any State law or
regulation; or
(2) if taken or possessed in violation of any U.S. law,
treaty, or regulation or in violation of Indian tribal law.
It is also unlawful to possess any wild animal (alive or dead
including parts, products, eggs, and offspring) within the U.S.
territorial or special maritime jurisdiction (as defined in
18 U.S.C. 7) that is taken, possessed, transported, or sold in
violation of any State law or regulation, foreign law, or Indian
tribal law.

RESPONSIBLE FEDERAL AGENCIES:

USFWS -Responsible for the management/recovery, listing, and
law enforcement/protection of this species.
BIA -Responsible for the law enforcement/protection of this
species with applicable State and Federal laws on
public lands under their control. Also responsible
for management/recovery on Bureau of Indian Affairs
lands.
BLM -Responsible for the law enforcement/protection of this
species with applicable State and Federal laws on
public land under their control (43 CFR 4140). Also
responsible for management/recovery on Bureau of Land
Management lands.

All Federal agencies have responsibility to ensure that any
action authorized, funded, or carried out by that agency is not likely
to jeopardize the continued existence of the species or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of Critical Habitat (50 CFR 402),
Status - 1 (DRAFT) - Status
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

and to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the
conservation of the species.

STATE STATUSES AND LAWS:

STATE: California
DESIGNATED STATUS: Endangered
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY: Department of Fish and Game
STATE STATUTE: Title 14, California Administrative Code, Section
670.5 1981 Supplement.

INTERNATIONAL STATUSES, TREATIES, AND AGREEMENTS:
None.

ECONOMIC STATUSES:
The Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard has commercial value for
pet trade and collectors. The State of California regulates trade in
reptiles and since the listing of the lizard such trade is illegal.

78/08/23:43 FR 63812/ - Proposed listing
80/05/28:45 FR 36038/36041 - Reproposal of Critical Habitat
80/09/25:45 FR 63812/63820 - Final rule and CH designation
85/07/22:50 FR 29901/29909 - Five year review

Status - 2 HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS

HABITAT - TERRESTRIAL
TERRESTRIAL

LAND USE -
Transportation, communications, and Util
Sandy Areas other than Beaches

COMMENTS ON HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS -
Uma inornata occurs in aeolian sand habitats within the Coachella
Valley, Riverside Co., CA. The species does not occur in other types
of habitat or locations and is rarely found as far as 15 feet from a
sand deposit (58). Suitable habitat is located in various areas
including undeveloped parcels of land bounded by numerous road and
highways and traversed by utility transmission corridors.
The Coachella Valley is a northern extension of the Colorado
Desert. It is bordered by the Little San Bernardino Mountains on the
west, and the Santa Rosa Mountains and Salton Sea to the south. Much
of the valley floor consists of aeolian or blow-sand and rocky
alluvial deposits with sparse vegetation. Parts of the valley have
been extensively urbanized and cultivated.
Vegetation is sparse in the sand habitat of Uma inornata.
England and Nelson (23) note that creosote bush (Larrea tridentata)
comprises the dominant plant community. In addition, burrobush
(Prosopis juliflora), cheesebush (Hymenoclea salsola), desert dicoria
(Dicoria canescens), plicate coldenia (Coldenia placata), and Russian
thistle (Salsola iberica) are found in varying degrees of abundance in
Uma's environment. The spread of certain plants, particularly Russian
thistle, may be having a detrimental impact on the blow-sand habitat
by causing stabilization, and thus, allowing other plants to invade.
Vertebrates which inhabit the aeolian sands of the Coachella
Valley include: road-runner (Geococcyx californianus), badger
(Taxidea taxus), shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), sparrow hawk (Falco
sparverius), sidewinder (Crotalus cerastes), glossy snake (Arizona
elegans), western whiptail (Cnemidophorus tigris), ground squirrels
(Citellus sp.), and Kangaroo rats (Dipodomys sp.).
England and Nelson (23) identified three general types of
blow-sand deposits that are inhabited by the lizard: sandy plains;
sand hummocks; and mesquite dunes. The general distribution of these
habitats were mapped and representative photographs of each type are
given in reference 23.
Analyses of the size distribution of sand grains in areas of high
and low population densities are found in Stebbins (20), Norris (01),
Pough (30), England and Nelson (23) and Turner et al., (29). The
results of the analyses for deposits from different areas within the
Coachella Valley are consistent with each other as are conclusions
regarding the affect of substrate parameters on the distribution of
the lizard. Substrates with a high percentage (about 10%) of silt
(modal grain; size greater than 1.0 mm) are avoided. Between these
extremes the particle size distribution curves may assume a number of
forms with the mean paticle diameter ranging from 0.1 to 0.3 mm with
median diameters ranging from 0.1 to 0.4 mm.
The specific environmental (substrate) parameters that are
required by the species are the result of complex relationships
between geological and meteorological processes (29). Blow-sand
habitats are dynamic in space and time and the long-term existence of
these habitats depends upon uninterupted sand transport from source
areas where the lizard does not occur to areas of habitat where the
lizard does occur. Sand source areas and habitat areas are usually
Habitat Associations - 1 separated by several kilometers. The dynamics of sand transport, sand
sources and aeolian deposition areas are discussed in detail by Weaver
(28) as are the affects of windbreaks (sand impoundment) on the
stability of viable habitat.
The Coachella fringe-toed lizard escapes predators and extreme
environmental conditions by burrowing in the sand or possibly
utilizing existing rodent burrows.

Habitat Associations - 2 (DRAFT) - Food Habits
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

FOOD HABITS

TROPHIC LEVEL -
OMNIVORE

LIFESTAGE FOOD FOOD PART
General Evergreen Shrubs-Leaves/Twigs
General Poaceae
General
General Forb Leaves/Stems
General Forb Flowers/Fruit/Seed
General Arthropods
General Evergreen Shrubs-Leaves/Twigs
General Poaceae
General
General Forb Leaves/Stems
General Forb Flowers/Fruit/Seed
General Arthropods

Food Habits - 1 (DRAFT) - Environment Associations
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATIONS

G = General A = Adult
LIM = Limiting RA = Resting Adult
J = Juvenile FA = Feeding Adult
RJ = Resting Juvenile BA = Breeding Adult
FJ = Feeding Juvenile P = Pupae
L = Larvae E = Egg
RL = Resting Larvae
FL = Feeding Larvae

LIFESTAGE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATIONS
G Terrestrial Features: Burrows
G
G Terrestrial Features: Burrows
G

Environment Associations - 1 (DRAFT) - Life History
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

LIFE HISTORY

FOOD HABITS:
The food habits of Uma inornata are not well studied. Stebbins
(20) compiled a list of plant and animal food items from observations
in the field and laboratory and from the examination of stomachs and
fecal pellets. Minnich and Shoemaker (31) studied water and
electrolyte turnover in a closely related species, Uma scoparia, and
reported food items in the diet. There are no compelling reasons to
believe that the diet of U. inornata and U. scoparia should markedly
differ and the results of the two studies are in general agreement.
In both studies insects were not identified beyond the family level.
Plant food items differed between the study areas, but this may only
reflect different years, seasons and relative abundance of food items
at the time that the studies were done.
Stebbins (20) found that U. inornata consumed insects from the
orders Coleoptera (tenebrionids, curculionids, and coccinellids),
Hymenoptera (ants and bees), Hemiptera, Orthoptera, and Lepidoptera
(caterpillars). U. inornata also consumed plants from the following
families: Asteraceae (Dicoria, seeds), Bignoniaceae (Chilopsis,
leaves and buds), Boroginaceae (Cryptantha, leaves) and
Zygophyllaceae (Larrae, leaves). Food items taken in captivity by
U. inornata include, from the arthropods, millipedes, sow bugs,
carabid beetles, termites, meal worms, cockroaches, and flies; and
from the plant kingdom, Dandilions (flowers and fruits) and grass
blades.
Minnich and Shoemaker (31) found that the closely related U.
scoparia ate some food types not found in Stebbins' study. These
foods are, from the insects, Lepidoptera (moths), from the arachnids,
Arachnida (scorpions), from plants Boroginaceae (Coldenia plicata,
leaves), Euphorbiaceae (Croton californicus, seeds), Fabaceae (Dalea
emoryi, leaves), Poaceae (Aristida adscensionis and Bouteba barbata,
flowers, fruit, leaves and stems of both species).
The composition of the diet differed greatly for adult and
juvenile U. scoparia: 60% of the adult diet was plant material and
less than 10% of the juvenile diet was plant material. These
differences in diet have a significant affect on water turnover and
electrolyte flux rates (31) and dietary differences might also affect
growth and reproduction (32).
There are no comparative data for the diet of adult and
juvenile U. inornata. However, Mayhew (33) demonstrated that
reproduction was curtailed during drought conditions and he inferred
that a decrease in annual plant germination and secondary productivity
of insects were the cause of the decline in reproduction. The
relationships between seasonal availability and abundance of food
items and growth and reproduction in U. inornata deserve further
study.
Carpenter (33) maintained U. inornata, U. notata and U. scoparia
in an outdoor enclosure and fed them "insects and spiders captured
with sweep nets." The enclosure was located in Oklahoma, several
hundred kilometers east of the range of Uma sp. and presumably the
"insects and spiders" were novel food items (i.e., species that Uma
sp. would not encounter within its range). This observation indicates
Life History - 1 (DRAFT) - Life History
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

that Uma is most likely a generalist and would take any available
arthropods that it encounters. Carpenter also observed cannibalism
and saurophagy in all three species of Uma. Large males ate juveniles
of their own species and small Depsosaurus dorsalis and Cnemidophorus
sexlineatus. The Uma sp. also ate their own shedding skin and the
skin of other individuals. Leaves of a "sunflower plant" were eaten
by U. inornata as were the petals from "flowers".
In summary, the results and observations that are available for
the genus Uma (31,33) and U. inornata (20) indicate that U. inornata
is probably a generalist in food habits. Arthropods, plants and
possibly other lizards are consumed and there may be ontogenetic
changes in the composition of the diet.

HOME RANGE/TERRITORY:
The social behavior and spatial relationships of Uma inornata
have not been studied in the field. Carpenter (33) studied social
organization and behavior of captive U. inornata, U. notata and U.
scoparia and concluded that: "These three fring-toed lizards show
typical iguanid patterns of behavior in their social structure, which
is based on territoriality." In a recent review of social behavior
and spacing patterns of inguanid lizards, Stamps (34) reported that
of 67 studies of 60 species only three iguanids were not territorial.
All other species of iguanids are "territorial and agressive, but
depending on the species, the extent of territoriality seems to vary
seasonally, geographically or locally." The enclosure studies of
Carpenter (33) and the generalizations that emerged from the review
by Stamps (34) strongly support the contention that, when studied in
the field, U. inornata will be shown to be territorial. Strong
support for this can also be drawn from Pough's (30) observation that:
"Adult males appear to take stations on the large central dune at
intervals of 50-100 feet. The intervals remained constant from day to
day, but no marking experiments were carried out to determine if
individual lizards occupied the same spot each day." Pough (30) also
stated in a discussion of the use of rodent burrows that were scarce
relative to the number of lizards on the site that: ". . . to shelter
the entire population of Uma would require crowding several lizards
into each burrow. As Uma are very territorial, such crowding seems
likely."

PERIODICITY:
Mayhew (04) and Pough (30) described the daily and seasonal
activity patterns of Uma inornata in the field and recent reviews (35,
36,37) have focused on the physiological and environmental factors
that affect activity patterns of lizards.
The daily activity pattern of U. inornata is unimodal during cool
months of the year (Jan.-Apr., Oct.) and bimodal during the warm
months (May-Sept.). There is a precipitous decrease in activity in
November and rarely will an active lizard be encountered in December
and January. During this period the lizards are in hibernation
(brumation, 38).
A circadian rhythm of physiological responses and
temperature-independent morning emergence was demonstrated by Pough
(39). These responses preceed activity on the surface. Mayhew (04)
Life History - 2 (DRAFT) - Life History
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

collected monthly samples of U. inornata over a four year period
(1959-1962) and recorded the time of day that the lizards were active
on the surface (Table 1) and Pough described the behavior of lizards
during the active period.

TABLE 1: Activity times for Uma inornata collected monthly over a
four year period. Data from Mayhew (03,04).

YEAR (Adult male/female)
MONTH TIME IMMATURE 59 60 61 62
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Jan 1000-1400 1 1/0 - - -
Feb 1030-1600 0 1/0 - 1/0 -
Mar 0900-1700 7 1/3 5/6 9/4 3/2
Apr 0700-1830 8 7/6 6/6 9/2 3/2
May 0700-1230, 1430-1830 9 6/6 10/6 9/2 7/2
Jun 0600-1230, 1600-1900 11 3/10 8/2 3/5 10/6
Jul 0500-1100, 1630-1930 6 3/11 3/4 5/7 6/6
Aug 1530-1330, 1630-1900 19 7/9 17/33 6/5 7/11
Sep 0730-1330, 1630-1830 4 5/7 7/17 6/8 5/7
Oct 0730-1400 3 3/3 3/3 4/6 2/3
Nov 1000-1300 1 - - - -
Dec --- - - - - -

--------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 69 37/55 59/78 52/42 43/38
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________

REPRODUCTIVE SITE REQUIREMENTS:
Carpenter (33) described the breeding behavior and other social
behavior of Uma inornata. No reference was made to specific site
requirements that are necessary for successful courtship.
The location of oviposition sites and environmental factors
required for successful incubation of the eggs are unknown. However,
there are studies of the temperature and moisture requirements of two
lizard species that are frequently found in the same habitat as U.
inornata. Desert iguana, Dipsosaurus dorsalis, eggs hatch normally
between 28 and 38 degrees C at environmental water potentials between
-50 and -1500 kPa (40). In the Palm Desert area, egg burrows should
be located out of the root zone of perennial plants at a depth of
about 22 cm. At this depth the environmental conditions would remain
within the tolerance limits of the eggs throughout the incubation
period of desert iguana eggs (40). Zebra-tailed lizards, Callisaurus
draconoides, are closely related to U. inornata and the eggs of C.
draconoides have been successfully hatched when incubated in
environmental conditions within the ranges reported for desert iguanas
(41). There are no reasons to suppose that the embryonic tolerances
of U. inornata should differ greatly from that of other sympatric
iguanids. Pending specific studies of the tolerance limits of U.
inornata embryos and the edaphic environment of aeolian sand deposits,
the results of Muth (40) and Packard et al. (41) can probably be used
Life History - 3 (DRAFT) - Life History
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

to approximate reproductive site requirements.

PARENTAL CARE:
There is no known parental care of eggs or hatchlings.

POPULATION BIOLOGY:
The population biology of Uma inornata has not been studied.
This is a major gap in the data base of the species and the
formulation of management goals could be severely hampered by lack of
demographic data.

SPECIES INTERRELATIONSHIPS:
There are no known species interrelationships.

OTHER LIFE HISTORY DESCRIPTORS:
Several behavioral and morphological adaptations allow the
Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard, CVFTL, to exist in its habitat
(20,51). The CVFTL has the ability to run across the sand at
relatively high speeds and literally dive into it. It may move short
distances after burial, engaging in what has been called
"sand-swimming" until it is completely buried. The smooth scales
reduce friction and make it easier for the lizard to "swim" through
the sand. The enlarged fringe scales on the toes increase the foot
surfaces thus aiding locomotion on and beneath the sand. The
additional surface area created by the scales increases traction when
moving across the sand.
Numerous morphological adaptations function to protect the
lizard's body from abrasion and keep sand particles out of body
openings. The CVFTL can partially close its nostrils to exclude most
sand. When particles do get in, they are trapped in a U shaped nasal
passage, analogous to a kitchen-sink trap, and are blown out by a
burst of air. The snout is wedge- or shovel-shaped rather than blunt;
this wedge spreads the sand as the lizard dives. Because the upper
jaw is longer and overlaps the lower jaw, the lizard can dive into
sand without filling its mouth. Other adaptations include fringed
eyelids with a double seal and a loose flap of skin that covers the
ears when the lizard dives into the sand.
CVFTL attempt to escape predators by "sand-swimming" and, to a
lesser extent, by entering rodent burrows. "Sand-swimming" can also
be used to reach cool sand (29), thus avoiding high summer surface
temperatures that can exceed 71 degrees C (160 degrees F). However,
when shallow subsurface temperatures exceed tolerable limits, lizards
may be forced to seek shelter under a shrub or in a rodent burrow
(29). They also are capable of excavating a burrow to depths
sufficient to reach cooler substrates (59).
Additional information regarding physiology, morphology and
comparative reproduction in the genus Uma can be found in references
42-57.

Life History - 4 (DRAFT) - Management Practices
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

RESULT MANAGEMENT PRACTICE

Beneficial Controlling/Restricting Off-Road Vehicles
Beneficial Maintaining undisturbed/undeveloped areas
Beneficial Land Acquisition
Beneficial Reforestation
Beneficial Controlling/Removing Nonnative Vegetation
Adverse Incidental Capturing/Killing
Existing Incidental Capturing/Killing
Adverse Off Road Vehicles
Existing Off Road Vehicles
Adverse Rural Residential/Industrial Areas
Existing Rural Residential/Industrial Areas
Adverse Recreational development
Existing Recreational development
Adverse Highway/Railroads
Existing Highway/Railroads
Adverse Transmission Lines/Towers
Existing Transmission Lines/Towers
Adverse Reservoirs
Existing Reservoirs
Adverse Exotic/Feral/Introducted Species
Existing Exotic/Feral/Introducted Species
Adverse
Existing
Adverse Vegetation Composition Changes
Existing Vegetation Composition Changes
Beneficial Controlling/Restricting Off-Road Vehicles
Beneficial Maintaining undisturbed/undeveloped areas
Beneficial Land Acquisition
Beneficial Reforestation
Beneficial Controlling/Removing Nonnative Vegetation
Adverse Incidental Capturing/Killing
Existing Incidental Capturing/Killing
Adverse Off Road Vehicles
Existing Off Road Vehicles
Adverse Rural Residential/Industrial Areas
Existing Rural Residential/Industrial Areas
Adverse Recreational development
Existing Recreational development
Adverse Highway/Railroads
Existing Highway/Railroads
Adverse Transmission Lines/Towers
Existing Transmission Lines/Towers
Adverse Reservoirs
Existing Reservoirs
Adverse Exotic/Feral/Introducted Species
Existing Exotic/Feral/Introducted Species
Adverse
Existing
Adverse Vegetation Composition Changes
Management Practices - 1 (DRAFT) - Management Practices
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

RESULT MANAGEMENT PRACTICE

Existing Vegetation Composition Changes

COMMENTS ON MANAGEMENT PRACTICES -
Habitat destruction and modification are the primary threats to
the long-term existence of Uma inornata. England and Nelson (23) and
England (24) reconstructed the historic range and surveyed the
Coachella Valley for suitable habitat. Their results indicate that
the original range was about 840 square km (324 square mi) and that
the range in 1975 had been reduced to 612 square km (236 square mi),
a 27% reduction in range. However, within the areal extent of the
range in 1975 only about 311 square km (120 square mi) or 51% was
comprised of suitable aeolian sand habitat. Recreation oriented
development (golf courses and country clubs) and agriculture were
responsible for the loss of habitat. England (24) resurveyed the
Coachella Valley in August and December 1982 and found only 245.5
square km (94.8 square mi) of habitat west of the Coachella Canal and
14 square km (5.5 square km) east of the canal; a 17% reduction in
the total amount of suitable habitat in just 7 years.
The habitat west of the canal was primarily developed for country
clubs, condominiums, homes and associated utility and commercial
development, and east of the canal the development was primarily
agricultural.
In 1982 the Southern California Association of Governments (25)
projected more than a doubling of the permanent population in
Coachella Valley from 128,478 to 266,575. The Coachella Valley is a
seasonal resort area and the part-time population could be more than
50% of the permanent population from November to May of each year.
The rate of development will increase west of the canal to
accommodate growth. This pattern is evident from development that
occurred in 1983. At least 11 square km (4.25 square mi) were
developed or approved for development west of the canal (26). The
development in 1983 represents 4.5% of the habitat that was identified
by England in 1982.
Two major transportation corriders, Interstate Highway
10/Southern Pacific railroad and the Highway 111 right-of-way, may act
as barriers to lizard movement, affectively dividing the valley into
three populations. Habitat fragmentation may prevent reestablishment
in areas where population declines occur, resulting in local
extirpation (58).
The quality of aeolian sand habitat is degraded by windbreaks and
destruction of sand transport upwind from any given site. Thus,
development has both a primary impact of direct habitat loss and a
secondary impact on habitat quality downwind from the development.
The negative influence of development will, in the long-term extend
the entire length of the valley. The complex dynamics of aeolian sand
transport are discussed in detail by Weaver (27,28). About 80% of the
aeolian deposition area of the Coachella Valley is either developed or
affected by disruption of the sand transport system. The wind
shielded areas will eventually be lost as Uma inornata habitat. The
rate of habitat degradation by sand depletion and surface
Management Practices - 2 (DRAFT) - Management Practices
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

stabilization varies from 0.40 km (0.25 mi) to 1.21 km (0.75 mi) per
year downwind from an obstruction (27). The relationship between the
rate of habitat degradation caused by physical processes and the rate
of decline in populations of Uma innornata requires further study.
However, all studies to date have demonstrated reduced abundance
downwind from obstructions to the sand transport system (29).
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is considering a flood-control
project on the Whitewater River. Depending upon the alternative plan
selected, the facility may be designed to prevent new sands from
entering the Coachella Valley. If constructed, the dam(s) would act
as a giant windbreak, causing substantial adverse impacts on the
remaining CVFTL habitat.
Since the 1950's large portions of remaining CVFTL habitat have
been invaded by Russian thistle, a noxious weed from Asia that can
form dense mats one to two feet thick which completely cover and
stabilize the soil. CVFTL habitat usually is characterized by large,
open sandy areas with scattered vegetation. Over a period of years,
the composition of the plant community may be altered, the food base
changed, and the soil stabilized, resulting in CVFTL population
reductions or local extirpations. In addition, plantain (Plantago
insularis) and the introduced grass Schismus barbatus are invading
substantial habitat in the Coachella Valley. These species may also
stabilize the soil and reduce the suitability of the habitat for
CVFTL.
Unrestricted off-road vehicle use is another cause of habitat
degradation and loss. Two areas are severely degraded; Flat Top
Mountain/Edom Hill and Windy Point. The total area of these sites is
about 7.8 square km (3.0 square mi) (24). Off-road activity also
occurs at many smaller areas throughout the valley wherever there is
a significant accumulation of blow-sand. The cumulative area of the
smaller sites is not known.
The cumulative impact of development, wind shielding and off-road
vehicle activities on Uma inornata populations and habitat is
difficult to quantify. Each of these factors have a negative impact,
but synergistic effects have not been analyzed. However, a grave
prediction emerges with even the most simplistic analysis of the rate
of habitat loss: if the present rate of development continued, all of
the remaining habitat in the Coachella Valley would be lost in 24
years and Uma inornata would be extinct by the year 2007.

APPROVED PLAN:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1984. The Coachella Valley
Fringe-toed Lizard Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Portland, OR. 54 pp.

The following actions need to be taken in priority order to
preserve the Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard (CVFTL) and its
habitat:

1. Habitat needs to be acquired for preservation. This is probably
the most important element in the Recovery Plan. Without the
establishment of two or more large-scale reserves, and supporting
Management Practices - 3 (DRAFT) - Management Practices
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

viable self-sustaining populations, the long-term survival of the
CVFTL cannot be assured.

2. CVFTL biological requirements are in urgent need of study.

3. CVFTL populations throughout the Coachella Valley need monitoring
to determine trends in numbers and areas inhabited.

4. The effects of habitat modifications including Tamarisk (Tamarix
sp.) windbreaks, and the encroachment of exotic vegetation such as
Russian thistle (Salsola australis) and mustards (Brassica sp.), etc.,
on the CVFTL need further study, and appropriate management actions
taken.

5. Restoration of CVFTL habitat through rehabilitation needs study.

6. Public information and education programs need to be developed and
conducted to further public support and awareness of the importance of
preserving this species.

7. Existing laws and regulations protecting CVFTL and their habitat
must be enforced.

Because of permanent habitat destruction, the CVFTL will never
inhabit more than a fraction of its former range. Even with the
implementation of suggested actions in the recovery plan, the
population levels will continue to decline on unprotected lands as
development in the Valley continues. Without implementation of the
recovery plan, it is entirely conceivable this decline will continue
to the point of extinction.
The establishment of two or more large-scale reserves containing
viable populations of CVFTL and secure habitat, should overcome the
primary threat to the species existence.

APPROVED PLAN:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1984. The Coachella Valley
Fringe-toed Lizard Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Portland, OR. 54 pp.

The following actions need to be taken in priority order to
preserve the Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard (CVFTL) and its
habitat:

1. Habitat needs to be acquired for preservation. This is probably
the most important element in the Recovery Plan. Without the
establishment of two or more large-scale reserves, and supporting
viable self-sustaining populations, the long-term survival of the
CVFTL cannot be assured.

2. CVFTL biological requirements are in urgent need of study.

3. CVFTL populations throughout the Coachella Valley need monitoring
Management Practices - 4 (DRAFT) - Management Practices
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

to determine trends in numbers and areas inhabited.

5. Restoration of CVFTL habitat through rehabilitation needs study.

6. Public information and education programs need to be developed and
conducted to further public support and awareness of the importance of
preserving this species.

7. Existing laws and regulations protecting CVFTL and their habitat
must be enforced.

Management Practices - 5 (DRAFT) - References
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

References

***** REFERENCES FOR ALL NARRATIVES EXCEPT N-OCCURRENCE *****

01 Norris, K.S. 1958. The evolution and systematics of the iguanid
genus Uma and its relation to the evolution of other North American
desert reptiles. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 114(3):253-326.
02 Stebbins, R.C. 1954. Amphibians and reptiles of western North
America. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York. 528 pp.
03 Mayhew, W.W. 1965. Reproduction in the sand-dwelling lizard Uma
inornata. Herpetologica 21(1):39-55.
04 Mayhew, W.W. 1964. Photoperiodic responses in three species of
the lizard genus Uma. Herpetologica 20(2):95-113.
05 Cope, E.D. 1895. On the species of Uma and Xantusia. Amer. Nat.
29:938-939.
06 Cope, E.D. 1896. On the genus Callisaurus. Amer. Nat.
30:1049-1050.
07 Camp, C.L. 1916. Notes on the local distribution and habits of
the amphibians and reptiles of southeastern California in the
vicinity of the Turtle Mountains. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool.
12(17):503-544.
08 Stejneger, L. and T. Barbour. 1917. A check list of North
American amphibians and reptiles. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge.
125 pp.
09 Schmidt, K.P. 1953. A check list of North American amphibians
and reptiles. Sixth edition. Publ. Amer. Soc. Ichthyol.
Herpetol., Chicago. 280 pp.
10 Heifetz, W. 1941. A review of the lizards of the genus Uma.
Copeia 1941(2):99-111.
11 Cope, E.D. 1900. The crocodilians, lizards and snakes of North
America. Ann. Rept. U.S. Natl. Mus. 1898:153-1294.
12 Smith, H.M. 1946. Handbook of Lizards: Lizards of the United
States and of Canada. Comstock Publ. Co., Ithaca. 557 pp.
13 Pough, F.H. 1973. Uma inornata Cope, Coachella Valley fringe-toed
lizard. Catalog Amer. Amphib. Reptiles, Species Account #126, Soc.
Study of Amphib. Reptiles. 2 pp.
14 Van Denburgh, J. 1922. The reptiles of western North America.
Vol.1. Occas. Pap. Calif. Acad. Sci. 10:1-611.
15 Adest, G.A. 1977. Genetic relationships in the genus Uma
(Iguanidae). Copeia 1977:47-52.
16 Zalusky, S.B., A.J. Gaudin, and J.R. Swanson. 1980. A comparative
study of cranial osteology in the North American sand lizards,
genus Uma (Reptilia:Iguanidae). Copeia 1980(2):296-310.
17 Mayhew, W.W. 1964. Taxonomic status of California populations of
the lizard genus Uma. Herpetologica 20(3):170-183.
18 Mosauer, W. 1935. The reptiles of a sand dune area and its
surroundings in the Colorado Desert, California: A study in
habitat preference. Ecology 22(2):125-140.
19 Cowles, R.B. 1941. Observations on the winter activities of
desert reptiles. Ecology 22(2):125-140.
20 Stebbins, R.C. 1944. Some aspects of the ecology of the iguanid
genus Uma. Ecol. Monogr. 14(3):311-332.
21 Stebbins, R.C. 1966. A field guide to western reptiles and
References - 1 (DRAFT) - References
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

amphibians. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. 279 pp.
22 Cornett, J. 1983. A masterpiece of adaptation -- Uma, the
fringe-toed sand lizard. Pacific Discovery 36(2):2-10.
23 England, A.S. and S.G. Nelson. 1976. Status of the fringe-toed
lizard (Uma inornata), Calif. Dept. Fish and Game, Inland
Fisheries, Admin. Rept. No. 77. 129 pp.
24 England, A.S. 1983. The Coachella Valley, and endangered
ecosystem: progress report on conservation and management efforts.
Wildl. Soc. Cal-Neva. Wildl. Trans. In press.
25 County of Riverside. 1982. Southern California Association of
Governments population forecasts. Riverside Cty. Plan. Dept.,
Riverside, CA.
26 Muth, A. 1984. Personal observation. Coachella Valley Ecological
Reserve Foundation, P.O. Box 2821, Palm Desert, CA 92261.
27 Weaver, D.C. 1979. Assessment of effects of flood control
alternatives on blowsand conditions in the Coachella Valley,
Whitewater River Basin. Army Corps of Engrs., Los Angeles Dist.,
CA.
28 Weaver, D.C. 1981. Aeolian sand transport and deposit
characteristics at ten sites in Coachella Valley, California, Part
2, IN: The effect of blowsand reduction on the abundance of the
fringe-toed lizard (Uma inornata) in the Coachella Valley,
California. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles, CA.
29 Turner, F.G., D.C. Weaver, and T.C. Rorabaugh. 1981. The
abundance of the fringe-toed lizard (Uma inornata) at 10 sites in
the Coachella Valley, California. Part 1, IN: The effect of
blowsand reduction on the abundance of the fringe-toed lizard (Uma
inornata) in the Coachella Valley, California. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Los Angeles.
30 Pough, F.H. 1970. The burrowing ecology of the sand lizard, Uma
notata. Copeia 1970(1):145-157.
31 Minnich, J.E. and V.H. Shoemaker. 1972. Water and electrolyte
turnover in a field population of the lizard, Uma scoparia.
Copeia 1972(4):650-659.
32 Mayhew, W.W. 1966. Reproduction in the psammophilous lizard Uma
scoparia. Copeia 1966(1):114-122.
33 Carpenter, C.C. 1963. Patterns of behavior in three forms of the
fringe-toed lizards (Uma,Iguanidae). Copeia 1963(2):406-412.
34 Stamps, J.A. 1977. Social behavior and spacing patterns in
lizards. Pages 265-334. IN: C. Gans and D.W. Tinkle (eds.),
Biology of the Reptilia, Vol.7, Ecology and Behavior A. Academic
Press, New York. 720 pp.
35 Huey, R.B. 1982. Temperature, physiology, and the ecology of
reptiles. Pages 25-91. IN: C.Gans and F.H. Pough (eds.), Biology
of the Reptilia, Vol.12, Physiology C, Physiological Ecology, Part
1. Academic Press, New York. 536 pp.
36 Avery, R.A. 1982. Field Studies of body temperature and
thermoregulation. Pages 93-166. IN: C.Gans and F.H. Pough
(eds.), Biology of the Reptilia, Vol.12, Physiology C,
Physiological Ecology, Part 1. Academic Press, New York. 536 pp.
37 Tracy, C.R. 1982. Biophysical modeling in reptilian physiology
and ecology. IN: C.Gans and F.H. Pough (eds.), Biology of the
Reptilia, Vol.12, Physiology C, Physiological Ecology, Part 1.
References - 2 (DRAFT) - References
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

Academic Press, New York. 536 pp.
38 Mayhew, W.W. 1965. Hibernation in the horned lizard, Phrynosoma
m'calli. Comp. Biochem. Physiol 16(1):103-119.
39 Pough, F.H. 1969. Physiological aspects of the burrowing of sand
lizards (Uma, Iguanidae) and other lizards. Comp. Biochem.
Physiol. 31(6):869-884.
40 Muth, A. 1980. Physiological ecology of desert iguana
(Dipsosaurus dorsalis) eggs: temperature and water relations.
Ecology 61(6):1335-1343.
41 Packard, M.J., G.C. Packard, and T.J. Boardman. 1981. Water
balance of parchment-shelled eggs of a desert lizard (Callisaurus
draconoides). Can. J. Zool. 58:2051-2058.
42 Burt, C.E. 1931. On the occurrence of a throat fan in the sand
lizard Uma notata Baird, with notes on the adaptive specializations
of the form. Copeia 1931(1):15-16.
43 Campbell, H.W. 1969. The effects of temperature on the auditory
sensitivity of lizards. Physiol. Zool. 42(2):183-210.
44 Cook, S.F. 1949. Respiratory metabolism of certain reptiles and
amphibians. Univ. California Publ. Zool. 53(10):367-376.
45 Cowles, R.B. and C.M. Bogert. 1944. A preliminary study of the
thermal requirements of desert reptiles. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat.
Hist. 83(5):261-296.
46 Etheridge, R. 1964. The skeletal morphology and systematic
relations of sceloporine lizards. Copeia 1964(4):610-631.
47 Mayhew, W.W. 1967. Comparative reproduction in three species of
the genus Uma. Pages 45-61. IN: W.W. Milstead (ed.), Lizard
Ecology: A symposium. Univ. Missouri Press, Columbia, MO. 300pp.
48 Mayhew, W.W. and S.J. Wright. 1970. Seasonal changes in
testicular histology of three species of the lizard genus Uma. J.
Morph. 130(2):163-186.
49 Norris, K.S. 1967. Color adaptation in desert reptiles and its
thermal relationships. Pages 162-229. IN: W.W. Milstead (ed.),
Lizard Ecology: A symposium. Univ. Missouri Press, Columbia, MO.
300 pp.
50 Pough, F.H. 1969. Environmental adaptations in the blood of
lizards. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 31(6):885-901.
51 Pough, F.H. 1969. The morphology of undersand respiration in
reptiles. Herpetologica 25(3):216-223.
52 Stebbins, R.C. 1943. Adaptations in the nasal passages for sand
burrowing in the saurian genus Uma. Amer. Nat. 77:38-52.
53 Stebbins, R.C. 1948. Nasal structure in lizards with reference to
olfaction and conditioning of the inspired air. Amer. J. Anat.
83(2):183-222.
54 Stebbins, R.C. and R.M. Eakin. 1958. The role of the "third eye"
in reptilian behavior. Amer. Mus. Novitates (1870):1-40.
55 Cornett, J.W. 1982. Interbreeding between Uma inornata and Uma
notata. Southwest Nat. 27(2):223.
56 Mayhew, W.W. 1961. Photoperiodic response of female fringe-toed
lizards. Science 134(3496):2104-2105.
57 Mayhew, W.W. 1966. Reproduction in the arenicolous lizard Uma
notata. Ecology 47(1):9-18.
58 Mayhew, W.W. 1983. Conflicts between the fringe-toed lizard and
development in the Coachella Valley. Wildl. Soc. Cal-Neva. Wildl.
References - 3 (DRAFT) - References
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

Trans., In press.
59 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1985. Coachella Valley
Fringe-toed Lizard Recovery Plan. Agency Draft.
60 England, A.S. and Wear. 1983. Manuscript in preparation.

***** REFERENCES FOR N-OCCURRENCE NARRATIVE ONLY *****

01 Adest, G.A. 1977. Genetic relationships in the genus Uma
(Iguanidae). Copeia 1977:47-52.
02 Brode, J. 1975. Personal communication. California Dept. of Fish
and Game, Inland Fisheries, 1701 Nimbus Rd., Rancho Cordova, CA
95670.
03 Cornett, J.W. 1981. Biotic survey and population status of the
Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard (Uma inornata) on Indian
Avenue properties. Biological survey for Draft Environmental
Impact Report, Highland-Gateway Development Project, Palm Springs
Redevelopment Agency, Palm Springs, CA 92263.
04 Cornett, J.W. 1983. Personal Communication. Palm Springs Desert
Museum, P.O. Box 2288, Palm Springs, CA 92263.
05 Cowles, R.B. 1941. Observations on the winter activities of
desert reptiles. Ecology 22(2):125-140.
06 Davis, J. 1969-1975. Personal communication to A.S. England.
07 England, A.S. 1983. The Coachella Valley, and endangered
ecosystem: progress report on conservation and management efforts.
Wildl. Soc. Cal-Neva. Wildl. Trans.
08 England, A.S. and S.G. Nelson. 1976. Status of the fringe-toed
lizard (Uma inornata), Calif. Dept. Fish and Game, Inland
Fisheries, Admin. Rept. No. 77-1.
09 England, A.S. and S.G. Nelson. 1976. Personal communication.
A.S.E., Dept. Wildlife and Fisheries, Univ. California, Davis, CA
95616; S.G.N., Environmental Consultants, P.O. Box 1026, Riverside,
CA 92502.
10 Friesen, R.D. 1983. Biological assessment, Palm Valley Country
Club, Specific Plan No. 181-E, Riverside Co., CA. Friesen
Biological Surveys, 615 Bermuda Dr., Redlands, CA 922373.
11 LaPre, L.F. 1982. Endangered species survey of the
Devers-Valley-Serrano Transmission line project. Southern
California Edison Company, DEIR/EIR SCH 80120519, Calif. Public.
Util. Comm., A59982.
12 LaPre, L.F. 1983a. Personal communication. The Mission Inn
Rotunda, Suite 501, 3616 Main Street, Riverside, CA 92501.
13 LaPre, L.F. 1983b. The Monterey Avenue and Avenue 34 extensions:
Biological inventory and impact analysis. Final Environmental
Impact Report No. 178, Riverside Co. Planning Dept., Riverside, CA.
14 LaPre, L.F. and J.W. Cornett. 1981. Public lands survey for the
Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard. Bureau of Land Management,
Riverside, CA.
15 Mayhew, W.W. 1965. Reproduction in the sand-dwelling lizard Uma
inornata. Herpetologica 21(1):39-55.
16 Mayhew, W.W. 1958-1973. Personal communication. Dept. of
Biology, Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521.
17 Mayhew, W.W. 1981. Line transects and photo sites on the Deep
References - 4 (DRAFT) - References
Species LIZARD, FRINGE-TOED, COACHELLA VALLEY
Species Id ESIS151001
Date 14 MAR 96

Canyon transect. Philip L. Boyd Deep Canyon Desert Research
Center, Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521.
18 Museum Records. 1900-1975. A.S. England, personal communication.
Collections examined: Los Angeles County Museum of Natural
History; San Diego Natural History Museum; University of California
Museum of Vertebrate Zoology.
19 Muth, A. 1983. Personal observation. Coachella Valley Ecological
Reserve Foundation, P.O. Box 2821, Palm Desert, CA 92261.
20 Norris, K.S. 1958. The evolution and systematics of the iguanid
genus Uma and its relation to the evolution of other North American
desert reptiles. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 114(3):253-326.
21 Pough, F.H. 1970. The burrowing ecology of the sand lizard, Uma
notata. Copeia 1970(1):145-157.
22 Stebbins, R.C. 1944. Some aspects of the ecology of the iguanid
genus Uma. Ecol. Monogr. 14(3):311-332.
23 Stevens, D.W. 1983. Personal communication. Environmental and
Regulatory Affairs, Southern California Edison Company, P.O. Box
800, Rosemead, CA 91770.
24 Turner, F.G., D.C. Weaver, and T.C. Rorabaugh. 1981. The
abundance of the fringe-toed lizard (Uma inornata) at 10 sites in
the Coachella Valley, California. Part 1, IN: The effect of
blowsand reduction on the abundance of the fringe-toed lizard (Uma
inornata) in the Coachella Valley, California. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Los Angeles.
25 Tinkham, E.R. 1980. Biological survey of the Winte-Dresselhaus
property North Jackson Street, Indio, California. Annexation #50,
City of Indio, 100 Civic Center Mall, Indio, CA 92202.
26 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1982. Endangered and Threatened
wildlife and plants; Listing as threatened with critical habitat
for the Coachella Valley fringe-toed lizard. 50 CFR Part 17.
27 Vitt, J.T. 1983. Personal communication. Department of Biology,
Univ. of California, Los Angeles, CA 90024.
28 Weaver, D.C. 1981. Aeolian sand transport and deposit
characteristics at ten sites in Coachella Valley, California, Part
2, IN: The effect of blowsand reduction on the abundance of the
fringe-toed lizard (Uma inornata) in the Coachella Valley,
California. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles.
29 Wilbanks, J.B. 1983. Personal communication. Planning
Department, City of Indio, 100 Civic Center Mall, Indio, CA 92202.
30 Cornett, J.W. 1983. Biological survey of a seventy two acre
parcel near Bermuda Dunes, Riverside Co., California. Riverside
County Planning Department, Environmental Consultants, 933 Calle
Loro, Palm Springs, CA 92263.
31 Tierra Madre Consultants. 1984. Personal communication. Tierra
Madre Consultants, Mission Inn Rotunda, Suite 306, 3616 Main St.,
Riverside, CA 92501.

References - 5