The semi-volatile response to my pocket gopher post could have been
avoided if I had skipped the commentary and stuck with the facts.
Gene Hunn's post cuts to the real point I was trying to make:
>My understanding is that pocket gophers are a bit like island
>populations. They are highly localized with limited genetic contact over
>even short distances. Thus significant evolutionary units are quite
>vulnerable.

...when I wrote this:
>> 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_

>> Pocket
>> gophers have (or had) their place in the Puget Sound lowlands for a long
>> while and deserve to be protected.
------------------------
Scott Richardson
NE Seattle
salix at isomedia.com