Tamiasciurus hudsonicus - (Erxleben, 1777)
Red Squirrel
Other English Common Names: red squirrel
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Tamiasciurus hudsonicus (Erxleben, 1777) (TSN 180166)
French Common Names: écureuil roux
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.104800
Element Code: AMAFB08010
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Mammals - Rodents
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Mammalia Rodentia Sciuridae Tamiasciurus
Genus Size: B - Very small genus (2-5 species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (editors). 1993. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Second edition. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. xviii + 1206 pp. Available online at: http://www.nmnh.si.edu/msw/.
Concept Reference Code: B93WIL01NAUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Tamiasciurus hudsonicus
Taxonomic Comments: Based on patterns of genetic variation and morphology, Arbogast et al. (2001) suggested that Tamiasciurus should be regarded as comprising one species with three subspecies (hudsonicus, douglasii [including mearnsi], and mogollonensis); mogollonensis represents a southwestern clade that occurs in Arizona, New Mexico, and adjacent parts of southern Colorado and southeastern Utah. Alternatively, Arbogast et al. (2001) suggested that these three taxa might be recognized as separate phylogenetic species. Pending further support for this rearrangement, the North American mammal checklist by Baker et al. (2003) did not accept Arbogast et al.'s (2001) proposed reorganization of Tamiasciurus as a single species. Thorington and Hoffmann (in Wilson and Reeder 2005) also recognized douglasii, hudsonicus, and mearnsi as distinct species.

Earlier, Hall (1981) had suggested that T. douglasii and T. hudsonicus might be conspecific, but Lindsay (1982) concluded that apparent hybrids probably were examples of character convergence.
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 05Apr2016
Global Status Last Changed: 06Nov1996
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Reasons: Widespread in North America; abundant in many areas.
Nation: United States
National Status: N5 (05Sep1996)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N5 (21Feb2016)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Alaska (S5), Arizona (S5), Colorado (S5), Connecticut (S5), Delaware (S3), District of Columbia (SH), Georgia (S3), Idaho (S5), Illinois (S3), Indiana (S4), Iowa (S3), Maine (S5), Maryland (S5), Massachusetts (S5), Michigan (S5), Minnesota (SNR), Montana (S5), Navajo Nation (S5), New Hampshire (S5), New Jersey (S4), New Mexico (S5), New York (S5), North Carolina (S4), North Dakota (SNR), Ohio (SNR), Oregon (S4?), Pennsylvania (S5), Rhode Island (S5), South Carolina (S3?), South Dakota (S5), Tennessee (S4S5), Utah (S5), Vermont (S5), Virginia (S5), Washington (S5), West Virginia (S5), Wisconsin (S5), Wyoming (S5)
Canada Alberta (S5), British Columbia (S5), Labrador (S5), Manitoba (S5), New Brunswick (S5), Newfoundland Island (SNA), Northwest Territories (S5), Nova Scotia (S5), Nunavut (S5), Ontario (S5), Prince Edward Island (S5), Quebec (S5), Saskatchewan (S5), Yukon Territory (S5)

Other Statuses

Implied Status under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (USESA): PS
Comments on USESA: Subspecies grahamensis of southeastern Arizona is listed by USFWS as Endangered.
IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent: >2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments: Alaska to Newfoundland, south to the southern Appalachians and through the Rocky Mountains to Arizona and New Mexico.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)) Alaska to Newfoundland, south to the southern Appalachians and through the Rocky Mountains to Arizona and New Mexico.

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
Color legend for Distribution Map
Endemism: occurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AK, AZ, CO, CT, DC, DE, GA, IA, ID, IL, IN, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MT, NC, ND, NH, NJ, NM, NN, NY, OH, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI, WV, WY
Canada AB, BCnative and exotic, LB, MB, NB, NFexotic, NS, NT, NU, ON, PE, QC, SK, YT

Range Map
Note: Range depicted for New World only. The scale of the maps may cause narrow coastal ranges or ranges on small islands not to appear. Not all vagrant or small disjunct occurrences are depicted. For migratory birds, some individuals occur outside of the passage migrant range depicted. For information on how to obtain shapefiles of species ranges see our Species Mapping pages at www.natureserve.org/conservation-tools/data-maps-tools.

Range Map Compilers: Sechrest, 2002


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
AZ Apache (04001)*, Graham (04009)
CT New London (09011)*
GA Fannin (13111), Habersham (13137), Murray (13213), Rabun (13241)*, Towns (13281), Union (13291), White (13311)
IA Hancock (19081), Winnebago (19189)
SC Greenville (45045), Oconee (45073)*, Pickens (45077)
WY Big Horn (56003), Crook (56011), Johnson (56019), Sheridan (56033), Washakie (56043), Weston (56045)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
01 Shetucket (01100002)+*, Thames (01100003)+*
03 Saluda (03050109)+, Seneca (03060101)+, Tugaloo (03060102)+, Upper Chattahoochee (03130001)+, Conasauga (03150101)+
06 Upper Little Tennessee (06010202)+*, Hiwassee (06020002)+, Ocoee (06020003)+
07 Winnebago (07080203)+
10 Nowood (10080008)+, Big Horn Lake (10080010)+, Little Bighorn (10080016)+, Upper Tongue (10090101)+, Middle Fork Powder (10090201)+, Crazy Woman (10090205)+, Clear (10090206)+, Beaver (10120107)+, Upper Belle Fourche (10120201)+, Lower Belle Fourche (10120202)+, Redwater (10120203)+
14 Middle San Juan (14080105)+*, Chaco (14080106)+*, Chinle (14080204)+*
15 Upper Gila-San Carlos Reservoir (15040005)+, Willcox Playa (15050201)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Reproduction Comments: Breeds March-April and June-July in Quebec. Gestation lasts 31-35 days (Lair 1985). Some females produce 2 litters/year; litter size averages 4-5. Some females breed when less than one year old (Lair 1986).
Ecology Comments: Densities range from about 1 per 3.2 ha (Pinaleno Mountains, southeastern Arizona) to 1 per 0.2 ha (Layne 1954, USFWS 1987).

More territorial than most other North Amerian tree squirrels. Some populations in British Columbia are limited by food (acting through effect on reproduction) (Sullivan 1990; see also J. Mamm. 73:930-936); but factors such as territorial behavior may limit populations at high density (Klenner and Krebs 1991, Klenner 1991).

Sciurid mycophagy may play important role in forest ecology (Maser and Maser 1988).

Habitat Type: Terrestrial
Non-Migrant: Y
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Mobility and Migration Comments: Home range varies from 1-6 acres (Banfield 1974). In Alberta, most young settled close to mother's territory (maximum of 323 m from natal territory); of 219 births, only 20 offspring survived to the following spring (Larsen and Boutin 1994). In Minnesota, median dispersal distance for 8 young was 100 m, with 4 remaining in their natal ranges and 4 dispersing away (Sun 1997). In British Columbia, almost all juveniles settled on or adjacent to their natal territory (Haughland and Larsen 2004).
Palustrine Habitat(s): FORESTED WETLAND, Riparian
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Forest - Conifer, Forest - Mixed
Special Habitat Factors: Standing snag/hollow tree
Habitat Comments: Prefers coniferous and mixed forests, but also occurs in deciduous woodlots, hedgerows, second-growth areas. Prefers to nest in tree cavities; also constructs leaf nests and uses ground burrows.
Adult Food Habits: Frugivore, Granivore
Immature Food Habits: Frugivore, Granivore
Food Comments: Diet consists of seeds, conifer cones, nuts, fruits. Occasionally feeds on invertebrates and small vertebrates. Commonly caches, and later consumes, large amounts of food; characterized by larderhoarding in the west, scatterhoarding in the east (Dempsey and Keppie, 1993, J. Mamm. 74:1007-1013). Also taps maple trees and consumes sugar residues (Heinrich, 1992, J. Mamm. 73:51-54).
Adult Phenology: Crepuscular, Diurnal
Immature Phenology: Crepuscular, Diurnal
Phenology Comments: Usually quite conspicuous throughout the day. Most active 2 hours after sunrise and before sunset.
Length: 39 centimeters
Weight: 252 grams
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Monitoring Requirements: See Halvorson (1972) for information on handling techniques and devices.
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Tree Squirrels

Use Class: Not applicable
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Evidence of historical presence, or current and likely recurring presence, at a given location. Such evidence minimally includes collection or reliable observation and documentation of one or more individuals in appropriate habitat where the species is presumed to be established and breeding.
Separation Barriers: Major water barriers in regions where water does not regularly freeze in winter; greater than 200 meters wide.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 2 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: Tree squirrels may disperse up to several tens of kilometers, but dispersal distance likely is usually not more than a few kilometers. Juvenile red squirrels generally settle on or adjacent to their natal territory (Haughland and Larsen 2004). Whitaker and Hamilton (1998) mentioned fox squirrels traveling 1.2 km daily between woodlots.

Unsuitable habitat includes areas lacking or largely devoid of trees.

Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): .1 km
Inferred Minimum Extent Justification: Based on a home range of 0.8 hectares (see Separation Justification).
Date: 08Mar2005
Author: Hammerson, G., and S. Cannings
Notes: Contains species in the genera SCIURUS and TAMIASCIURUS.
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 08Mar2005
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): Hammerson, G.

Zoological data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs) and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Alvo, R. 1998. National status evaluation of 20 selected animal species inhabiting Canada's forests. Final Report prepared for the Canadian Pulp and Paper Association, the Biodiversity Convention Office and the Canadian Forest Service. 328 pp.

  • Aquin, P. 1999. Évaluation de la situation des groupes taxonomiques des mammifères du Québec. Ministère de l'Environnement et de la Faune. 5 pages.

  • Arbogast, B. S., R. A. Browne, and P. D. Weigl. 2001. Evolutionary genetics and Pleistocene biogeography of North American tree squirrels (Tamiasciurus). Journal of Mammalogy 82:302-319.

  • Armstrong, D.M. 1972. Distribution of Mammals in Colorado. Monograph of the Museum of Natural History, University of Kansas. University of Kansas Printing Service, Lawrence. 415 pp.

  • Baker, R. H. 1983. Michigan mammals. Michigan State University Press. 642 pp.

  • Baker, R. J., L. C. Bradley, R. D. Bradley, J. W. Dragoo, M. D. Engstrom, R. S. Hoffman, C. A. Jones, F. Reid, D. W. Rice, and C. Jones. 2003a. Revised checklist of North American mammals north of Mexico, 2003. Museum of Texas Tech University Occasional Papers 229:1-23.

  • Banfield, A. W. F. 1974. The mammals of Canada. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Canada. 438 pp.

  • Banfield, A.W.F. 1974. The mammals of Canada. University of Toronto Press, Toronto.

  • Beauvais, G. 2000. Mammalian responses to forest fragmentation in the Central and Southern Rocky Mountains. Pages 179-201 IN: R.L. Knight, F.W. Smith, S.W. Buskirk, W.H. Romme, and W.L. Baker. Forest Fragmentation in the Southern Rocky Mountains. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado.

  • Beck, W.H. 1958. A guide to Saskatchewan mammals. Special Publication No. 1. Saskatchewan Natural History Society, Regina, Saskatchewan.

  • Buskirk, S.W., S.C. Forrest, M.G. Raphael, et. al. 1989. Winter resting site ecology of marten in the central Rocky Mountains. Journal of Wildlife Management 53:191-196.

  • Clark, Tim W. and Mark R. Stromberg. 1987. Mammals in Wyoming. University Press of Kansas. Lawrence, Kansas.

  • Cockrum, E.L. 1960. The recent mammals of Arizona: their taxonomy and distribution. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

  • Connor, P.F. 1960. The small mammals of Otsego and Schoharie Counties, New York. N.Y.S. Museum and Science Service Bull. 382. 84 pp.

  • Connor, P.F. 1966. The mammals of the Tug Hill Plateau, New York. New York State Museum and Science Service Bulletin. 406. 82 pp.

  • Coombs, E. M. [no date-1977?]. Wildlife observations of the hot desert region, Washington County, Utah, with emphasis on reptilian species and their habitat in relation to livestock grazing. A report to the Cedar City District, BLM by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources.

  • Dawson, N. 2001. A survey of Ontario trappers to estimate wildlife population levels and population changes: 1999-2000 Summary Report. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Northwest Region, Wildlife Assessment Program. Unpaginated.

  • DeGraaf, R. M. and D. R. Rudis. 1986. New England wildlife: habitat, natural history, and distribution. Univ. Mass. Press. Amherst, MA. 491 pp.

  • Dobbyn, J.S. 1994. Atlas of the Mammals of Ontario. Federation of Ontario Naturalists, Don Mills, Ontario. 120 pp.

  • Doebel, J., and B. McGinnes. 1974. Home range and activity of a gray squirrel population. Journal of Wildlife Management 38:860-67.

  • Dolbeer, R.A. 1973. Reproduction in the red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) in Colorado. Journal of Mammalogy, 54(2):536-540.

  • Elliott, P.F. 1988. Foraging behavior of a central-place forager: field tests of theoretical predictions. The American Naturalist 131:159-174.

  • FERNER, J.W. 1974 HABITAT RELATIONSHIPS OF TAMIASCIURUS HUDSONICUS & SCIURUS ABERTI IN THE ROCKY MTNS. SOUTHWEST NATURALIST 18:469-473

  • FLYGER, V. AND J. E. GATES. 1982. PINE SQUIRRELS. PP. 230-238 IN WILD MAMMALS OF NORTH AMERICA. OP CIT.

  • Farentinos, R. C. 1972. Observations on the ecology of the tassel-eared squirrel. Journal of Wildlife Management 36:1234-39.

  • Flyger, V., and J. E. Gates. 1982. Fox and gray squirrels. Pages 209-229 in J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer, editors. Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and economics. Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore.

  • Forsyth, A. 1985. Mammals of the Canadian wild. Camden House, Camden East, Ont. 351p.

  • Godin, A. J. 1977. Wild mammals of New England. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. 304 pp.

  • Gordon, D.C. 1986. Mammals of Jefferson and Lewis counties, New York. Humphrey Press, Canandaigua, N.Y. 135 pp.

  • Gurnell, J. 1984. Home range, territoriality, caching behavior and food supply of the red dquirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus fremontii) in a subalpine lodgepole pine forest. Animal Behavior 32:1119-1131.

  • Hafner, M. S., L. J. Barkley, and J. M. Chupasko. 1994. Evolutionary genetics of New World tree squirrels (tribe Sciurini). J. Mamm. 75:102-109.

  • Hall, E. R. 1981a. The Mammals of North America, second edition. Vols. I & II. John Wiley & Sons, New York, New York. 1181 pp.

  • Hall, E. Raymond and Keith R. Kelson. 1959. The Mammals of North America. The Ronald Press Company, New York. 1083 pp.

  • Halvorson, C. H. 1972. Device and technique for handling red squirrels. USFWS Spec. Sci. Rep.--Wildl. 159:1-10.

  • Hamilton, W. J., Jr., and J. O. Whitaker, Jr. 1979. Mammals of the eastern United States. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, New York. 346 pp.

  • Hamilton, W.J., Jr. and J.O. Whitaker, Jr. 1979. Mammals of the eastern United States. Cornell University Press. Ithaca, New York. 346 pp.

  • Hatt, R.T. 1929. The red squirrel: its life history and habits, with special reference to the Adirondacks of New York and Harvard Forest. New York State Col. For. at Syracuse Univ. Wild Life Annals, 2(1):1-146.

  • Haughland, D. L., and K. W. Larsen. 2004. Ecology of North American red squirrels across contrasting habitats: relating natal dispersal to habitat. Journal of Mammalogy 85:225-236.

  • Hebda, A.J. 2011. List of mammals of Nova Scotia (including synonyms used in the literature relating to Nova Scotia) (revision 2) 24 July 2011. Nova Scotia Museum Collections Unit, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 24 pp. Online. Available: https://naturalhistory.novascotia.ca/sites/default/files/inline/images/names_and_synonyms_ver3.pdf

  • Hoffmeister, Donald F. 1986. Mammals of Arizona. The University of Arizona Press and The Arizona Game and Fish Department.

  • Hutchinson, B.C. 1985. 1985 Status Report on the Red Squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) in Canada. Prepared for the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and the Canadian Wildlife Service.

  • Ingles, L. G. 1947. Ecology and life history of the California gray squirrel. California Fish and Game 33:138-158.

  • Jackson, H. H. 1961. Mammals of Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison. 504 pp.

  • Jackson, Hartley T. 1961. Mammals of Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Press. Madison, WI 53701. 504pp.

  • Jones, J. K., Jr., R. S. Hoffman, D. W. Rice, C. Jones, R. J. Baker, and M. D. Engstrom. 1992a. Revised checklist of North American mammals north of Mexico, 1991. Occasional Papers, The Museum, Texas Tech University, 146:1-23.

  • Kemp, G.A. and L.B. Keith. 1970. Dynamics and regulation of red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) populations. Ecology 51:763-779.

  • Klenner, W. 1991. Red squirrel population dynamics. II. Settlement patterns and response to removals. J. Anim. Ecol. 60:979-993.

  • Klenner, W., and C. J. Krebs. 1991. Red squirrel population dynamics. I. The effect of supplemental food on demography. J. Anim. Ecol. 60:961-978.

  • Klugh, A.B. 1927. Ecology of the red squirrel. J. Mamm. 8(l)1-32.

  • LAERM, J. 1981. A SURVEY OF THE STATUS DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE OF POTENTIALLY THREATENED AND ENDANGERED VERTEBRATES IN GEORGIA. PART 4 THE MAMMALS. TECH. REPORT TO GA DEPT. OF NAT. RES. 161 PP.

  • Lair, H. 1985. Length of gestation in the red squirrel, Tamiasciurus hudsonicus. J. Mamm. 66:809-810.

  • Lair, H. 1986. Mating seasons and fertility of red squirrels in southern Quebec. Can. J. Zool. 63:2323-2327.

  • Landon, M. 1941. Changes in the squirrel population of Charlotteville Township, Norfolk County, Ontario, 1898-1940. Canadian Field-Naturalist 55:102-103.

  • Larsen, K. W., and S. Boutin. 1994. Movements, survival, and settlement of red squirrel (TAMIASCIURUS HUDSONICUS) offspring. Ecology 75:214-223.

  • Layne, J.N. 1954. The biology of the red squirrel, Tamiasciurus hudsonicus loquar Bangs, in central New York. Ecol. Monogr. 24(2):227-267.

  • Lindsay, S. L. 1982. Systematic relationship of parapatric tree squirrel species (TAMIASCIURUS) in the Pacific Northwest. Can. J. Zool. 60:2149-2156.

  • Linzey, D. and A. Linzey. 1968. Mammals of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Journ. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 84(3):328-414.

  • Linzey, D.W. 2016. Mammals of Great Smoky Mountains National Park: 2016 revision. Southeastern Naturalist 15(Monograph 8):1?93.

  • Long, C.A. 1965. The mammals of Wyoming. University of Kansas Publications, Museum of Natural History 14: 493-758.

  • Maser, C., J.M. Trappe, and R.A. Nussbaum. 1978. Fungal-small mammal interrelationships with emphasis on Oregon coniferous forests. Ecology 59:799-809.

  • Maser, C., and Z. Maser. 1988. Interactions among squirrels, mycorrhizal fungi, and coniferous forests in Oregon. Great Basin Nat. 48:358-369.

  • Mattson, D.J. and D.P. Reinhart. 1996. Indicators of red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) abundance in the whitebark zone. Great Basin Naturalist 56:272-275.

  • Merritt, J.F. 1987. Guide to the Mammals of Pennsylvania. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 408 pp. B87MER01PAUS.

  • Mumford, R. E., and J. O. Whitaker, Jr. 1982. Mammals of Indiana. Indiana University Press, Bloomington. 537 pp.

  • Mumford, Russell E. 1969. Distribution of the Mammals of Indiana. Indiana Academy of Science, Indianapolis, Indiana. 114 pp.

  • New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Checklist of the amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals of New York State, including their protective status. Nongame Unit, Wildlife Resources Center, Delmar, NY.

  • O'Donoghue, M., and S. Stuart. 1993. Hare-raising encounters. Natural History 2/93, pp. 26-33.

  • Obbard, M.E. 1987. Red Squirrel. pp. 264-281 in Novak, M., Baker, J.A., Obbard, M.E., and B. Malloch (eds). Wild Furbearer Management and conservation in North America. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Ottawa. 1150pp.

  • Parks Canada. 2000. Vertebrate Species Database. Ecosystems Branch, 25 Eddy St., Hull, PQ, K1A 0M5.

  • Pauls, R.W. 1978. Behavioural strategies relevant to the energy economy of the red squirrel (Tamiascuirus hudsonicus). Canadian Journal of Zoology 56:1519-1525.

  • Reige, D.A. 1991. Habitat specialization and social factors in distribution of red and gray squirrels. Journal of Mammalogy 72:152-162.

  • Reynolds, R.T., et.al. 1992. Management recommendations for the northern goshawk in the southwestern United States. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, U.S. Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-217, Fort Collins, CO. 90 p.

  • Rothwell, R. 1979. Nest sites of red squirrels (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) in the Laramie Range of southeastern Wyoming. Journal of Mammalogy 60:404-405.

  • Rusch, D. A., and W. G. Reeder. 1978. Population ecology of Alberta red squirrels. Ecology 59:400-420.

  • Rusch, D.A. and W.G. Reeder. 1978. Population ecology of Alberta red squirrels. Ecology 59:400-420.

  • Ryden, H. 1992. The raggedy red squirrel. Dutton. New York, New York. 48p.

  • Sherburne, S.S. 1993. Squirrel middens influence marten (Martes americana) use of subnivean access points. American Midland Naturalist 129:204-207.

  • Smith, C. C. 1968. The adaptive nature of social organization in the genus of tree squirrels, TAMIASCIURUS. Ecological Monographs 38:31-63.

  • Smith, C.C. 1968. The adaptive nature of social organization in the genus of three squirrels Tamiasciurus. Ecological Monographs 38:31-63.

  • Sullivan, T. P. 1990. Responses of red squirrel (TAMIASCIURUS HUDSONICUS) populations to supplemental food. J. Mamm. 71:579-590.

  • Sun, C. 1997. Dispersal of young in red squirresl (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus). American Midland Naturalist 138:252-259.

  • Tlen, D.L. 1993. Kluane Southern Tutchone glossary: english to Southern Tutchone. First edition. The Northern Research Institute, Whitehorse, Yukon. 38 pp.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 3 June 1987. Determination of endangered status for the Mount Graham red squirrel. Federal Register 52:20994-20999.

  • WHARTON, C.H. 1968. DISTRIBUTION OF THE RED SQUIRREL IN GEORGIA. J. MAMMAL. 49(1):153-155.

  • Whitaker, John O., Jr., and Russell E. Mumford. 2009. Mammals of Indiana. Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN.

  • Wildlife Management Information System (WMIS). 2006+. Geo-referenced wildlife datasets (1900 to present) from all projects conducted by Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Canada.  Available at http://www.enr.gov.nt.ca/programs/wildlife-research/wildlife-management-information-services

  • Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (editors). 1993. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Second edition. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. xviii + 1206 pp. Available online at: http://www.nmnh.si.edu/msw/.

  • Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder (editors). 2005. Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Third edition. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Two volumes. 2,142 pp. Available online at: https://www.departments.bucknell.edu/biology/resources/msw3/

  • Wilson, D.E. and S. Ruff. 1999. The Smithsonian book of North American mammals. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London.

  • Wooding, F.H. 1982. Wild mammals of Canada. McGraw-Hill Ryerson. Toronto. 272p.

  • Woods, S.E. Jr. 1980. The Squirrels of Canada. National Museum of Natural Sciences, National Museums of Canada, Ottawa. 199p.

  • Young, P.J. 1999. Red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus). Pages 460-461 IN: D.E. Wilson and S. Ruff, editors. The Smithsonian book of North American mammals. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, in association with the American Society of Mammalogists.

  • Youngman, P.M. 1975. Mammals of the Yukon Territory. Publications in Zoology, No. 10., National Museums of Canada, Ottawa. 192 pp.

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of March 2019.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2019 NatureServe, 2511 Richmond (Jefferson Davis) Highway, Suite 930, Arlington, VA 22202, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2019. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.