View in other NatureServe Network Field Guides
NatureServe
Montana
Utah
Wyoming
Idaho
Wisconsin
British Columbia
South Carolina
Yukon
California
New York
Mountain Goat - Oreamnos americanus
Native/Non-native Species(depends on location or taxa) Global Rank :
G5
State Rank :
S4
(see State Rank Reason below)
Agency Status USFWS :
USFS :
BLM :
External Links
Listen to an Audio Sample
It seems your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio. Here is a to the audio instead
Copyright Jeff Rice and the Western Soundscape Archive at the University of Utah. Audio file courtesy of the Acoustic Atlas at Montana State University (www.acousticatlas.org)
State Rank Reason (see State Rank above)
Species is apparently secure and not at risk of extirpation or facing significant threats in all or most of its range.
Details on Status Ranking and Review
Mountain Goat (Oreamnos americanus ) Conservation Status Review
Population Size
Score D - 1,000-2,500 individuals
Comment 2016 estimate from Smith and DeCesare (2017) is 3,685 individuals within the state, with 2,526 of these in introduced (non-native) populations and 1,159 in populations within historic range (native). Only the native populaiton was considered when ranki
Range Extent
Score F - 20,000-200,000 km squared (about 8,000-80,000 square miles)
Comment 145,195 square Kilometers from Natural Heritage Program range maps
Long-term Trend
Score E - Relatively Stable (±25% change)
Comment Native populations have declined 3-4 fold since the 1940s and 50s. The majority of introduced populations are stable or increasing. In aggregate the number of goats within the state has remained stable.
Short-term Trend
Score E - Stable. Population, range, area occupied, and/or number or condition of occurrences unchanged or remaining within ±10% fluctuation
Comment Across both native and introduced populations, population is stable within 10% over the last decade (Smith, B. L., and N. J. DeCesare. 2017. Status of Montana’s mountain goats: A synthesis of management data (1960–2015) and field biologists’ perspectives)
Threats
Score G - Slightly threatened. Threats, while recognizable, are of low severity, or affecting only a small portion of the population or area.
Comment Genetic isolation, disturbance, climate change
Severity Low - Low but nontrivial reduction of species population or reversible degradation or reduction of habitat in area affected, with recovery expected in 10-50 years.
Comment Degradation of alpine habitats due t climate change likely irreversible. Impacts from disturbance are reversible within a short timeframe
Scope Low - 5-20% of total population or area affected
Comment Specific threats unlikely to impact more than 20% of the population in the next few decades
Immediacy High - Threat is operational (happening now) or imminent (within a year).
Comment Ongoing
Intrinsic Vulnerability
Score C - Not Intrinsically Vulnerable. Species matures quickly, reproduces frequently, and/or has high fecundity such that populations recover quickly (< 5 years or 2 generations) from decreases in abundance; or species has high dispersal capability such that extirpated populations soon become reestablished through natural recolonization (unaided by humans).
Comment Low fecundity (1 young per year), and isolated populations, but as a managed species, translocation and management can mitigate these vulnerabilities.
Environmental Specificity
Score B - Narrow. Specialist. Specific habitat(s) or other abiotic and/or biotic factors (see above) are used or required by the Element, but these key requirements are common and within the generalized range of the species within the area of interest.
Comment Alpine specialist
Raw Conservation Status Score
Score
3.5 + -0.25 (population size) + 0 (geographic distribution) + 0 (short-term trend) + 0.75 (threats) = 4
General Description
Coat white; horns and hooves black; tail may have a few brown or black hairs. Long hair of winter coat forms a beard under the chin and pantaloons around the front legs. Body compact and chunky, legs short. Horns smooth, sharp, and curved slightly backward, 8 to 10 inches long. Horns of nannies curve less and are thinner, but sometimes longer, than those of billies. Hooves have hard outer edges with soft centers that "stick" to rocks. Old billies may weigh 300 lbs. or more, nannies about 150 lbs. Nannies, kids and immature billies form small herds; mature billies often alone except during rut; females dominant over males.
Species Range
Range Comments
Map images and GIS layers of general and winter range for populations of this and other hunted wildlife species can be found on Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks GIS Layers web page
Observations in Montana Natural Heritage Program Database
Number of Observations: 5802
(Click on the following maps and charts to see full sized version)
Map Help and Descriptions
Relative Density
Recency
(Observations spanning multiple months or years are excluded from time charts)
Migration
Occassionally discrete winter and summer ranges 5 to 10 miles apart in Bitterroots (Smith 1976). Males show little home range fidelity (Rideout 1977).
Habitat
Precipitous terrain; steep, south-facing slopes in winter, sometimes enter subalpine forest. Snow cover an important influence on winter distribution. Winter habitat: cliffy terrain, south-facing canyon walls, windblown ridgetops. Spring: south- and west-facing cliffs. Summer: meadows, cliffs, ravines, and forests (Chadwick 1973, Burleigh 1978, Joslin 1985).
Ecological Systems Associated with this Species
Details on Creation and Suggested Uses and Limitations
How Associations Were Made
We associated the use and habitat quality (common or occasional) of each of the 82 ecological systems mapped in Montana for
vertebrate animal species that regularly breed, overwinter, or migrate through the state by:
Using personal observations and reviewing literature that summarize the breeding, overwintering, or migratory habitat requirements of each species (Dobkin 1992, Hart et al. 1998, Hutto and Young 1999, Maxell 2000, Foresman 2012, Adams 2003, and Werner et al. 2004);
Evaluating structural characteristics and distribution of each ecological system relative to the species' range and habitat requirements;
Examining the observation records for each species in the state-wide point observation database associated with each ecological system;
Calculating the percentage of observations associated with each ecological system relative to the percent of Montana covered by each ecological system to get a measure of "observations versus availability of habitat".
Species that breed in Montana were only evaluated for breeding habitat use, species that only overwinter in Montana were only evaluated for overwintering habitat use, and species that only migrate through Montana were only evaluated for migratory habitat use.
In general, species were listed as associated with an ecological system if structural characteristics of used habitat documented in the literature were present in the ecological system or large numbers of point observations were associated with the ecological system.
However, species were not listed as associated with an ecological system if there was no support in the literature for use of structural characteristics in an ecological system,
even if point observations were associated with that system.
Common versus occasional association with an ecological system was assigned based on the degree to which the structural characteristics of an ecological system matched the preferred structural habitat characteristics for each species as represented in scientific literature.
The percentage of observations associated with each ecological system relative to the percent of Montana covered by each ecological system was also used to guide assignment of common versus occasional association.
If you have any questions or comments on species associations with ecological systems, please contact the Montana Natural Heritage Program's Senior Zoologist.
Suggested Uses and Limitations
Species associations with ecological systems should be used to generate potential lists of species that may occupy broader landscapes for the purposes of landscape-level planning.
These potential lists of species should not be used in place of documented occurrences of species (this information can be requested at:
mtnhp.org/requests ) or systematic surveys for species and evaluations of habitat at a local site level by trained biologists.
Users of this information should be aware that the land cover data used to generate species associations is based on imagery from the late 1990s and early 2000s and was only intended to be used at broader landscape scales.
Land cover mapping accuracy is particularly problematic when the systems occur as small patches or where the land cover types have been altered over the past decade.
Thus, particular caution should be used when using the associations in assessments of smaller areas (e.g., evaluations of public land survey sections).
Finally, although a species may be associated with a particular ecological system within its known geographic range, portions of that ecological system may occur outside of the species' known geographic range.
Literature Cited
Adams, R.A. 2003. Bats of the Rocky Mountain West; natural history, ecology, and conservation. Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado. 289 p.
Dobkin, D. S. 1992. Neotropical migrant land birds in the Northern Rockies and Great Plains. USDA Forest Service, Northern Region. Publication No. R1-93-34. Missoula, MT.
Foresman, K.R. 2012. Mammals of Montana. Second edition. Mountain Press Publishing, Missoula, Montana. 429 pp.
Hart, M.M., W.A. Williams, P.C. Thornton, K.P. McLaughlin, C.M. Tobalske, B.A. Maxell, D.P. Hendricks, C.R. Peterson, and R.L. Redmond. 1998. Montana atlas of terrestrial vertebrates. Montana Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, University of Montana, Missoula, MT. 1302 p.
Hutto, R.L. and J.S. Young. 1999. Habitat relationships of landbirds in the Northern Region, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station RMRS-GTR-32. 72 p.
Maxell, B.A. 2000. Management of Montana's amphibians: a review of factors that may present a risk to population viability and accounts on the identification, distribution, taxonomy, habitat use, natural history, and the status and conservation of individual species. Report to U.S. Forest Service Region 1. Missoula, MT: Wildlife Biology Program, University of Montana. 161 p.
Werner, J.K., B.A. Maxell, P. Hendricks, and D. Flath. 2004. Amphibians and reptiles of Montana. Missoula, MT: Mountain Press Publishing Company. 262 p.
Commonly Associated with these Ecological SystemsAlpine Systems
Forest and Woodland Systems
Grassland Systems
Shrubland, Steppe and Savanna Systems
Sparse and Barren Systems
Wetland and Riparian Systems
Occasionally Associated with these Ecological SystemsGrassland Systems
Recently Disturbed or Modified
Wetland and Riparian Systems
Food Habits
Grasses, sedges, lichens, forbs and shrubs. Dominant items vary dependent on range and season: grasses, sedges, shrubs and forbs. Coniferous trees, mosses and lichens also used (Saunders 1955, Chadwick 1973, Smith 1976, Burleigh 1978). May congregate at mineral licks (Joslin 1985, Singer 1978).
Ecology
Vehicle access linked to population declines (Joslin 1985). Low productivity and sociobiological characteristics combine to make sensitive to overharvest (Smith 1976, Burleigh 1978). May leave traditional areas in response to disturbances such as logging (Chadwick 1973, Joslin 1985).
Reproductive Characteristics
Breed in November and December; usually one kid, but sometimes two on good range. Billies fight head to tail, sometimes inflicting serious wounds to hindquarters and flanks. Nannies usually breed at 2 1/2 years of age. Courtship begins late October. Give birth late May to early June. Gestation 182 days. Neo-nates highly precocious (Smith 1976). Hunting tends to be additive mortality. Low-to-no compensatory response.
References
Literature Cited AboveLegend:
Additional ReferencesLegend: Do you know of a citation we're missing? Effects of recreation on Rocky Mountain wildlife: a review for Montana . [Montana]: Montana Chapter of the Wildlife Society.
Web Search Engines for Articles on "Mountain Goat"
Additional Sources of Information Related to "Mammals"
