Ondatra zibethicus - (Linnaeus, 1766)
Common Muskrat
Other English Common Names: Muskrat, common muskrat
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Ondatra zibethicus (Linnaeus, 1766) (TSN 180318)
French Common Names: rat musqué
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.103944
Element Code: AMAFF15010
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Mammals - Rodents
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Mammalia Rodentia Cricetidae Ondatra
Genus Size: A - Monotypic genus
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: Ondatra zibethicus
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 04Apr2016
Global Status Last Changed: 13Nov1996
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
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 Alabama (S5), Alaska (S5), Arizona (S4), Arkansas (S5), California (SNR), Colorado (S5), Connecticut (S5), Delaware (S5), District of Columbia (S4), Georgia (S5), Idaho (S4), Illinois (S5), Indiana (S4), Iowa (S5), Kansas (S5), Kentucky (S5), Louisiana (S4S5), Maine (S5), Maryland (S5), Massachusetts (S5), Michigan (S5), Minnesota (SNR), Mississippi (S5), Missouri (S4), Montana (S5), Navajo Nation (S4), Nebraska (S5), Nevada (S5), New Hampshire (S5), New Jersey (S5), New Mexico (S4), New York (S5), North Carolina (S5), North Dakota (SNR), Ohio (SNR), Oklahoma (S4), Oregon (S5), Pennsylvania (S4), Rhode Island (S5), South Carolina (SNR), South Dakota (S5), Tennessee (S5), Texas (S5), Utah (S4S5), 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 (S3S4), Northwest Territories (S5), Nova Scotia (S5), Nunavut (S5), Ontario (S5), Prince Edward Island (S5), Quebec (S5), Saskatchewan (S5), Yukon Territory (S4S5)

Other Statuses

IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent Comments: North America, north to the treeline, including Newfoundland; south to the Gulf Coast, Rio Grande, and lower Colorado River valleys; introduced and now widespread in Old World.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: North America, north to the treeline, including Newfoundland; south to the Gulf Coast, Rio Grande, and lower Colorado River valleys; introduced and now widespread in Old World.

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, AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DC, DE, GA, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NN, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI, WV, WY
Canada AB, BCnative and exotic, LB, MB, NB, NF, 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: NatureServe, 2005; Sechrest, 2002


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
TX El Paso (48141), Pecos (48371)*, Presidio (48377), Reeves (48389)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
13 El Paso-Las Cruces (13030102)+*, Rio Grande-Fort Quitman (13040100)+, Cibolo-Red Light (13040201)+, Alamito (13040202)+, Black Hills-Fresno (13040203)+, Toyah (13070003)+, Landreth-Monument Draws (13070007)+*
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Reproduction Comments: Gestation lasts 28-30 days. Average of 2-3 litters/year. Litter size is 1-12 (usually averages about 5-6). Weaned and fairly independent after about 1 month. Sexually mature in 4-6 months. In Saskatchewan, polygyny was common (Marinelli and Messier 1993). Typically high rate of mortality in young.
Ecology Comments: Generally solitary but several may use same general area; in winter several may congregate in single den. Territoriality common (Caire et al. 1989), mostly in breeding season.

Home range sizes relatively small; usually does not forage more than 11 m from home site (Baker 1983). In marginal areas, foraging excursions greater. Seasonal home range may range from less than 0.1 ha to several hectares (see Marinelli and Messier 1993). Home ranges generally less than 100 m in diameter (Takos 1944, Boutin and Birkenholz 1987). However, along linear waterways, home ranges average 411 meters long (Willner et al. 1980).

Populations fluctuate, density up to about 90/ha, usually much less (6/ha, 24/ha, and 36/ha in three studies cited by Marinelli and Messier 1993).

In Manitoba, spatial and temporal variation in vegetation response to flooding contributed to variation in the density dependence of both survival and recruitment; reductions in emergent vegetation caused by flooding resulted in decreased winter survival (Clark and Kroeker 1993).

Habitat Type: Freshwater
Non-Migrant: Y
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Estuarine Habitat(s): Herbaceous wetland
Riverine Habitat(s): BIG RIVER, CREEK, Low gradient, MEDIUM RIVER
Lacustrine Habitat(s): Shallow water
Palustrine Habitat(s): FORESTED WETLAND, HERBACEOUS WETLAND, Riparian
Special Habitat Factors: Burrowing in or using soil
Habitat Comments: Prefers fresh or brackish marshes, lakes, ponds, swamps, and other bodies of slow-moving water. Most abundant in areas with cattail. Rare or absent in large artificial impoundments where fluctuating water levels eliminate littoral zone plants (food supply) (Caire et al. 1989). Dens in bank burrow or conical house of vegetation in shallow vegetated water. Sometimes in uplands-Clough 1987.

See Clark (1994) for information on habitat selection in experimental marshes undergoing succession in Manitoba.

Adult Food Habits: Herbivore, Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Herbivore, Invertivore
Food Comments: Diet mainly consists of aquatic plants, particularly cattails (TYPHUS spp.), cordgrass, and bulrush. Also eats crustaceans and mollusks; may eat large numbers mussels in some areas (Hanson et al. 1989). Builds rooted feeding platforms. Eats mainly upland vegetation in some areas.
Adult Phenology: Circadian, Crepuscular, Nocturnal
Immature Phenology: Circadian, Crepuscular, Nocturnal
Phenology Comments: Mainly nocturnal but frequently seen in daylight. Active year-round. Two peaks of activity: between 1600 and 1700 h and 2200-2300 hours (Stewart and Boder 1977).
Length: 62 centimeters
Weight: 1816 grams
Economic Attributes
Help
Economic Comments: Large numbers harvested for pelt.
Management Summary
Help
Species Impacts: Predation by muskrat appears to be inhibiting the recovery of endangered mussel species, and probably is placing some demes of endangered pigtoe mussel species in further jeopardy of extirpation from sites in upper Tennessee River drainage (Neves and Odom 1989).
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
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 Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 2 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: Home ranges are small, but movement capability and dispersal potential are large. For example, regardless of obstacles, 31% of muskrats displaced 3 km returned to the home range, and 15% returned from 4 km (Erickson 1963). Dispersal rate in Sweden averaged 3.2 km per year (Danell 1978, cited by Willner et al. 1980).
Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): .08 km
Inferred Minimum Extent Justification: Based on a home range of 0.5 hectares (Takos 1944). Along linear waterways, an inferred extent of 0.2 kilometers may be used (Willner et al. 1980).
Date: 02Apr2004
Author: Hammerson, G., and S. Cannings
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: 13Dec1994
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
  • Alexander, M.M. 1964. The muskrat in New York State. State University College of Forestry, Syracuse, N.Y.

  • 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.

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

  • 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.

  • BURT, W.H., AND R.P. GROSSENHEIDER. 1976. A FIELD GUIDE TO THE MAMMALS, THIRD EDITION. HOUGHTON MIFFLIN, MASSACHUSETTS. 289 P.

  • 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.

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

  • Boutin, S. and D. E. Birkenholz. 1987. Muskrat and Round-tailed Muskrat. Pages 314-324 In M. Novak, J. A. Baker, M. E. Obbard and B. Malloch (editors). Wild furbearer management and conservation in North America. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Toronto, Ont.

  • Boutin, S. and D.E. Birkenholz. 1987. Muskrat and Round-tailed Muskrat. Pages 314-325 in Novak, M. et al. (eds.) Wild Furbearer Management and Conservation in North America. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 1150 pp.

  • Brooks, R.P. and W.E. Dodge. 1986. Estimation of habitat quality and summer population density for Muskrats on a watershed basis. Journal of Wildlife Management 50(2): 269-273.

  • Caire, W., J. D. Tyler, B. P. Glass, and M. A. Mares. 1989. Mammals of Oklahoma. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Oklahoma. 567 pp.

  • Canadian Wildlife Service. 1978. Hinterland Who's who: Muskrat. Environment Canada. Canada. 4p.

  • Cannings, S. 2001. EO Specifications for Muskrat (Ondatra Zibethicus). NatureServe, Unpublished. 1 pp.

  • Chapman, J. A., and G. A. Feldhamer, editors. 1982. Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and economics. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.

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

  • Clark, W. R. 1994. Habitat selection by muskrats in experimental marshes undergoing succession. Can. J. Zool. 72:675-680.

  • Clark, W. R., and D. W. Kroeker. 1993. Population dynamics of muskrats in experimental marshes at Delta, Manitoba. Can. J. Zool. 71:1620-1628.

  • Clough, G. C. 1987. Ecology of island muskrats, ONDATRA ZIBETHICUS, adapted to upland habitat. Can. Field-Nat. 101:63-69.

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

  • Connor, P.F. 1971. The mammals of Long Island, New York. NYS Museum and Science Service Bull. 416. 78 pp.

  • Cooley, D., C.D. Eckert, and R.R. Gordon. 2012. Herschel Island?Qikiqtaruk Inventory, Monitoring, and Research Program: Key Findings and Recommendations. Unpublished report. Yukon Parks. Whitehorse, Yukon.

  • 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.

  • Corporate Services, Northwest Territories Department of Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development. 1999. Game Licensing System: Individual Trapping Summary.

  • 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.

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

  • ESHER, ROBERT I. AND DWIGHT K. BRADSHAW. 1988. DIVERSITY AND ABUNDANCE AF VERTEBRATES OF DELISLE FOREST AND ADJACENT MARSH. MS. STATE UNIV. RES. CENTER. 51 pp.

  • ESHER, ROBERT J. AND DWITHT K. BRADSHAW, 1988. AN ECOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE SSC AREA POTENTIALLY IMPACTED BY AN ADVANCED SOLID ROCKET MOTOR MANUFACTORY AND TEST FACILITY. MS. STATE RES. CENTER. 20 MAY. 45 PP.

  • ESHER,R.J., ET. AL. 1986-1987. MAMMALIAN STUDIES: PHASE II, GULF ISLANDS NATIONAL SEASHORE. CONTRACT NO. CX5320-5-1546. MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CENTER, NSTL STATION, MISSISSIPPI, III P.

  • Erickson, H. R. 1963. Reproduction, growth, and movement of muskrats inhabiting small water areas in New York state. New York Fish and Game Journal 10:90-117.

  • Errington, P.L. 1961. Muskrats and marsh management. Stackpole Co., Harrisburg, PA. 183 pp.

  • Errington, P.L. 1963. Muskrat populations. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames. 665 pp.

  • FREEMAN, R.M. 1954. MUSKRATS IN MISSISSIPPI. MISSISSIPPI GAME AND FISH COMMISSION, 48 P.

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

  • Gibson, G.G. and D.A. McKiel. 1972. Dracunculus insignis (Leidy, 1858) and larval Eustrongylides sp. in a muskrat from Ontario, Canada. Can. J. Zool. 50: 897-901.

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

  • Goodpaster, W.W. and Hoffmeister, D.F. 1952. Notes on the mammals of western Tennessee. Journal of Mammalogy 33(3):

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

  • Government of the Northwest Territories (NWT). 2000. NWT Species Monitoring - Infobase. Available online: http://www.nwtwildlife.rwed.gov.nt.ca/monitor (June 2001). Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development, GNWT, Yellowknife, NT.

  • HALL, E.R. 1981. THE MAMMALS OF NORTH AMERICA, SECOND EDITION, 2 VOLUMES. JOHN WILEY & SONS, NEW YORK. (1:600 P., 2:581 P.).

  • HAMILTON, W.J. JR., AND J.O. WHITAKER, JR. 1979. MAMMALS OF THE EASTERN UNITED STATES, SECOND EDITION. CORNELL UNIVERSITY PRESS, ITHACA, NEW YORK. 346 P.

  • HOWELL, A.H. 1909. NOTES ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF CERTAIN MAMMALS IN THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES PROC. BIOL. SOC. WASH. 22:55-68.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Hanson, J. M., W. C. Mackay, and E. E. Prepas. 1989. Effect of size-selective predation by muskrats (ONDATRA ZIBETHICUS) on a population of unionid clams (ANODONTA GRANDIS SIMPSONIANA). J. Anim. Ecol. 58:15-28.

  • 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

  • Hoffman, B.T. and M.M. Alexander. 1984. Seasonal patterns of primeness, pelt condition, pelt value and sex-age structure in Long Island muskrats. Trans. Northeast Sect. Wildlife Society 41:30-43.

  • Hollister, N. 1911. A systematic synopsis of the muskrats. North American Fauna 32:1-47.

  • Holmes, Janelle. 1970. A 1970 definition of Ondatra zibethicus ripensis in the vicinity of Clint, Texas. M. A. Thesis. Sul Ross State University, Alpine, Texas. 37 pp.

  • Holmes, Kenneth E. 1970. The ecological status, present and future, of Ondatra zibethicus in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of El Paso County, Texas. M. A. Thesis. Sul Ross State University, Alpine, Texas. 74 pp.

  • Hutchinson, B.C. 1985. 1985 Status Report on the Muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) in Canada. Prepared for the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and the Canadian Wildlife Service.

  • JENKINS, J. H. 1953. GAME RESOURCES OF GEORGIA. GA GAME AND FISH COMMISSION. ATLANTA. 114 PP.

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

  • Johnson, C.E. 1925. The muskrat in New York: Its natural history and economics. Roosevelt Wildlife Bull., 3(2):205- 320.

  • 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., 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.

  • KENNEDY, M.L. 1968. A SURVEY OF THE MAMMALS OF DE SOTO COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI. M.S. THESIS, MEMPHIS STATE UNIVERSITY.

  • KENNEDY, M.L., ET. AL. 1974. A REVIEW OF MISSISSIPPI MAMMALS. STUDIES IN NATURAL SCIENCES. 2(1):1-36.

  • LOWERY, G.H., JR. 1974. THE MAMMALS OF LOUISIANA AND ITS ADJACENT WATERS. LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 565 P.

  • Le Boulenge, Eric, P. Legendre, C. De Le Court, P. Le Boulenge-Nguyen, and M. Languy. 1996. Microgeographic morphological differentiation in muskrats. Journal of Mammalogy 77(3):684-701.

  • Lever, C. 1985. Naturalized mammals of the world. Longman Group Limited, England.

  • 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.

  • Lowery, George H. 1974. The mammals of Louisiana and its adjacent waters. Kingsport Press, Inc. Kingsport, Tennessee. 565 pp.

  • MISSISSIPPI MUSEUM OF NATURAL SCIENCE. 1989. COUNTY INFORMATION FOR MAMMALS OF MISSISSIPPI.

  • MITCHELL, W.A. AND C.O. MARTIN. 1985. SOUTHWEST MISSISSIPPI TRIVUTARIES STUDY AREA ENVIROMENTAL INVENTORY - WILDLIFE RESOURES. MISCELLANEOUS PAPER EL-85-3, U.S. ARMY ENGINEER WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION, VICKSBURG, MISSISSIPPI. 90P.

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

  • Marinelli, L., and F. Messier. 1993. Space use and the social system of muskrats. Can. J. Zool. 71:869-875.

  • 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.

  • Naughton, D. 2012. The natural history of Canadian mammals. University of Toronto Press, Toronto: 784 pp.

  • Neves, R. J., and M. C. Odom. 1989. Muskrat predation on endangered freshwater mussels in Virginia. J. Wild. Manage. 53:934-941.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • PERRY, H. R. JR. 1982. MUSKRATS. PP 283-325 IN WILD MAMMALS OF NORTH AMERICA. OP CIT.

  • Parker, G.R. and J.W. Maxwell. 1984. An evaluation of spring and autumn trapping seasons for Muskrats, Ondatra zibethicus, in eastern Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 98(3): 292-304.

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

  • Perry, H. R., Jr. 1982. Muskrats (ONDATRA ZIBETHICUS and NEOFIBER ALLENI). Pages 282-325 in J. A. Chapman and G. A. Feldhamer, editors. Wild mammals of North America. Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore.

  • Proulx, G. 1984. Estimating Muskrat Population Trends by House Counts. Journal of Wildlife Management 48(3): 917-922.

  • Proulx, G. and B.M.L. Buckland. 1985. Precocial Breeding in a Southern Ontario Muskrat, Ondatra zibethicus, Population. Canadian Field-Naturalist 99(3): 377-378.

  • Rappole, J. H. and A. R. Tipton. 1987. An assessment of potentially endangered mammals of Texas. Cooperative Agreement #14-16-0002-86-927. Final Report submitted to U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Endangered Species, Albuquerque, New Mexico. 1 November 1987.

  • Runge, W. and D. Henry. 1988. Wild furbearers of Saskatchewan. Saskatchewan Department of Parks, Recreation and Culture, Booklet.

  • Runge, W. and J. Mulhern. 1985. The status of wild furbearers in Saskatchewan. Saskatchewan Parks and Renewable Resources, Wildlife Branch. February. Mimeo. 43pp.

  • Sahtu Renewable Resources Board @ Ben Olsen, Biologist. 2000. Letter to Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development - dated 30 May 2000. Sahtu Renewable Resources Board. IN Government of the Northwest Territories. NWT Species Monitoring - Infobase. Available online: http://www.nwtwildlife.rwed.gov.nt.ca/monitor (June 2001). Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development, GNWT, Yellowknife, NT.

  • Schwartz, C. W., and E. R. Schwartz. 1981. The wild mammals of Missouri. University of Missouri Press, Columbia. 356 pp.

  • Sealander, J.A. and G.A. Heidt. 1990. Arkansas Mammals: Their Natural History, Classification and Distribution. University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville. 308 pp.

  • See SERO listing

  • Slough, B. G., and T. S. Jung. 2007. Diversity and distribution of the terrestrial mammals of the Yukon Territory: a review. The Canadian Field-Naturalist, 121(2): 119-127.

  • Slough, B.G. 1999. Status recommendation for Yukon mammals and amphibians. IN Hoefs, M. (ed.) Status assessment and proposed "at risk" designations of Yukon's vertebrate species - a technical analysis. Yukon Fish and Wildlife Branch unpubl. report.

  • Stewart, R.W. and J.R. Boder. 1977. Summer activity of muskrats in relation to weather. J. Wildl. Mgmt. 41:487-499.

  • Swepston, Danny A. 1981. Final Report. Job No. 11: Pecos River muskrat survey. Grant No. W-103-R-11 Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration. Submitted to Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin, TX. 16 November 1981.

  • THOMPSON, B., D. MILLER, T. DOUMITT, AND T. JACOBSON. 1992. ECOLOGICALLY-BASED MANAGEMENT EVALUATION FOR SUSTAINABLE HARVEST AND USE OF NEW MEXICO FURBEARER RESOURCES. NEW MEXICO FEDERAL AID PROJECT W-129-R, JOB 1. SUBMITTED BY WILDLIFE DIVISION, NEW MEXICO DEPARTMENT OF GAME AND FISH, SANTA FE, TO U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, LAS CRUCES.

  • Takos, M. J. 1944. Summer movements of banded muskrats. Journal of Wildlife Management 8:307-311.

  • Timm, R.M. (ed). 1983. Prevention and control of wildlife damage. Great Plains Agricultural Council, Wildlife Resources Committee and Nebraska Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska.

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

  • WARD, R.P. 1965. THE MAMMALS OF MISSISSIPPI. J. MISS. ACAD. SCI. 11:309-330.

  • WILLNER, G.R., ET. AL. 1980. MAMMALIAN SPECIES NO. 141, ONDATRA ZIBETHICUS. THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MAMMALOGISTS.

  • 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

  • Willner, G. R., G. A. Feldhammer, E. E. Zocker, and J. A. Chapman. 1980. ONDATRA ZIBETHICUS. American Society of Mammalogists, Mammalian Species No. 141. 8 pp.

  • 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, Maryland. Two volumes. 2,142 pp. [Available online at: http://www.bucknell.edu/msw3/ ]

  • 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, D.C. 750 pp.

  • Wolfe, J.L. 1971. Mississippi land mammals. Mississippi Museum of Natural Science, Jackson, Mississippi 44 pp.

  • YEAGER, L.E. 1941. TRAPPERS AND FUR ANIMALS OF THE ORIGINAL DELTA REGION OF MISSISSIPPI. JOUR. MAMM. 22:364-378.

  • 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.