Peromyscus truei - (Shufeldt, 1885)
Piñon Deermouse
Other English Common Names: Piñon Mouse, piñon deermouse
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Peromyscus truei (Shufeldt, 1885) (TSN 180291)
Spanish Common Names: Ratón
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.100548
Element Code: AMAFF03130
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Mammals - Rodents
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Mammalia Rodentia Cricetidae Peromyscus
Genus Size: D - Medium to large genus (21+ 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: Peromyscus truei
Taxonomic Comments: Includes Texas Panhandle population, formerly regarded as distinct species P. comanche. See Carleton (1989), Janecek (1990), and DeWalt et al. (1993) for evidence supporting conspecificity of comanche and truei. Subspecies gratus is now regarded as distinct species (including former truei subspecies gentilis, erasmus, zapotecae, and part of truei) (see Modi and Lee 1984). Peromyscus gratus differs in chromosome number and is sympatric with P. truei in southeastern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico, though the area of sympatry is not fully known (see map in Carleton 1989). Genic data support the recognition of P. gratus as a species distinct from P. truei (Janecek 1990).

See Durish et al. (2004) for a molecular phylogeny of the P. truei species group.
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 08Nov1996
Global Status Last Changed: 08Nov1996
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Nation: United States
National Status: N5 (05Sep1996)

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 Arizona (S5), California (SNR), Colorado (S4), Idaho (S1), Navajo Nation (S5), Nevada (S5), New Mexico (S5), Oklahoma (S3), Oregon (S4?), Texas (S2), Utah (S4S5), Wyoming (S1)

Other Statuses

IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent Comments: Southwestern and Central Oregon, northern Nevada, northern Utah, western and southern Colorado south to northern Baja California, southeastern Arizona, and southern New Mexico; disjunct population in northern Texas (formerly regarded as separate species, P. COMANCHE) (Carleton 1989; Musser and Carleton, in Wilson and Reeder 1993).

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: Southwestern and Central Oregon, northern Nevada, northern Utah, western and southern Colorado south to northern Baja California, southeastern Arizona, and southern New Mexico; disjunct population in northern Texas (formerly regarded as separate species, P. COMANCHE) (Carleton 1989; Musser and Carleton, in Wilson and Reeder 1993).

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 AZ, CA, CO, ID, NM, NN, NV, OK, OR, TX, UT, WY

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)
ID Cassia (16031), Owyhee (16073)
TX Armstrong (48011), Briscoe (48045), Dickens (48125), Floyd (48153)*, Garza (48169), Lynn (48305), Randall (48381), Swisher (48437)
WY Sweetwater (56037)*
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
11 Upper Prairie Dog Town Fork Red (11120103)+, Tule (11120104)+, Lower Prairie Dog Town Fork Red (11120105)+, Upper Salt Fork Red (11120201)+, North Pease (11130103)+*
12 Double Moutain Fork Brazos (12050004)+, Salt Fork Brazos (12050007)+
14 Upper Green-Flaming Gorge Reservoir (14040106)+*
17 Raft (17040210)+, Middle Snake-Succor (17050103)+, Middle Owyhee (17050107)+, Jordan (17050108)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Reproduction Comments: Breeds primarily in spring and summer, throughout most of year in Arizona and in some areas of California and Nevada (see Kirkland and Layne 1989). Average number of litters per year is 3.4 in central California. In New Mexico and Colorado, gestation lasts 25-27 days (nonlactating) or about 40 days (lactating). Litter size averages about 3-4. Average life span is less than 1 year.
Ecology Comments: In California, home range averaged 2.9 ha for 8 males, 0.8 ha for 7 females; the relatively large homes ranges may have reflected the effects of drought and reduced food availability (Hall and Morrison 1997). In New Mexico, median home range size was 0.4-1.6 ha, varying with sex and the method used (Ribble and Stanley 1998).

In northern New Mexico, based on short-term data, mean home range size (minimum convex polygon) was 0.41 ha (trapping data) or 0.93 ha (radiotelemetry) (Ribble et al. 2002).

Non-Migrant: Y
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Palustrine Habitat(s): Riparian
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Bare rock/talus/scree, Desert, Forest - Conifer, Forest - Hardwood, Forest - Mixed, Shrubland/chaparral, Woodland - Conifer, Woodland - Hardwood, Woodland - Mixed
Special Habitat Factors: Fallen log/debris, Standing snag/hollow tree
Habitat Comments: Often among rocks or on rocky slopes (but rocky terrain not required) in a wide variety of habitats including: pinyon- juniper woodlands, chaparral and desert scrub areas, limestone cliffs, redwood forests, riparian woodlands. Nests among rocks; may also nest in trees. Individuals use multiple daytime sites (Hall and Morrison 1997).
Adult Food Habits: Frugivore, Granivore, Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Frugivore, Granivore, Invertivore
Food Comments: Feeds on seeds, nuts, berries, fungi, and insects. Often forages in trees.
Adult Phenology: Nocturnal
Immature Phenology: Nocturnal
Phenology Comments: Active throughout the year. Primarily nocturnal.
Length: 23 centimeters
Weight: 31 grams
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Small Murid Rodents

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.
Mapping Guidance: Separate sites separated by less than 1000 meters should be mapped as separate polygons.
Separation Barriers: Barriers include: wide highways with heavy traffic (subjective determination) and highways with continuous solid barriers that prevent rodent passage; major water bodies, arbitrarily set at those greater than 50 meters across in ice-free areas and those greater than 200 meters wide if frozen regularly.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 2 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: Home ranges may be quite small, but at least some species exhibit good dispersal ability that may take them several kilometers from their natal area (Maier 2002). Peromyscus that have been displaced up to 3 km may return home within a few days (see Maier 2002). Displaced Neotoma fuscipes dispersed up to at least 1.6 km from their release point in five nights (Smith 1965). A male Dicrostonyx richardsoni moved more than 3 kilometers per day several times (Engstrom, in Wilson and Ruff 1999). Some species can traverse significant distances of unsuitable habitat. For example, Peromyscus leucopus may move between wooded areas separated by a deforested agricultural gap of up to at least 2 km (Krohne and Hoch 1999). In New Brunswick, a tagged subadult male Peromyscus maniculatus was captured at locations 1.77 km apart after a period of 2 weeks in September, suggesting that dispersal may extend at least this far (Bowman et al. 1999). In Kansas, individual Peromyscus maniculatus were captured at trap sites up to 1.32 km apart (Rehmeier et al. 2004). Dispersal can play a key role in the population dynamics of murid rodents.

Patterns of genetic (DNA) variation indicate that gene flow can be low among subpopulations of Neotoma magister and that effective dispersal is limited among subpopulations separated by as little as 3 km (Castleberry et al. 2002).

Separation distance for suitable habitat is a compromise between the typical small home range sizes of these mammals and their sometimes considerable dispersal ability and the likely low probability that two occupied locations separated by less than several kilometers of suitable habitat would represent independent populations.

Roads, especially divided highways, are major barriers to dispersal in small mammals (Oxley et al. 1974, Wilkins 1982, Garland and Bradley 1984).

Date: 08Mar2005
Author: Hammerson, G., and S. Cannings
Notes: Group contains most members of the family Muridae: mice, voles, lemmings, woodrats, etc.
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: 18Mar2005
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
  • Allen, C. R., S. Demarais, and R. S. Lutz. 1994. Red imported fire ant impact on wildlife: an overview. The Texas Journal of Science 46(1):51-59.

  • Andersen, M.D. 2011. Maxent-based species distribution models. Prepared by Wyoming Natural Diversity Database for use in the pilot WISDOM application operational from inception to yet-to-be-determined date of update of tool.

  • Andersen, M.D. and B. Heidel. 2011. HUC-based species range maps. Prepared by Wyoming Natural Diversity Database for use in the pilot WISDOM application operational from inception to yet-to-be-determined date of update of tool.

  • 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.

  • Banks, E. M., R. J. Brooks, and J. Schnell. 1975. A radiotracking study of home range and activity of the brown lemming (Lemmus trimucronatus). Journal of Mammalogy 56:888-901.

  • Bowman, J. C., M. Edwards, L. S. Sheppard, and G. J. Forbes. 1999. Record distance for a non-homing movement by a deer mouse, Peromyscus maniculatus. Canadian Field-Naturalist 113:292-293.

  • Bradley, R. D., Schmidly, D. J., and C. W. Kilpatrick. 1996. The relationships of Peromyscus sagax to the P. boylii and P. truei species groups in Mexico based on morphometric, karyotypic, and allozymic data. Pp. 95-106 in Contributions in Mammalogy: A Memorial Volume Honoring Dr. J. Knox Jones, Jr. (H. H. Genoways and R. J. Baker, eds). Museum of Texas Tech University, Lubbock.

  • Brooks, R. J., and E. M. Banks. 1971. Radio-tracking study of lemming home range. Communications in Behavioral Biology 6:1-5.

  • Carleton, M. D. 1989. Systematic and evolution. Pp. 7-142 in Kirkland, G. L. and Layne, J. N., eds. Advances in the Study of Peromyscus (Rodentia). Lubbock, Texas Tech University Press.

  • Carraway, L.N. et al. 1993. Range extension and habitat of Peromyscus truei in eastern Oregon. Northwest Naturalist 74:81-84.

  • Castleberry, S., B., T. L. King, P. B. Wood, and W. M. Ford. 2002. Microsatellite DNA analysis of population structure in Allegheny woodrats (Neotoma magister). Journal of Mammalogy 83:1058-1070.

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

  • 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.

  • DEWALT, THERESA SPRADLING, EARL G. ZIMMERMAN, AND JOHN V. PLANZ. 1993. MITOCHONDRIAL-DNA PHYLOGENY OF SPECIES OF THE BOYLII AND TRUEI GROUPS OF THE GENUS PEROMYSCUS. J. MAMM. 74(2):352-362.

  • DeWalt, T. S., E. G. Zimmerman, and J. V. Planz. 1993. Mitochondrial-DNA phylogeny of species of the BOYLII and TRUEI groups of the genus PEROMYSCUS. J. Mamm. 74:352-362.

  • Douglass, R. J. 1977. Population dynamics, home ranges, and habitat associations of the yellow-cheeked vole, Microtus xanthognathus, in the Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 91:237-47.

  • Durish, N. D., K. E. Halcomb, C. W. Kilpatrick, and R. D. Bradley. 2004. Molecular systematics of the Peromyscus truei species group. Journal of Mammalogy 85:1160-1169.

  • Fitzgerald, J. P. et al. 1992. Mammals of Colorado. Review manuscript.

  • Garland, T., Jr. and W. G. Bradley. 1984. Effects of a highway on Mojave Desert rodent populations. American Midland Naturalist 111:47-56.

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

  • Hall, L. S., and M. L. Morrison. 1997. Den and relocation site characteristics and home ranges of PEROMYSCUS TRUEI in the White Mountains of California. Great Basin Naturalist 57:124-130.

  • Hoffmeister, D. F. 1986. Mammals of Arizona. University of Arizona Press and Arizona Game and Fish Department. 602 pp.

  • Hoffmeister, D.F. 1981. PEROMYSCUS TRUEI. Mammalian Species,161:1-5.

  • Hoffmeister, Donald F. 1981. Peromyscus truei. American Society of Mammalogists, Mammalian Species 161:1-5.

  • JANECEK, LAURA L. 1990. GENIC VARIATION IN THE PEROMYSCUS TRUEI GROUP (RODENTIA:CRICETIDAE). J. MAMM. 71(3):301-308.

  • JOHNSON, G. L. AND R. L. PACKARD. 1974. ELECTROPHORECTIC ANALYSIS OF PEROMYSCUS COMANCHE BLAIR, WITH COMMENTS ON ITS SYSTEMATIC STATUS. OCC. PAPERS MUSEUM TEXAS TECH. UNIV. NO. 24:1-16.

  • Janacek, L. L. 1990. Genic variation in the PEROMYSCUS TRUEI group (Rodentia: Cricetidae). J. Mamm. 71:301-308.

  • Jike, L., G. O. Batzli, L. L. Geta. 1988. Home ranges of prairie voles as determined by radiotracking and by powdertracking. Journal of Mammalogy 69:183-186.

  • Johnson, G.L. and R.L. Packard. 1974. Electrophoretic analysis of PEROMYSCUS COMANCHE Blair, with comments on its systematic status. Occas. Papers Mus., Texas Tech Univ., 24:1-16.

  • Jones, J. K., Jr. and C. Jones. 1992. Revised checklist of recent land mammals of Texas, with annotations. The Texas Journal of Science 44(1):53-74.

  • Jones, J. K., Jr., C. Jones, and D. J. Schmidly. 1988. Annotated checklist of recent land mammals of Texas. Occasional Papers The Museum Texas Tech University 119:1-26.

  • 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.

  • Jones, J. K., S. Demarais, and C. T. McAllister. 1995. Contribution to a bibliography of recent Texas mammals 1981-1990. Special Publications, The Museum Texas Tech University 38:1-64.

  • KASPER, STEPHEN. 1992. MAMMALS FROM THE LATE PLEISTOCENE CARROL CREEK LOCAL FAUNA, DONLEY COUNTY, TEXAS. SOUTHWEST. NAT. 37(1):54-64.

  • King, J. A. (ed.). 1968. Biology of PEROMYSCUS (Rodentia). Am. Soc. Mamm. Spec. Publ. No. 2. 593 pp.

  • Kirkland, G. L., Jr., and J. N. Layne. 1989. Advances in the study of PEROMYSCUS (Rodentia). Texas Tech Univ. Press, Lubbock.

  • Krohne, D. T., and G. A. Hoch. 1999. Demography of Peromyscus leucopus populations on habitat patches: the role of dispersal. Canadian Journal of Zoology 77:1247-1253.

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

  • MacMillen, R. E. 1964. Population ecology, water relations and social behavior of a southern California semidesert rodent fauna. University of California Publications in Zoology 71:1-59.

  • Maier, T. J. 2002. Long-distance movements by female white-footed mice, Peromyscus leucopus, in extensive mixed-wood forest. Canadian Field-Naturalist 116:108-111.

  • Mammalian Species, nos. 1-604. Published by the American Society of Mammalogists.

  • Modi, W. S. and M. R. Lee. 1984. Systematic implications of chromosomal banding analyses of populations of PEROMYSCUSTRUEI (Rodentia: Muridae). Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington, 97:716-723.

  • OWEN, JAMES G. 1990. AN ANALYSIS OF THE SPATIAL STRUCTURE OF MAMMALIAN DISTRIBUTION PATTERNS IN TEXAS. ECOLOGY 71(5):1823-1832.

  • OWEN, JAMES G. 1990. PATTERNS OF MAMMALIAN SPECIES RICHNESS IN RELATION TO TEMPERATURE, PRODUCTIVITY, AND VARIANCE IN ELEVATION. J. MAMM. 71(1):1-13.

  • Oxley, D. J., M. B. Fenton and G. R. Carmody. 1974. The effects of roads on populations of small mammals. Journal of Applied Ecology 11: 51-59.

  • Rehmeier, R. L., G. A. Kaufman, and D. W. Kaufman. 2004. Long-distance movements of the deer mouse in tallgrass prairie. Journal of Mammalogy 85:562-568.

  • Ribble, D. O., A. W. Wurtz, E. K. McConnell, J. J. Buegge, and K. Welch, Jr. 2002. A comparison of home ranges of two species of Peromyscus using trapping and radiotelemetry data. Journal of Mammalogy 83:260-266.

  • Ribble, D. O., and S. Stanley. 1998. Home ranges and social organization of syntopic PEROMYSCUS BOYLII and P. TRUEI. Journal of Mammalogy 79:932-941.

  • SCHEIBE, J.S. AND M.J. O'FARRELL. 1995. HABITAT DYNAMICS IN PEROMYSCUS TRUEI: ECLECTIC FEMALES, DENSITY DEPENDENCE, OR REPRODUCTIVE CONSTRAINTS? J. MAMMAL. 76(2):368-375.

  • Schmidly, D.J. 1973. The systematic status of PEROMYSCUS COMANCHE. Southwestern Nat., 18:269-278.

  • Smith, M. H. 1965. Dispersal capacity of the dusky-footed wood rat, Neotoma fuscipes. American Midland Naturalist 74:457-463.

  • Storer, T. I., F. C. Evans, and F. G. Palmer. 1944. Some rodent populations in the Sierra Nevada of California. Ecological Monographs 14:166-192.

  • Wilkins, K. T. 1982. Highways as barriers to rodent dispersal. Southwestern Naturalist 27: 459-460.

  • 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: http://vertebrates.si.edu/msw/mswcfapp/msw/index.cfm

  • Wilson, D. E., and S. Ruff. 1999. The Smithsonian book of North American mammals. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 750 pp.

  • Wyoming Game and Fish Department. 1996. Nongame Bird and Mammal Plan, a plan for inventories and management of nongame birds and mammals in Wyoming. Prepared by B. Oakleaf, A.O. Cerovski, and B. Luce, Nongame Program Biological Services Section, Wyoming Game and Fish Dept. 183 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 2018.
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 © 2018 NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Dr., 7th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22203, 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. 2018. 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.