Rana pretiosa

Baird and Girard, 1853

Oregon Spotted Frog

G2Imperiled Found in 33 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G2ImperiledGlobal Rank
VulnerableIUCN
HighThreat Impact
Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa). Photo by U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Public Domain (U.S. Government Work), via ECOS.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, https://www.usa.gov/government-works
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.101451
Element CodeAAABH01180
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNVulnerable
Endemicoccurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassAmphibia
OrderAnura
FamilyRanidae
GenusRana
Other Common Names
Grenouille maculée de l'Oregon (FR) Grenouille maculée d'Oregon (FR) Oregon spotted frog (EN)
Concept Reference
Frost, D. R. 1985. Amphibian species of the world. A taxonomic and geographical reference. Allen Press, Inc., and The Association of Systematics Collections, Lawrence, Kansas. v + 732 pp.
Taxonomic Comments
Rana luteiventris and R. pretiosa formerly were regarded as conspecific. Green et al. (1996) examined allozyme and morphometric variation in R. pretiosa from 26 and 38 localities, respectively, and concluded that at least two species were represented, referred to as species A (southwestern Washington and Oregon Cascades) and species B (remainder of range). Morphometrically, the two species are "almost indistinguishable." The authors could not fully delineate the dividing line between the ranges of species A and species B. The two species were not assigned latin names because of a nomenclatural problem arising from the fact that specimens from the vicinity of the type series for R. pretiosa Baird and Girard could not be assigned to either species A or species B, and the type locality lies geographically between the known ranges of A and B.

Subsequently, Green et al. (1997) determined that frogs from the vicinity of the type locality of R. pretiosa are conspecific with the species residing in south-central Washington and and the Cascade Mountains of Oregon (species A). Hence, they concluded that populations from southwestern British Columbia, western Washington, western and central Oregon, and northeastern California are R. pretiosa (Oregon spotted frog) and that spotted frogs from the remainder of the range are another species for which the name Rana luteiventris (Columbia spotted frog) is applicable. See also Funk et al. (2008).

Rana luteiventris was regarded as possibly comprising multiple weakly differentiated species.
Conservation Status
Rank Method Rank calculation - Biotics v2
Review Date2026-01-21
Change Date2001-11-26
Edition Date2026-01-21
Edition AuthorsHammerson, G., E. West, and E. Gaines (2013); rev. R. L. Gundy (2026)
Threat ImpactHigh
Range Extent20,000-200,000 square km (about 8000-80,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences21 - 80
Rank Reasons
This species is found in a relatively broad range from southwestern British Columbia to southern Oregon. The species has suffered steep declines in area of occupancy and abundance due to habitat loss, habitat degradation, and predation by invasive predators. Habitat degradation continues to threaten this species due to invasive reed canary grass, disturbance to the habitat by livestock, water management issues, and agricultural runoff. In addition, predation by invasive American bullfrogs and some predatory fishes are reducing survival. Chytrid fungus may also be causing declines.
Range Extent Comments
This species is found in the Pacific Northwest. The range extends from southwestern British Columbia, Canada south through the eastern side of the Puget/Willamette Valley trough and the Columbia River gorge in south-central Washington to the Cascades Range at least to the Klamath Valley in Oregon (Dodd Jr. 2023). The species is considered extirpated from the Willamette Valley, northeastern California, and much of its range in western Washington (Hayes 1997, Pearl and Hayes 2005, Dodd Jr. 2023). More than two-thirds of known extant populations are along the crest and eastern slope of the Cascade Range in central Oregon (Hayes 1997, Cushman and Pearl 2007, Pearl et al. 2009). Elevational range extends from near sea level in the Puget Trough lowlands in Washington to around 1,500 meters in the Oregon Cascades and locations in western Oregon (Dunlap 1955, Hayes 1997, McAllister and Leonard 1997). At the northern range limits, occurrences are unlikely to occur at elevations above 200 meters (Pearl and Hayes 2004). Using Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) (2026) records from 2000-2025, range extent is estimated to be 103,761 km² (RARECAT 2025).
Occurrences Comments
As of around 2009, 38 occupied locations (sites) were known in the United States, including 8 in Washington (1 historical, 7 new) and 30 in Oregon (13 historical, 17 new) (USFWS 2009). No extant populations were known in California, but not all potential habitat there had been adequately surveyed (USFWS 2009). In British Columbia, seven populations have been documented, but the three historical sites no longer support the species, and the four recently discovered populations appear to be isolated from one another (Haycock 2000; K. Welstead, pers. comm. 2009, cited by USFWS 2009).

As of around 2013, this species occurred in 18 sub-basins and was represented by 4 extant occurrences in British Columbia, 19 in Washington, and about a dozen in Oregon (USFWS 2013, Bohannon et al. 2016, USFWS 2024a).
Threat Impact Comments
This species faces multiple threats including habitat loss, habitat degradation, invasive predators, and disease. Habitat loss has occurred in the form of conversion of land to pasture and agriculture. Habitat degradation has occurred from hydrologic changes resulting from operation of existing water diversions/manipulation structures, new and existing residential and road developments, drought, and removal of beavers from the landscape (Watson et al. 2003, USFWS 2013, USFWS 2024a). In addition, the invasive plant reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) has reduced habitat quality by growing so densely that the shallow edges of wetlands are no longer deemed suitable as egg-laying sites (Kapust et al. 2012, USFWS 2013, USFWS 2024a). Livestock grazing also degrades habitat by increasing sedimentation, increasing water temperatures, reducing water quality, and changing shoreline plant communities (USFWS 2013, USFWS 2024a). Invasive bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus) consume small frogs and often cause local extirpations (USFWS 2013, Dodd Jr. 2023, USFWS 2024a). Predation by exotic fishes (e.g., brook trout, centrarchids) may be a threat in some areas (Pearl et al. 2004, Pearl et al. 2009). Physiological effects from contaminants and other changes in water chemistry may negatively impact survival (Hayes et al. 1997, Blaustein et al. 1999, Watson et al. 2003). Chytrid fungus (Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis) is infecting this species, although the degree of impact is still uncertain (Berger et al. 1998, Pounds et al. 2006, Conlon et al. 2011, Padgett-Flohr and Hayes 2011, USFWS 2024a).
Ecology & Habitat

Description

This frog has upturned eyes, usually small bumps and tubercles on the the back and sides, and short hind legs relative to body length, and hind feet that are fully webbed (Leonard et al. 1993). The head is marked with a faint mask, and a light jaw stripe extends to the shoulder. Black spots are scattered on the head, back, sides, and legs. The dark spots have ragged edges and light centers and usually are associated with a tubercle or raised area of skin. The spots become larger and darker, and the edges become more ragged, with age (Hayes 1994). Juveniles are usually brown or, occasionally, olive green on the back and white, cream, or flesh-colored with reddish pigments on the underlegs and abdomen (McAllister and Leonard 1997). Adults range from brown to reddish brown but tend to become redder with age. Large, presumably older, individuals may be brick red over most of the dorsal surface (McAllister and Leonard 1997). Red surface pigment on the adult abdomen increases with age, and the underlegs of adults are a vivid orange red. Tan to orange folds along the sides of the back (dorsolateral folds) extend from behind the eye to midway along the back (McAllister and Leonard 1997). This is a medium-sized frog about 44-105 millimeters (1.7 to 4.1 inches) in body (snout-vent) length (McAllister and Leonard 1997, Rombough et al. 2006). Adult females are typically larger than adult males (the latter reach only about 75 mm (3 inches) (Leonard et al. 1993).

The weak call consists of a rapid series of 6-9 low clucking notes, sometimes described as sounding like a distant woodpecker's tapping. This species generally vocalizes only during the breeding season (Leonard et al. 1993); however vocalizations have been heard during the fall (Leonard et al. 1997).

Diagnostic Characteristics

"The following traits distinguish the Oregon spotted frog from the Cascades and northern red-legged frog: 1) the dorsal spots are black with ragged edges and light centers, 2) the eyes are oriented upward with the entire pupil of both eyes visible when the frog is viewed directly from above, 3) there is nearly full webbing between the toes with the webbing of the hind foot reaching almost to the tip of the longest toe and the webbing is almost straight when the toes are stretched apart, 4) the coloration in the groin area is similar to the coloration anteriorly on the side and posteriorly on the thighs with no obvious yellow and black mottled patch or patches, 5) when the hind leg is pressed forward against the body, the heel of the hind foot will seldom reach the nostril (similarly, the knee to heel measurement is typically less than half of the snout-vent length), 6) the dorsolateral folds are interrupted about two-thirds the distance down the back from the eye and often disappear entirely posteriorly, and 7) Cascade Frogs have honey-colored and yellow undersides, not red. The above traits may be difficult to see or absent in small juvenile frogs. Bullfrogs, a common non-native species, have a distinct fold from the posterior edge of the eye, around the top of the tympanum and ending at the arm and they lack dorsolateral folds." Source: Hallock and McAllister (2005). Corkran and Thoms (2006) also distinguished this species from the northern red-legged frog and Cascades frog

Corkran and Thoms (2006) presented keys to eggs, larvae, and metamorphosed individuals.

Habitat

The Oregon spotted frog is highly aquatic and generally avoids dry uplands. It is rarely found far from permanent quiet water. Usually it occurs in vegetated shallows or among grasses or sedges along the margins of streams, lakes, ponds (including those behind beaver dams), oxbows, springs, and marshes (Hodge 1976, Licht 1986, Watson et al. 2003, Chelgren et al. 2008). Individuals move among seasonal habitats usually along flooded or saturated corridors (Watson et al. 2003). In Washington, overland movements were very rare (Watson et al. 2003). Breeding occurs usually in shallow water in pools, ponds, or other quiet waters, among moderate or dense herbaceous vegetation, often close to shore but sometimes far from away from the edge (Pearl et al. 2009). Oviposition sites may be devoid of water later in the year. In Washington, frogs used deeper permanent pools in the dry season; in the coldest periods they buried themselves at the base of dense vegetation in shallow water under ice (Watson et al. 2003). In central Oregon, breeding habitats were natural or anthropogenic and ranged from small, seasonally flooded oxbow ponds to larger channels and marshes within an extensive wetland complex; most sites had extensive emergent and submergent vegetation (Bowerman and Pearl 2010). Wintering sites are in springs, slow-flowing channels, or deep open water (Hallock and Pearson 2001, Chelgren et al. 2008).

Pearl and Hayes (2004) reviewed available literature and summarized habitat relationships as follows. Oregon spotted frogs are generally associated with wetland complexes > 4 ha in size with extensive emergent marsh coverage that warms substantially during seasons when the frogs are active at the surface. The expanse of inundation in wetlands often varies greatly between spring and fall, but sites always include some permanent water adjacent to seasonally inundated habitat. Field observations and recent telemetry data suggest the frog utilize different wetland microhabitats for breeding, the nonbreeding active season (summer and portions of spring and fall), and overwintering. Breeding sites are generally associated with seasonally flooded, shallowly sloping benches that are vegetated with the previous year's emergent vegetation and are relatively unshaded. The frogs' shallow-water breeding habitat may contribute to relatively frequent stranding of the communally deposited egg masses and substantial egg mortality. Limited data suggest that adults may move little during the nonbreeding active season and may prefer microhabitats of moderate vegetation density that are near aquatic refuges.

Reproduction

The life cycle involves distinct stages: eggs, larvae, and metamorphosed individuals. Breeding occurs as early as February or March at lower elevations and as late as late May or early June at higher elevations (Leonard et al. 1993), and at a particular elevation southern populations likely tend to breed earlier than do northern populations. Breeding occurs in February at sea level in British Columbia. In central Oregon, the period from first oviposition to first hatching occurred in mid- to late April (Bowerman and Pearl 2010). Where freezing occurs, breeding generally occurs as early as winter thaw permits. In at least some areas breeding is "explosive" and occurs primarily within a period of 1-2 weeks (Pearl and Hayes 2005). Reproductive females likely breed once each year and deposit one egg mass per breeding event, and they usually lay eggs communally in clusters containing up to several hundred egg masses, often in the same location year after year. Eggs survive freezing air temperatures and ice cover for up to several days (Bowerman and Pearl 2010), hatch in 3-21 days, depending on temperature. Metamorphosis occurs in mid- to late summer (Nussbaum et al. 1983). Individuals first breed when 1-3 years old (females generally at 2-3 years), depending on the elevation and latitude (mature at greater age at high elevations). Most individuals live not more than a few years, but some may live more than a deacde (see USFWS 2009).
Palustrine Habitats
TEMPORARY POOLHERBACEOUS WETLANDRiparian
Other Nations (2)
CanadaN1
ProvinceRankNative
British ColumbiaS1Yes
United StatesN2
ProvinceRankNative
CaliforniaSHYes
OregonS1Yes
WashingtonS1Yes
Threat Assessments
ThreatScopeSeverityTiming
1 - Residential & commercial developmentRestricted - smallSerious or 31-70% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
2 - Agriculture & aquacultureLarge (31-70%)Moderate or 11-30% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
2.1 - Annual & perennial non-timber cropsLarge (31-70%)Moderate or 11-30% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
2.3 - Livestock farming & ranchingLarge (31-70%)Moderate or 11-30% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
7 - Natural system modificationsRestricted (11-30%)Moderate or 11-30% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
7.1 - Fire & fire suppression
7.2 - Dams & water management/useRestricted (11-30%)Moderate or 11-30% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
8 - Invasive & other problematic species, genes & diseasesLarge (31-70%)Extreme - seriousHigh (continuing)
8.1 - Invasive non-native/alien species/diseasesLarge (31-70%)Extreme - moderateHigh (continuing)
8.2 - Problematic native species/diseasesPervasive (71-100%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)

Roadless Areas (33)
Oregon (29)
AreaForestAcres
Bend WatershedDeschutes National Forest14,829
Bend WatershedDeschutes National Forest14,829
Brown Mt.Winema National Forest3,117
Buck CreekFremont National Forest9,887
CharltonDeschutes National Forest7,047
CharltonDeschutes National Forest7,047
Charlton ButteWillamette National Forest3,031
CornpatchWillamette National Forest7,346
Maiden PeakWillamette National Forest9,627
Maiden PeakWillamette National Forest9,627
Maiden PeakDeschutes National Forest26,432
Maiden PeakDeschutes National Forest26,432
Mt. ThielsenWinema National Forest1,153
North PaulinaDeschutes National Forest19,670
Roaring RiverWillamette National Forest2,128
Sky Lakes AWinema National Forest3,940
Sky Lakes AWinema National Forest3,940
South PaulinaDeschutes National Forest9,074
Twin LakesMt. Hood National Forest6,055
W. BoundaryWinema National Forest2,345
WaldoDeschutes National Forest4,973
WaldoDeschutes National Forest4,973
Waldo - FujiWillamette National Forest15,273
Waldo - FujiWillamette National Forest15,273
Waldo - LakeWillamette National Forest2,993
Waldo - Salmon CreekWillamette National Forest3,195
West - South BachelorDeschutes National Forest25,994
West - South BachelorDeschutes National Forest25,994
Yamsay Mt.Winema National Forest6,699
South Dakota (1)
AreaForestAcres
Indian CreekBuffalo Gap National Grassland24,666
Washington (3)
AreaForestAcres
Gotchen CreekGifford Pinchot National Forest7,518
Mt. Baker WestMt Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest25,390
West AdamsGifford Pinchot National Forest2,238
References (73)
  1. Behler, J. L., and F. W. King. 1979. The Audubon Society field guide to North American reptiles and amphibians. Alfred A. Knopf, New York. 719 pp.
  2. Berger, L., et al. 1998. Chytridiomycosis causes amphibian mortality associated with population declines in the rain forests of Australia and Central America. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 95:9031-9036.
  3. Blackburn, L., P. Nanjappa, and M. J. Lannoo. 2001. An Atlas of the Distribution of U.S. Amphibians. Copyright, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, USA.
  4. Blaustein, A.R., Hays, J.B, Hoffman, P.D., Chivers, D.P., Kiesecker, J.M., Leonard, W.P., Marco, A., Olson, D.H., Reaser, J.K. and Anthony, R.G. 1999. DNA repair and resistance to UV-B radiation in western spotted frogs. Ecological Applications 9:1100-1105.
  5. Bohannon, J. S., D. R. Gay, M. P. Hayes, C. D. Danilson, and K. I. Warheit. 2016. Discovery of the Oregon spotted-frog in the northern Puget Sound Basin, Washington State. Northwestern Naturalist 97: 82–97.
  6. Bowerman, J., and C. A. Pearl. 2010. Ability of Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>) embryos from central Oregon to tolerate low temperatures. Northwestern Naturalist 91:198-202.
  7. Briggs, J. L., Sr. 1987. Breeding biology of the Cascade frog, <i>Rana cascadae</i>, with comparisons to <i>R. aurora</i> and <i>R. pretiosa</i>. Copeia 1987:241-245.
  8. Chelgren, N. D., C. A. Pearl, M. J. Adams, and J. Bowerman. 2008. Demography and movement in a relocated population of Oregon spotted frogs (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>): influence of season and gender. Copeia 2008:742-751.
  9. Collins, J. T., and T. W. Taggart. 2009. Standard common and current scientific names for North American amphibians, turtles, reptiles, and crocodilians. Sixth edition. The Center for North American Herpetology, Lawrance, Kansas. iv + 44 pp.
  10. Conlon, J. M., M. Mecharska, E. Ahmed, L. Coque, T. Jouenne, J. Leprince, H. Vaudry, M. P. Hayes, and G. Padgett-Flohr. 2011. Host defense peptides in skin secretions of the Oregon spotted frog <i>Rana pretiosa</i>: Implications for species resistance to chytridiomycosis. Developmental & Comparative Immunology 35(6): 644-649. doi: 10.1016/j.dci.2011.01.017
  11. Corkran, C. C., and C. Thoms. 2006. Amphibians of Oregon, Washington and British Columbia. Revised and updated edition. Lone Pine Publishing, Edmonton, Alberta.
  12. Corn, P. S., and F. A. Vertucci. 1992. Descriptive risk assessment of the effects of acidic deposition on Rocky Mountain amphibians. J. Herpetol. 26:361-369.
  13. Crother, B. I. (editor). 2008. Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico, with comments regarding confidence in our understanding. Sixth edition. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles Herpetological Circular 37:1-84. Online with updates at: http://www.ssarherps.org/pages/comm_names/Index.php
  14. Crother, B. I. (editor). 2017. Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico, with comments regarding confidence in our understanding. 8th edition. SSAR Herpetological Circular 43:1-104. [Updates in SSAR North American Species Names Database at: https://ssarherps.org/cndb]
  15. Cushman, K. A., and C. A. Pearl. 2007. A conservation assessment for the Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>). Report to USDA Forest Service Region 6 and USDI Bureau of Land Management, Oregon and Washington. 46 pp. http://fresc.usgs.gov/products/papers/1578_Pearl.pdf
  16. Dodd, C. K., Jr. 2023. Frogs of the United States and Canada, Second Edition. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.
  17. Dunlap, D. G. 1955. Inter- and intraspecific variation in Oregon frogs of the genus <i>Rana</i>. American Midland Naturalist 54:314-331.
  18. Frost, D. R. 1985. Amphibian species of the world. A taxonomic and geographical reference. Allen Press, Inc., and The Association of Systematics Collections, Lawrence, Kansas. v + 732 pp.
  19. Frost, D. R. 2010. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 5.4 (8 April 2010). Electronic Database accessible at http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.php. American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA.
  20. Frost, D.R. 2020. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.0. American Museum of Natural History, New York, USA. Online: http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.html
  21. Funk, W. C., C. A. Pearl, H. M. Draheim, M. J. Adams, T. D. Mullins, and S. M. Haig. 2008. Range-wide phylogeographic analysis of the spotted frog complex (<i>Rana luteiventris</i> and <i>Rana pretiosa</i>) in northwestern North America. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 49:198-210.
  22. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). 2026. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) data portal. Online. Available: https://www.gbif.org/ (accessed 2026).
  23. Green, D.M. 1986a. Systematics and evolution of western North American frogs allied to <i>Rana aurora</i> and <i>Rana boylii</i>: karyological evidence. Systematic Zoology 35:273-282.
  24. Green, D.M. 1986b. Systematics and evolution of western North American frogs allied to <i>Rana aurora</i> and <i>Rana boylii</i>: electrophoretic evidence. Systematic Zoology 35:283-296.
  25. Green, D. M., H. Kaiser, T. F. Sharbel, J. Kearsley, and K. R. McAllister. 1997. Cryptic species of spotted frogs, <i>Rana pretiosa</i> complex, in western North America. Copeia 1997:1-8.
  26. Green, D. M., T. F. Sharbel, J. Kearsley, and H. Kaiser. 1996. Postglacial range fluctuation, genetic subdivision and speciation in the western North American spotted frog complex, <i>Rana pretiosa</i>. Evolution 50:374-390.
  27. Hallock, L. A., and K. R. McAllister. 2005. Oregon spotted frog. Washington Herp Atlas. http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/herp/
  28. Hallock, L., and S. Pearson. 2001. Telemetry study of fall and winter Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>) movement and habitat use at Trout Lake, Klickitat County, Washington. Washington Natural Heritage Program. Report to Washington State Department of Transportation and Washington Dept. of Natural Resources Natural Areas Program. 36 pp.
  29. Haycock, R. D. 2000. COSEWIC status report on the Oregon spotted frog <i>Rana pretiosa</i> in Canada, in COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Oregon spotted frog <i>Rana pretiosa</i> in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. 22 pp.
  30. Hayes, Marc P. Herpetologist at Portland State University. Has worked on ranids for ORNHP.
  31. Hayes, M.P. 1994. Current status of the spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>) in Western Oregon. Final report to ODFW. 13 pp.
  32. Hayes, M. P. 1997. Status of the Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i> sensu stricto) in the Deschutes Basin and selected other systems in Oregon and northeastern California with a rangewide synopsis of the species' status. Final report prepared for The Nature Conservancy under contract to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 57 pp + appendices.
  33. Hayes, M. P. 1998. The Buck Lake Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>) population (Spencer Creek System, Klamath County, Oregon). Final report prepared for the Bureau of Land Management and The Nature Conservancy under contract to Winema National Forest.
  34. Hayes, M. P., and M. R. Jennings. 1986. Decline of ranid frog species in western North America.: are bullfrogs (<i>Rana catesbeiana</i>) responsible? J. Herpetol. 20:490-509.
  35. Hayes, M. P., C. J. Rombough, G. E. Padget-Flohr, L. A. Hallock, J. E. Johnson, R. S. Wagner, and J. D. Engler. 2009. Amphibian chytridiomycosis in the Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>) in Washington State, USA. Northwestern Naturalist 90:148-151.
  36. Hayes, M. P., J. D. Engler, R. D. Haycock, D. H. Knopp, W. P. Leonard, K. R. McAllister, and L. L. Todd. 1997. Status of the Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>) across its geographic range. Oregon Chapter, The Wildlife Society, Corvallis, Oregon.
  37. Hayes, M. P., J. D. Engler, S. Van Leuven, D. C. Friesz, T. Quinn and D. J. Pierce. 2001. Overwintering of the Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>) at Conboy Lake National Wildlife Refuge, Klickitat County, Washington, 2000-2001. Washington Department of Transportation, Final report, Olympia, Washington.
  38. Hodge, R. P. 1976. Amphibians and reptiles in Alaska, the Yukon and Northwest Territories. Alaska Northwest Publishing Company Anchorage, Alaska. 89 pp.
  39. Hunter, B. H., A. Ferchaud, E. Normandeau, K. Morgan, A. Mooers, G. Mastromonaco, and D. Lesbarrères. 2025. Continued collaboration of ex situ and in situ programs is critical for the genetic sustainability of the endangered <i>Rana pretiosa</i>. Nature (2025) 15: 17835. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-01483-4
  40. Jennings, M. R., and M. P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and reptile species of special concern in California. Final Report submitted to the California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Division. Contract No. 8023. 255 pp.
  41. Jones, L.L.C., W. P. Leonard, and D. H. Olson, editors. 2005. Amphibians of the Pacific Northwest. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle, Washington. xii + 227 pp.
  42. Kapust, H. Q. W., K. R. McAllister, and M. P. Hayes. 2012. Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>) response to enhancement of oviposition habitat degraded by invasive reed canary grass (<i>Phalaris arundinacea</i>). Herpetological Conservation and Biology 7(3): 358-366.
  43. Koch, E.D., G. Williams, C.R. Peterson, and P.S. Corn. 1997. A summary of the conference on declining and sensitive amphibians in the Rocky Mountains and Pacific Northwest. November 7-8, 1996, Boise Idaho. Meeting sponsored by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Idaho Herpetological Society, Declining Amphibian Population Task Force Rocky Mountain Working Group, U.S. Geological Survey - Biological Resources Division, Idaho Museum of Natural History, Idaho State University.
  44. Leonard, W. P., H. A. Brown, L. L. C. Jones, K. R. McAllister, and R. M. Storm. 1993. Amphibians of Washington and Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle, Washington. viii + 168 pp.
  45. Leonard, W.P., K.R. McAllister, and L.A. Hallock. 1997. Autumn vocalizations by the red-legged frog (<i>Rana aurora</i>) and the Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>). Northwestern Naturalist 78:73-74.
  46. Licht, L.E. 1971. Breeding habits and embryonic thermal requirements of the frogs, <i>Rana aurora aurora</i> and <i>Rana pretiosa pretiosa</i>, in the Pacific Northwest. Ecology 52(1):116-124.
  47. Licht, L.E. 1986. Food and feeding behavior of sympatric red-legged frogs, <i>Rana aurora</i>, and spotted frogs, <i>Rana pretiosa</i>, in southwestern British Columbia. Canad. Field-Naturalist 100:22-31.
  48. McAllister, K. R., and M. Walker. 2003. An inventory of Oregon spotted frogs (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>) in the upper Black River drainage, Thurston County, Washington. Unpublished report. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia. 12 pp.
  49. McAllister, K. R., and W. P. Leonard. 1997. Washington State status report for the Oregon spotted frog. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia. 38 pp.
  50. McAllister, K. R., W. P. Leonard, and R. M. Storm. 1993. Spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>) surveys in the Puget Trough of Washington, 1989-1991. Northwestern Naturalist 74:10-15.
  51. Nussbaum, R.A., E.D. Brodie, Jr., and R.M. Storm. 1983. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Pacific Northwest. University Press of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho. 332 pp.
  52. Padgett-Flohr, G. E., and M. P. Hayes. 2011. Assessment of the vulnerability of the Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>) to the amphibian chytrid fungus (<i>Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis</i>). Herpetological Conservation and Biology 6(2): 99-106.
  53. Pearl, C. A, and M. P. Hayes. 2004. Habitat associations of the Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>): A literature review. Final Report. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington, USA.
  54. Pearl, C. A., and M. P. Hayes. 2005. <i>Rana pretiosa</i>. Oregon spotted frog. Pages 577-580 in M. Lannoo, editor. Amphibian declines: the conservation status of United States species. University of California Press, Berkeley.
  55. Pearl, C. A., M. J. Adams, and N. Leuthold. 2009. Breeding habitat and local population size of the Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>) in Oregon, USA. Northwestern Naturalist 90:136-147.
  56. Pearl, C. A., M. J. Adams, R. B. Bury, and B. McCreary. 2004. Asymmetrical effects of introduced bullfrogs (<i>Rana catesbeiana</i>) on native ranid frogs in Oregon. Copeia 2004:11-20.
  57. <p>NatureServe's Rapid Analysis of Rarity and Endangerment Conservation Assessment Tool (RARECAT). 2025. Version: 2.1.1 (released April 04, 2025).</p>
  58. Pounds, J. A., M. R. Bustamante, L. A. Coloma, J. A. Consuegra, M.P.L. Fogden, P. N. Foster, E. La Marca, K. L. Masters, A. Merino-Viteri, R. Puschendorf, S. R. Ron, G. A. Sanchez-Azofeifa, C. J. Still, and B. E. Young. 2006. Widespread amphibian extinctions from epidemic disease driven by global warming. Nature 439:161-167.
  59. Risenhoover, K. L., T. C. McBride, K. R. McAllister, and M. Golliet. 2001. Oviposition behavior of the Oregon spotted frog (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>) along Dempsey Creek, Thurston County, Washington. Port Blakely Tree Farms Technical Report RD-01-02.
  60. Rombough, C.R., M.P. Hayes, and J.D. Engler. 2006. <i>Rana pretiosa</i> (Oregon Spotted Frog). Maximum Size. Herpetological Review 37(2):210.
  61. Spahr, R., L. Armstrong, D. Atwood, and M. Rath. 1991. Threatened, endangered, and sensitive species of the Intermountain Region. U.S. Forest Service, Ogden, Utah.
  62. Species at Risk Branch. 2002. Species at risk range maps. Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada. Online. Available: http://www.sis.ec.gc.ca/download_e.htm.
  63. Stebbins, R. C. 1985a. A field guide to western reptiles and amphibians. Second edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts. xiv + 336 pp.
  64. Stebbins, R. C. 2003. A field guide to western reptiles and amphibians. Third edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.
  65. Todd, L. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service endangered species biologist.
  66. Turner, F.B. and Dumas, P.C. 1972. <i>Rana pretiosa</i>. Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles. 119:1-4.
  67. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2024. Oregon Spotted Frog (Rana pretiosa) Species Biological Report. Bend, Oregon. 107 pp.
  68. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2024. Recovery Implementation Strategy for Oregon spotted frog. Portland, Oregon. 96 pp.
  69. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2009. <i>Rana pretiosa</i>. Species assessment and listing priority assignment form. USFWS Region 1.
  70. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 29 August 2013. Threatened status for Oregon spotted frog. Federal Register 78(168):53582-53623.
  71. Washington Department of Wildlife. 1991. Spotted Frog <i>Rana pretiosa</i>. Unpublished report from Washington Department of Wildlife, Olympia. 4 pp.
  72. Washington Herp Atlas. 2009 (map products updated March 2017). A cooperative effort of Washington Natural Heritage Program, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S.D.I. Bureau of Land Management, and U.S. Forest Service. 250 pp.
  73. Watson, J. W., K. R. McAllister, and D. J. Pierce. 2003. Home ranges, movements, and habitat selection of Oregon spotted frogs (<i>Rana pretiosa</i>). Journal of Herpetology 37:292-300.