Pocket Gophers

You will almost certainly never see one. Pocket gophers live underground and are solitary, so what you get is the evidence: fresh soil pushed up in mounds, plants wilting for no visible reason, and occasionally a whole row of them gone.

This page covers what the animal is and what the sourced options are. The trap question — where to set one, which types exist, and what the only two efficacy studies we could find actually measured — is on the traps page.

What It Is

A pocket gopher is a burrowing rodent named for its fur-lined external cheek pouches. We cannot give you a national species count: no extension or government source we could obtain states how many species occur in the United States, so rather than repeat a figure we cannot trace, here is what the state-level sources do say.

• University of California IPM states that five species of pocket gophers are found in California (as of the 06/2025 revision of UC ANR Publication 7433), with Thomomys bottae the most widespread of them.
• Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife names the northern pocket gopher, Thomomys talpoides, as occupying much of eastern Washington, and the Mazama or western pocket gopher, Thomomys mazama, as the only pocket gopher in most of western Washington.

Both figures are state-scoped and are written that way deliberately. If you need a national picture, your state wildlife agency is the place to get it.

Gopher Mound or Mole Hill

This is the identification that matters, because it decides everything you do next, and it is the thing most often got wrong. Two signals: the shape of one mound, and the pattern of several.

The shape of a single mound

• Gopher. University of California IPM describes mounds as crescent- or horse-shoe-shaped when viewed from above, with the hole off to one side and usually plugged. Utah State University Extension gives the same in different words: mounds are fan-shaped, and a soil plug seals the entrance. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife describes a fan-shaped or heart-shaped mound.
• Mole. University of California IPM describes mole mounds as more circular, and states that in profile they are volcano-shaped. Oregon State University Extension agrees that mole mounds are higher and generally rounder in shape than gopher mounds.

The plug position is the single most useful check. On a gopher mound the plug sits to one side of a fan or crescent; on a mole hill the opening is in the middle of a cone.

The pattern of several mounds

Oregon State University Extension gives a second signal that works from the kitchen window, before you go and crouch over anything: gopher mounds tend to be clumped in tight groups, while the mole’s tend to be spaced in a line as single mounds.

How big is a mound

Two sources, two ranges, both reported rather than averaged. Oregon State University Extension gives flattened or fan-shaped mounds 12 to 24 inches in diameter and 4 or more inches in height. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension gives a horseshoe shaped mound approximately 8 to 24 inches in diameter and 6 inches high.

The Burrow System

One gopher, one system. The figures below differ between sources and between species, and each is attributed rather than blended into a single false number.

• Depth. University of California IPM: feeding burrows 6 to 12 inches below ground, with the nest as deep as 6 feet. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: tunnels 4 to 12 inches below ground, nest as deep as 6 feet. Utah State University Extension and New Mexico State University: main tunnel 4 to 18 inches below the surface. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension: shallow runways 4 to 15 inches below the surface.
• Tunnel diameter. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife gives 1¾ to 3½ inches. New Mexico State University gives about 3 inches.
• Extent. University of California IPM gives a system covering 200 to 2,000 square feet. Utah State University Extension and New Mexico State University both give up to 200 yards of tunnels. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension gives a system extending as much as 800 feet and covering an acre of ground.

The practical consequence of the depth figures is simple: you cannot set anything until you have found the main tunnel, and the main tunnel is 4 to 18 inches down depending on whose figure applies where you live.

The Year in a Gopher

Two claims here that sound contradictory and are not. Both are true and both are sourced.

• They are active all year. University of California IPM states that gophers don’t hibernate and are active year-round. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife adds that they are active year-round and at all hours of the day.
• Surface activity peaks in spring and fall. Utah State University Extension states that pocket gophers are usually most active in the spring and fall. New Mexico State University ties that directly to control: trapping is most effective when gophers are pushing up new mounds, usually in spring and fall. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension states that control operations should be conducted during the spring and fall when pocket gophers are most active near the surface.

So there is no closed season on the animal, but there is a season on your success rate, and fresh mounds are the signal that it has opened.

What They Damage

• Irrigation and utilities. University of California IPM reports damage to flexible plastic water lines and irrigation systems. Utah State University Extension reports biting through electrical, internet, and other utility cables. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife reports chewing underground sprinkler lines.
• Plants and trees. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife reports eating garden crops or damaging orchard or ornamental trees, and gnawing on bark several feet up.
• Lawns and equipment. University of California IPM notes mounds interfering with mowing; Utah State University Extension reports damage to mowing equipment.
• Structures. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension reports that a tunnel system in a dam can cause it to erode and wash out, and that tunnels under pavement can make it sink.

One counterweight, because it is in the same extension literature and leaving it out would flatter the case: Texas A&M AgriLife Extension records that one gopher transports 2½ tons of soil to the ground surface in a year. The animal is a soil engineer that happens to be standing on your lawn.

Control: Trapping First

Trapping is the method the extension sources treat as the default for a yard or a garden, and it is the one with actual field evidence behind it. Two things decide whether it works, and neither is which trap you buy:

• Set in the main tunnel, not a lateral. University of California IPM states that lateral placement is not as successful as in the main burrow. New Mexico State University agrees: greater success will usually be achieved by trapping in the main runway.
• Find the main tunnel by probing. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension describes locating the main runway by probing the soil with a bluntly pointed probe, 6 to 8 inches from the mound on the horseshoe-depression side. University of California IPM describes what you are feeling for: a sudden, noticeable drop of about 2 inches.

The full method, the trap types extension sources name, and what the two efficacy studies found are on the traps page, linked below.

Control: Exclusion

Exclusion works at the scale of a single plant and struggles at the scale of a yard. Every source that recommends it states a limit in the same breath, and those limits are the useful part.

• Baskets around individual plants. University of California IPM describes wire baskets of light-gauge, three-quarter-inch, non-galvanized steel wire. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife describes bulb baskets from half-inch mesh hardware cloth.
• Buried barriers. Utah State University Extension describes mesh of a quarter to half an inch, buried about 18 inches. New Mexico State University describes fencing highly valued ornamental shrubs with quarter-inch or half-inch hardware cloth buried at least 18 inches.

And the stated limits, which matter more than the specifications. University of California IPM says underground fencing is not perfect, because persistent gophers can burrow below the wire. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife says a below-ground barrier will only slow the movements of gophers for a time, and that sooner or later the barrier will be breached. New Mexico State University calls yard-scale fencing of limited practicality. Utah State University Extension is the bluntest: excluding pocket gophers can be very costly and is usually impractical.

What Does Not Work

A long list, and it is worth reading before spending anything, because most of what is marketed for gophers is on it.

• Repellents. University of California IPM: no repellents have proven effective. New Mexico State University: there are no registered repellents.
• Vibrating stakes, ultrasonic devices and pinwheels. University of California IPM gives the reason as well as the verdict — these rodents don’t frighten easily. New Mexico State University: noise-making devices and plants reported to repel pocket gophers have not been proven effective.
• Chewing gum and laxatives in the burrow. University of California IPM: ineffective.
• Gasoline or propane in the burrow. New Mexico State University states this is not recommended. Utah State University Extension notes that because of their higher cost and inconsistent effectiveness, gas cartridges are not recommended.

One more, and it is a small thing that saves effort: University of California IPM reports no impact of human scent on trapping success. You do not need gloves for that reason.

Before You Set Anything

Check your state wildlife agency first. Pocket gopher law is state-by-state, we checked two states out of fifty, and in one place lethal control is prohibited outright. What follows is what the primary texts say, not legal advice.

Some pocket gophers are federally protected

A US Fish and Wildlife Service final rule published on 9 April 2014 at 79 FR 19760 determined threatened species status under the Endangered Species Act for four subspecies of the Mazama pocket gopher found in Thurston and Pierce Counties of Washington State: the Olympia, Roy Prairie, Tenino and Yelm pocket gophers. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife adds that people are not permitted to use lethal control in these areas.

If you are in those counties, the identification question on this page is not academic.

California

Fish and Game Code section 4150 provides that a nongame mammal may not be taken or possessed except as provided in the code. Section 4152 then provides that nongame mammals found to be injuring growing crops or other property may be taken at any time or in any manner, by the owner or tenant of the premises. University of California IPM’s own reading of the same position is that a trapping license is not required for gopher removal.

Section 3003.1 separately restricts body-gripping traps, but it does so for a stated purpose: it makes it unlawful to trap for the purposes of recreation or commerce in fur. Depredation control of an animal damaging your property under section 4152 is a different purpose. Whether a particular trap design falls inside that section’s definition is a legal question neither the code text nor the extension guidance answers, so we state what the code says and stop there.

Washington

Outside the protected populations, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife states that pocket gophers are unclassified and may be trapped or killed, that a special trapping permit is required for the use of all traps other than live traps, and that it is unlawful to release a pocket gopher anywhere within the state other than where it was legally trapped, without a permit. That last clause is the one that catches people who intend to be kind.

No other state was checked. Two out of fifty is not coverage, and nothing on this page should be read as describing the law where you live.

Questions

Sources

Every claim above traces to one of the following. Where sources give different figures for the same measurement, all are reported and attributed rather than averaged.

1. UC Statewide IPM Program, University of California (R.A. Baldwin). Pocket Gophers — Pest Notes, UC ANR Publication 7433. Updated 06/2025. https://ipm.ucanr.edu/home-and-landscape/pocket-gophers/
2. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Living with wildlife: Pocket gophers. Accessed August 21, 2026. https://wdfw.wa.gov/species-habitats/living/species-facts/pocket-gophers
3. Utah State University Extension. Pocket Gophers. July 2024. https://extension.usu.edu/crops/research/pocket-gophers
4. New Mexico State University Cooperative Extension Service. Controlling Pocket Gophers in New Mexico (Guide L-109). Reprinted March 2005. https://pubs.nmsu.edu/_l/L109/index.html
5. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension. Managing Pocket Gopher Damage (L-1904). June 2013. https://agrilifeextension.tamu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Managing-pocket-gopher-damagepublication.pdf
6. Oregon State University Extension Service (W.D. Edge and J.P. Loegering). Controlling pocket gopher damage to agricultural crops (EC 1117). Reprinted May 1999. https://smallfarms.oregonstate.edu/sites/agscid7/files/pocket-gophers-ec1117.pdf
7. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior. Threatened Species Status for the Olympia, Roy Prairie, Tenino, and Yelm Pocket Gophers — final rule, 79 FR 19760. April 9, 2014. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2014/04/09/2014-07414/endangered-and-threatened-wildlife-and-plants-threatened-species-status-for-the-olympia-pocket
8. California Legislative Information. California Fish and Game Code § 4150 — nongame mammals. Accessed August 21, 2026. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=FGC&sectionNum=4150
9. California Legislative Information. California Fish and Game Code § 4152 — take of nongame mammals injuring property. Accessed August 21, 2026. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=FGC&sectionNum=4152