Jim Rosso wrote:
We don't need to have people build tunnels for pocket
gophers. Or did I miss something?

My guess is you missed something.
I believe the following subspecies of _Thomomys_ are candidates for state
listing. Two of them were candidates for federal listing before the USFWS
dumped the "candidate" terminology for Category 2 species.
Brush Prairie Pocket Gopher _T. talpoides douglasi_
Shelton Pocket Gopher _T. mazama couchi_
*Roy Prairie Pocket Gopher _T. mazama glacialis_
*Cathlamet Pocket Gopher _T. mazama louiei_
Tenino Pocket Gopher _T. mazama tumuli_
I'm not able to provide population data for these subspecies, but they are
in trouble (and in one case, probably already gone gone gone). Pocket
gophers have (or had) their place in the Puget Sound lowlands for a long
while and deserve to be protected. Too bad the tunnels constructed on one
piece of property didn't work, but I believe it was worth the try.
Consider the case of a certain Threatened owl, one that probably played
a pivotal role in the necessity of Referendum 48. Should a landowner
maintain habitat for this subspecies, if it lives on his or her property?
------------------------
Scott Richardson
NE Seattle
salix at isomedia.com