The California Natural Diversity Database (data-
base) was fi rst conceptualized and developed in 1979
by The Nature Conservancy (now overseen by Nature-
Serve; Csuti 1982, Bittman 2001). Since its inception,
the Habitat Conservation Division of the California De-
partment of Fish and Game has maintained the database
(Bittman 2001, Brooks and Matchett 2002). Its main
purpose is to be a repository of data concerning endan-
gered, threatened, and special concern plant and animal
species (Bittman 2001, Brooks and Matchett 2002).
Ultimately, the information stored in the database will
allow for better management of special status species
by providing accurate and useful landscape and natural
history information, which will lead to the delisting of
species upon recovery.
The database only records physical sightings of
plants and animals in areas that are surveyed, collec-
tively known as elements. The database does not record
surveys that suggest absence of a particular sensitive
species, and no inference can be made regarding the pres-
ence of species on lands that have never been surveyed
(Bittman 2001). It is critical that the database consists of
the highest possible quality information on location, dis-
tribution, habitat conditions, threats, and land use asso-
ciated with listed and sensitive species (Bittman 2001).
However, the assumption that researchers, government
agency personnel, members of conservation groups,
biological consultants, and individuals from the private
sector accurately and positively identify target species
can have important implications regarding the quality
of the database. Here we provide a possible example
of how misidentifi cations by biologists in the fi eld can
subsequently add inaccurate elements to the database.
In the case of the San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes ma-
crotis mutica) there are several common survey meth-
odologies. These methodologies vary according to the
time of year, the physical landscape, the natural history,
and population of the S