PRIORITY SPECIES POOL -- AREA 15
From among the breeding avifauna, a
pool of species may be derived that represents priorities for conservation action within
the physiographic area. Note that a species may be considered a priority for several
different reasons, including global threats to the species, high concern for regional or
local populations, or responsibility for conserving large or important populations of the
species. The different reasons for priority status are represented by levels or tiers. Our
primary means of prioritizing species is through the PIF prioritization scores generated
by Colorado Bird Observatory (Hunter et al. 1993, Carter et al. 2000). This system ranks
species according to seven measures of conservation vulnerability. These include four
global measures (i.e., they do not change from area to area), as well as threats to
breeding populations (TB), area importance (AI), and population trend (PT), which are
specific to each physiographic area. A total rank score is then derived, which is a
measure of overall conservation priority.
Explanations of the tiers, or entry levels into the
Priority Species Pool are as follows:
- High overall (global) priority
-- species
scoring = 22 in the PIF prioritization system. Indicates high vulnerability of populations
throughout the species range, irrespective of specific status in this physiographic area.
Species without manageable populations in the area (peripheral) are omitted.
High physiographic area priority --
species scoring 19-21 in the PIF system, with either (IIa) AI + PT = 8 or (IIb) a high
percentage of the global population breeding in the physiographic area. Tier IIa indicates
species that are of moderately high global vulnerability, and with relatively high
abundance and/or declining or uncertain population trend in the physiographic area. Tier
IIb signifies that the area shares in responsibility for long-term conservation of those
species, even if they are not currently threatened. Percent of population is calculated
from percent of range area, weighted by BBS relative abundance (see Rosenberg and Wells
1999). A disproportionately high percentage of global population is determined by
considering the size of each physiographic area relative to the total land area of North
America, south of the open boreal forest.
Additional Watch List -- species on
PIF’s national Watch List that did not already meet criteria I or II. Watch List
species score = 20 (global scores only), or 18-19 with PT = 5. These species are
considered to be of high conservation concern throughout their range, even in areas where
local populations may be stable or not severely threatened.
Additional listed -- species on
federal, provincial, or state endangered, threatened, or special concern lists that did
not meet any of above criteria. These are often rare or peripheral populations.
Local concern -- species of justifiable
local concern or interest. May represent a geographically variable population or be
representative of a specific habitat of conservation concern.
Species that are federally or state listed are noted on
the Priority Species Pool by country and/or state using the following codes: E =
Endangered, T = Threatened, SC = Special Concern, V = Vulnerable.
Note: the Priority
Species Pool and Priority Habitat-suites are excerpted from the associated Physiographic Area Plan.
These tables are also available as a downloadable PDF file.
Priority species pool for Area 15
updated 04/2001). Percent of population calculated from percent of range area,
weighted by BBS relative abundance (see Rosenberg and Wells 1999). PIF regional and global
scores from CBO (Carter et al. 2000).
| Entry level |
Species |
Total score |
% of pop. |
AI |
PT |
Local status a |
|
I. Continental priority |
| |
Henslow’s Sparrow (CAN-E, NY-T) |
27 |
< 1 |
2 |
5 |
B |
| |
Golden-winged Warbler (NY-SC) |
27 |
< 1 |
2 |
5 |
B |
| |
Cerulean Warbler (CAN-V, NY-SC) |
24 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Bobolink |
23 |
3.2 |
5 |
4 |
B |
| |
Upland Sandpiper (NY-T) |
23 |
< 1 |
2 |
5 |
B |
| |
American Woodcock |
22 |
<1 |
3 |
5 |
B |
| |
Black-billed cuckoo |
22 |
1.0 |
4 |
5 |
B |
| |
Red-headed Woodpecker (CAN-V, NY-SC) |
22 |
< 1 |
2 |
5 |
B,R? |
| |
Prothonotary Warbler (CAN-E) |
22 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
II. Regional priority |
|
a. |
Baltimore Oriole |
21 |
2.5 |
5 |
3 |
B |
| |
Field Sparrow |
21 |
< 1 |
3 |
5 |
B |
| |
Eastern Wood-pewee |
20 |
1.0 |
4 |
4 |
B |
| |
Willow Flycatcher |
20 |
?? |
5 |
3 |
B |
| |
Sharp-shinned Hawk (NY-SC) |
19 |
< 1 |
5 |
3 |
B |
|
c. |
Louisiana Waterthrush (CAN-V) |
21 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Sedge Wren (NY-T) |
21 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Canada Warbler |
20 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Loggerhead Shrike (CAN-E) |
20 |
< 1 |
2 |
5 |
B |
| |
Northern Harrier (NY-SC) |
19 |
< 1 |
3 |
3 |
R |
| |
Short-eared Owl (CAN-V, NY-E) |
19 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B, R |
|
III. Additional Watch List |
| |
American Black Duck |
21 |
< 1 |
2 |
4 |
R |
| |
Wood Thrush |
20 |
1.4 |
3 |
2 |
B |
| |
Blue-winged Warbler |
20 |
1.3 |
2 |
1 |
B |
|
IV. Additional federal listed |
| |
King Rail (CAN-E, NY-T) |
21 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Hooded Warbler (CAN-T) |
20 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Acadian Flycatcher (CAN-E) |
19 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Yellow-breasted Chat (CAN-V, NY-SC) |
19 |
< 1 |
2 |
5 |
B |
| |
Black Tern (CAN-V, NY-E) |
18 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Northern Bobwhite (CAN-V) |
18 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
R |
| |
Red-shouldered Hawk (CAN-V, NY-SC) |
18 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Least Bittern (CAN-V, NY-T) |
18 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Barn Owl (CAN-E) |
17 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
V. Additional state or provincial listed |
| |
Whip-poor-will (NY-SC) |
20 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Grasshopper Sparrow (NY-SC) |
19 |
< 1 |
2 |
5 |
B |
| |
American Bittern (NY-SC) |
19 |
< 1 |
2 |
4 |
B |
| |
Bald Eagle (NY,ON-E) |
18 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Vesper Sparrow (NY-SC) |
17 |
< 1 |
3 |
4 |
B |
| |
Cooper’s Hawk (NY-SC) |
17 |
2.0 |
3 |
3 |
R |
| |
Osprey (NY-SC) |
17 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Common Tern (NY-T) |
17 |
1.3 |
5 |
3 |
B |
| |
Pied-billed Grebe (NY-SC) |
16 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Common Nighthawk (NY-SC) |
15 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
| |
Horned Lark (NY-SC) |
11 |
< 1 |
2 |
2 |
R |
a Local status: B = breeding population only; R = found
year-round, although breeding population may differ from wintering population; ext =
extirpated.
PRIORITY HABITAT-SPECIES SUITES -- AREA 15
Priority habitat-species suites for Area 15
(updated 04/2001). TB (threats breeding), AI (area importance), PT
(population trend), and total PIF scores from CBO prioritization database (Carter et al.
2000). Focal species for each habitat in all caps.
| Habitat |
Species |
Total score |
TB |
AI |
PT |
Action level a |
| Agricultural Grassland |
| |
HENSLOW'S SPARROW |
27 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
II |
| |
UPLAND SANDPIPER |
23 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
III |
| |
BOBOLINK |
23 |
3 |
5 |
4 |
III |
| |
Sedge Wren |
21 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Loggerhead Shrike |
20 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
II |
| |
Northern Harrier |
19 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
III |
| |
Grasshopper Sparrow |
19 |
3 |
2 |
5 |
III |
| |
Vesper Sparrow |
17 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
III |
| |
Short-eared Owl |
19 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Barn Owl |
17 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Horned Lark |
11 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
V |
| Shrub-early successional |
| |
GOLDEN-WINGED WARBLER |
27 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
II |
| |
AMERICAN WOODCOCK |
23 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
II |
| |
Field Sparrow |
21 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
III |
| |
Blue-winged Warbler |
20 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
V |
| |
Willow Flycatcher |
20 |
2 |
5 |
3 |
V |
| |
Yellow-breasted Chat |
19 |
3 |
2 |
5 |
III |
| |
Northern Bobwhite |
18 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Whip-poor-will |
20 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Common Nighthawk |
15 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| Riparian-deciduous (Carolinian) forest |
| |
CERULEAN WARBLER |
25 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
II |
| |
Black-billed Cuckoo |
22 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
III |
| |
Red-headed Woodpecker |
22 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
III |
| |
Prothonotary Warbler |
22 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Baltimore Oriole |
21 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Louisiana Waterthrush |
21 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Eastern Wood-Pewee |
20 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
III |
| |
Hooded Warbler |
20 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Acadian Flycatcher |
20 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Wood Thrush |
20 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
IV |
| |
Bald Eagle |
18 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Cooper’s Hawk |
15 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
IV |
| Northern hardwood-mixed forest |
| |
BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO |
22 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
III |
| |
CANADA WARBLER |
21 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Eastern Wood-Pewee |
20 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
III |
| |
Wood Thrush |
20 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
IV |
| |
Sharp-shinned Hawk |
19 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Red-shouldered Hawk |
18 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Cooper’s Hawk |
15 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
IV |
| Freshwater wetland |
| |
AMERICAN BLACK DUCK |
21 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
III |
| |
King Rail |
21 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Northern Harrier |
19 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
IV |
| |
AMERICAN BITTERN |
19 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
III |
| |
Black Tern |
18 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Least Bittern |
18 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Bald Eagle |
18 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Osprey |
17 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Common Tern |
17 |
2 |
5 |
3 |
IV |
| |
Pied-billed Grebe |
16 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
a Action levels: I = crisis; recovery
needed; II = immediate management or policy needed rangewide; III = management to reverse
or stabilize populations; IV = long-term planning to ensure stable populations; V =
research needed to better define threats; VI = monitor population changes only.
Literature Cited
Carter, M. F., W. C. Hunter, D. N. Pashley, and K. V. Rosenberg. 2000. Setting
conservation priorities for landbirds in the united states: the partners in flight
approach. Auk 117:541-548.
Hunter, W. C., M. F. Carter, D. N. Pashley, and K. Barker. 1993. The Partners In Flight
prioritization scheme. Pp. 109-119 in D. Finch and P Stangel (eds.), Status and management
of Neotropical migratory birds. U.S.D.A. General Technical Report RM-229, Rocky Mountain
Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.
Rosenberg, K. V. and J. V. Wells. 1999. Global perspectives on Neotropical migrant
conservation in the Northeast: Long-term responsibility vs. immediate concern. In R. E.
Bonney, D. Pashley, R. J. Cooper, and L. Niles (Eds.). Strategies for bird conservation:
The Partners in Flight planning process. Cornell Lab of Ornithology.
|