Idaho Pocket Gopher - Thomomys idahoensis
General Description
The Idaho Pocket Gopher in Montana measures approximately 7 1/2 inches from tip of nose to end of tail. It weighs close to 3 1/2 ounces. Smaller in dimensions and lighter in color than the Northern Pocket Gopher, it shares most of the same characteristics: small ears and small black eyes, short fur, a short, nearly hairless tail (just under 1 3/4 inches in length for the Idaho Pocket Gopher), well-developed jaw, neck, forearm, and shoulder muscles, long curved claws on its forepaws, exposed yellowish incisors, and the external, furlined cheek pouches, with openings on each side of the mouth. It does not have the black patches around the almost hidden ears. Its fur will be yellowish brown on top, sprinkled with dark brown- and grayish brown-tipped hairs (Foresman 2001). Underneath, it will be yellowish or yellowish brown instead of dark gray, with whitish feet. The fur can be smoothed forward or backward and dark gray fur surrounds its nose (Zeveloff 1988). The Idaho Pocket Gopher has 20 teeth.
General Distribution
Summary of Observations Submitted for Montana
Number of Observations: 14
(Click on the following maps and charts to see full sized version)
Map Help and Descriptions
Relative Density
Recency
(Records associated with a range of dates are excluded from time charts)
Migration
Non-migratory.
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 (high, medium, or low) 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 2001, 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 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 associated as using 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 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.
High, medium, and low habitat quality was assigned based on the degree to which the structural characteristics of an ecological system matched the preferred structural habitat characteristics for each species in the 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 assignments of habitat quality.
If you have any questions or comments on species associations with ecological systems, please contact Bryce Maxell at
bmaxell@mt.gov or (406) 444-3655.
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:
http://mtnhp.org/requests/default.asp) 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. 2001. The wild mammals of Montana. Special Publication No. 12. Lawrence, KS: The American Society of Mammalogists. 278 p.
- 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 Systems
Forest and Woodland Systems
Grassland Systems
Open Water / Wetland and Riparian Systems
Shrubland, Steppe and Savanna Systems
Sparse and Barren Systems
Food Habits
Not much information.
Ecology
Apparently scant information has been produced during T. idahoensis' 14 year history as a species. Probably similar to T. talpoides in many aspects. May be a paler color.
References
- Additional ReferencesLegend:
View WorldCat Record
View Online Publication
Do you know of a citation we're missing?
Clark, T. W. and M. R. Stromberg. 1987. Mammals in Wyoming. Univ. Kansas Mus. Nat. Hist. Publ. Education Series No. 10. xii + 314 pp.
Foresman, K. R. 2001. The Wild Mammals of Montana. American Society of Mammologists, Special Publication No. 12: Lawrence, KS, 278 pp.
Hoffmann, R.S., P.L. Wright, and F.E. Newby. 1969. Distribution of some mammals in Montana. I. Mammals other than bats. J. Mammal. 50(3): 579-604.
Reid, F. 2006. Peterson Field Guide to Mammals of North America, 4th Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company: Boston and New York, 608 pp.
- Web Search Engines for Articles on "Idaho Pocket Gopher"
- Additional Sources of Information Related to "Mammals"