Share your observations of plants or non-game animals with the Natural Heritage Inventory
Help care for rare plants and animals by ordering an Endangered Resources plate.
There is no overview information available for that species.
The table below provides information about the protected status - both state and federal - and the rank (S and G Ranks) for Seaside Grasshopper (Trimerotropis maritima). See the Working List Key for more information about abbreviations. Counties shaded blue have documented occurrences for this species in the Wisconsin Natural Heritage Inventory database. The map is provided as a general reference of where occurrences of this species meet NHI data standards and is not meant as a comprehensive map of all observations.
Note: Species recently added to the NHI Working List may temporarily have blank occurrence maps.
| Summary Information | |
|---|---|
| State Status | SC/N |
| Federal Status in Wisconsin | none |
| State Rank | S2S4 |
| Global Rank | G5 |
| Tracked by NHI | Y |
| WWAP | SGCN |
Identification: Medium to large-sized highly-speckled grasshopper. Pronotum with two transverse sulci. Gray to yellow or pale brown coloration with bands on the long forewing that may be very pale. Hindwing clear to light yellow with black band in the central area. Inner face of hind femur with a narrow, short basal dark band. Hind tibia yellow. Separated from T. huroni only by the minimal band in the basal area of hind femur.
Similar Species: Trimerotropis huroni on northern Lake Michigan beaches. Spharagemon collare has only one transerves sulcus.
Habitat: Grassland/herbaceous, sand/dune, cropland/hedgerow.
State Distribution: Found commonly along the sandy shores of the lower Chippewa and Wisconsin Rivers, and on beaches along southern Lake Michigan.
Global Distribution: Found across the eastern, southern, and central United States reaching as far north as Wisconsin and Ontario and west to Arizona (Otte, 1984).
No additional photos are available for Seaside Grasshopper at this time. Please consider donating a photo to the Natural Heritage Conservation program.
The table below lists the natural communities that are associated with Seaside Grasshopper. Only natural communities for which Seaside Grasshopper is "high" (score=3) or "moderate" (score=2) associated are shown. See the key to association scores for complete definitions. Please see the Wildlife Action Plan to learn how this information was developed.
| Natural community | Score |
|---|---|
| Great Lakes Beach | 3 |
| Great Lakes Dune | 3 |
| Inland Beach | 3 |
| Lake Michigan | 2 |
| Sand Barrens | 2 |
| Warmwater rivers | 2 |
The table below lists the ecological landscape association scores for Seaside Grasshopper. The scores correspond to the map (3=High, 2=Moderate, 1=Low, 0=None). For more information, please see the Wildlife Action Plan.
| Ecological landscape | score |
|---|---|
| Central Lake Michigan Coastal | 3 |
| Western Coulee and Ridges | 3 |
| Central Sand Plains | 2 |
| Forest Transition | 2 |
| Southeast Glacial Plains | 2 |
| Southern Lake Michigan Coastal | 2 |
| Southwest Savanna | 2 |
| Western Prairie | 2 |
| Central Sand Hills | 1 |
| Northwest Lowlands | 1 |
| Superior Coastal Plain | 1 |
Ecological priorities are the combinations of natural communities and ecological landscapes that provide Wisconsin's best opportunities to conserve important habitats for a given Species of Greatest Conservation Need. The 10 highest scoring combinations are considered ecological priorities and are listed below. More than 10 combinations are listed if multiple combinations tied for 10th place. For more information, please see the Wildlife Action Plan.
* Ecological priority score is a relative measure that is not meant for comparison between species. This score does not consider socio-economical factors that may dictate protection and/or management priorities differently than those determined solely by ecological analysis. Further, a low ecological priority score does not imply that management or preservation should not occur on a site if there are important reasons for doing so locally.
Conservation actions respond to issues or threats, which adversely affect species of greatest conservation need (SGCN) or their habitats. Besides actions such as restoring wetlands or planting resilient tree species in northern communities, research, surveys and monitoring are also among conservation actions described in the WWAP because lack of information can threaten our ability to successfully preserve and care for natural resources.