PRIORITY SPECIES POOL -- AREA 27
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. 1994, 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.
There are five entry levels into the priority species pool, as follows:
Tier I. High Continental Priority. -- Species that are typically of conservation concern throughout their range. These are species showing high vulnerability in a number of factors, expressed as any combination of high parameter scores leading to an average score > 3 (the midpoint); total of 7 parameter scores will be ≥ 22, with AI ≥ 2 (so that species without manageable populations in the region are omitted).
Tier I A. High Continental Priority - High Regional Responsibility. Species for which this region shares in major conservation responsibility; i.e., conservation in this region is critical to the overall health of this species. Species with AI of 3 - 5, or a high percent population (above threshold in II B).
Tier I B. High Continental Priority - Low Regional Responsibility. Species for which this region can contribute to rangewide conservation objectives where the species occurs. Species with AI of 2.
Tier II. High Regional Priority. Species that are of moderate continental priority, but are important to consider for conservation within a region because of various combinations of high parameter scores, as defined below; total of 7 parameter scores = 19-21.
Tier II A. High Regional Concern. Species that are experiencing declines in the core of their range and that require short-term conservation action to reverse or stabilize trends. These are species with a combination of high area importance and declining (or unknown) population trend; total of 7 parameters = 19-21, with AI + PT ≥ 8.
Tier II B. High Regional Responsibility. Species for which this region shares in the responsibility for long-term conservation, even if they are not currently declining or threatened. These are species of moderate continental priority with a disproportionately high percentage of their total population in the region; total of 7 parameters = 19-21, with % population > threshold (see Appendix 3 in this area's full Plan).
Tier II C. High Regional Threats. Species of moderate continental priority that are uncommon in a region and whose remaining populations are threatened, usually because of extreme threats to sensitive habitats. These are species with high breeding threats scores within the region (or in combination with high nonbreeding threats outside the region); total of 7 parameters = 19-21 with TB + TN > 6, or local TB or TN = 5.
Tier III. Additional Watch List. These species are on the U.S. National Watch List not included in the above tiers. These species score highly enough based on global criteria to warrant conservation attention wherever they occur with an AI of 2 or more.
Tier IV. Additional Federally Listed. Species listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act receive conservation attention wherever they occur.
Tier V. Additional State Listed. - Species on state endangered, threatened, or special concern lists that did not meet any of above criteria. These are often rare or peripheral populations.
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 27. 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 -- all scores updated 10/2000).
|
Entry level |
Species |
Total score |
% of pop. |
AI |
PT |
Local status |
|
I |
||||||
|
A. |
Bicknell’s Thrush |
28 |
?? |
4 |
4 |
B |
|
Canada Warbler |
23 |
1.4 |
5 |
2 |
B |
|
|
Chestnut-sided Warbler |
23 |
3.6 |
5 |
4 |
B |
|
|
Black-throated Blue Warbler |
23 |
3.6 |
4 |
2 |
B |
|
|
Wood Thrush |
23 |
3.1 |
4 |
4 |
B |
|
|
American Woodcock |
22 |
1.3 |
4 |
5 |
B |
|
|
Blackburnian Warbler |
22 |
1.2 |
3 |
5 |
B |
|
|
B. |
Golden-winged Warbler |
27 |
< 1 |
2 |
5 |
B |
|
Piping Plover (F-T) |
26 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Saltmarsh Sharp-tail. Sparrow (SC-ME) |
26 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Nelson’s Sharp-tailed Sparrow |
25 |
?? |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Upland Sandpiper (E-VT, MA; T-VT, ME) |
23 |
< 1 |
2 |
5 |
B |
|
|
Bay-breasted Warbler |
23 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
II |
||||||
|
A. |
Scarlet Tanager |
21 |
3.2 |
4 |
4 |
B |
|
Rose-breasted Grosbeak |
20 |
1.9 |
5 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Least Flycatcher |
20 |
1.0 |
4 |
5 |
B |
|
|
Eastern Wood-pewee |
19 |
1.2 |
4 |
4 |
B |
|
|
Purple Finch |
19 |
1.4 |
4 |
5 |
R |
|
|
Gray Catbird |
19 |
2.7 |
4 |
4 |
B |
|
|
B. |
Veery |
19 |
3.9 |
5 |
2 |
B |
|
Ovenbird |
19 |
2.5 |
5 |
2 |
B |
|
|
C. |
Whip-poor-will |
21 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
Sedge Wren (E-ME) |
21 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Black-backed Woodpecker |
20 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
R |
|
|
Chimney Swift |
20 |
< 1 |
3 |
4 |
B |
|
|
Bobolink |
19 |
1.8 |
4 |
2 |
B |
|
|
III |
||||||
|
Blue-winged Warbler |
21 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
American Black Duck |
20 |
1.9 |
4 |
1 |
R |
|
|
Prairie Warbler |
20 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Red-headed Woodpecker |
19 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
V |
||||||
|
Blackpoll Warbler (SC-MA) |
19 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Grasshopper Sparrow (E-ME,CT; T-MA) |
19 |
< 1 |
1 |
5 |
B |
|
|
Northern Goshawk (SC-ME) |
19 |
< 1 |
3 |
3 |
R |
|
|
Mourning Warbler (SC-MA) |
19 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Roseate Tern (E-ME) |
19 |
< 1 |
1 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Common Loon (E-VT, T- NH, SC-MA) |
18 |
< 1 |
3 |
2 |
B |
|
|
Bald Eagle (T-ME) |
18 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Least Bittern (SC-ME) |
18 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Eastern Screech-Owl (SC-ME) |
18 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
R |
|
|
Eastern Meadowlark (SC-ME) |
18 |
< 1 |
2 |
5 |
B |
|
|
Olive-sided Flycatcher (SC-ME) |
17 |
< 1 |
2 |
4 |
B |
|
|
Sharp-shinned Hawk (SC-MA) |
17 |
1.0 |
5 |
2 |
R |
|
|
Northern Harrier (T-NH,MA) |
17 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Black Tern (E-ME) |
17 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Orchard Oriole (SC-ME) |
16 |
< 1 |
1 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Arctic Tern (T-ME) |
16 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Cooper's Hawk (T-NH, SC-MA, ME) |
15 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
R |
|
|
Vesper Sparrow (E-CT, T-MA, SC-ME) |
15 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Osprey (E-VT; T-NH) |
15 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Common Tern (SC-ME) |
15 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
N. Saw-whet Owl (SC-CT) |
15 |
< 1 |
2? |
3 |
R |
|
|
Common Nighthawk (T-NH) |
14 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Least Tern (E-ME) |
14 |
< 1 |
1 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Common Moorhen (SC-ME) |
14 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
Pied-billed Grebe (E-NH,MA) |
14 |
< 1 |
2 |
3 |
B |
|
|
American Coot (SC-ME) |
12 |
< 1 |
1 |
3 |
B |
|
PRIORITY HABITAT-SPECIES SUITES -- AREA 27
Priority habitat-species suites for Area 27. 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 |
|
Mountaintop -- conifer woodland |
||||||
|
BICKNELL'S THRUSH |
28 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
II |
|
|
Blackpoll Warbler |
19 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Coastal saltmarsh, dune and estuary |
||||||
|
SALTMARSH SHARP-TAILED SPARROW |
26 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
II |
|
|
NELSON'S SHARP-TAILED SPARROW |
25 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
II |
|
| PIPING PLOVER |
26 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
II |
|
| AMERICAN BLACK DUCK |
20 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
II |
|
|
Roseate Tern |
19 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
II |
|
|
Northern Harrier |
17 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Arctic Tern |
16 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Common Tern |
15 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Osprey |
15 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Least Tern |
14 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Northern hardwood-mixed forest |
||||||
| WOOD THRUSH |
23 |
2 |
4 |
4 |
III |
|
| BLACK-THROATED BLUE WARBLER |
23 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
IV |
|
| CANADA WARBLER |
22 |
2 |
5 |
2 |
IV |
|
|
Blackburnian Warbler |
22 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
III |
|
|
Scarlet Tanager |
21 |
2 |
4 |
4 |
III |
|
|
Rose-breasted Grosbeak |
20 |
2 |
5 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Chimney Swift |
20 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
III |
|
|
Least Flycatcher |
20 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
III |
|
|
Eastern Wood-Pewee |
19 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
III |
|
|
Veery |
19 |
2 |
5 |
2 |
IV |
|
|
Purple Finch |
19 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
III |
|
| NORTHERN GOSHAWK |
19 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Ovenbird |
19 |
2 |
5 |
2 |
IV |
|
|
Eastern Screech-Owl |
18 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Sharp-shinned Hawk |
17 |
2 |
5 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Cooper’s Hawk |
15 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Early successional forest/edge |
||||||
| GOLDEN-WINGED WARBLER |
27 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
II |
|
| CHESTNUT-SIDED WARBLER |
23 |
2 |
5 |
4 |
III |
|
| AMERICAN WOODCOCK |
22 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
III |
|
|
Whip-poor-will |
21 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
III |
|
|
Blue-winged Warbler |
21 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
V |
|
|
Prairie Warbler |
20 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
V |
|
|
Red-headed Woodpecker |
19 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Mourning Warbler |
19 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
V |
|
|
Gray Catbird |
19 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
III |
|
|
Mourning Warbler |
18 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
VI |
|
|
Olive-sided Flycatcher |
17 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
III |
|
|
Orchard Oriole |
16 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
V |
|
|
Common Nighthawk |
13 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
V |
|
|
Mature conifer (spruce-fir) forest |
||||||
| BLACKBURNIAN WARBLER |
22 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
III |
|
|
Bay-breasted Warbler |
23 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
BLACK-BACKED WOODPECKER |
20 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Blackpoll Warbler |
19 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Sharp-shinned Hawk |
17 |
2 |
5 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Olive-sided Flycatcher |
17 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
III |
|
|
N. Saw-whet Owl |
14 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Grassland/agricultural |
||||||
| UPLAND SANDPIPER |
23 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
III |
|
| SEDGE WREN |
21 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
| BOBOLINK |
19 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
IV |
|
|
Grasshopper Sparrow |
19 |
4 |
1 |
5 |
III |
|
|
Eastern Meadowlark |
18 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
III |
|
|
Northern Harrier |
17 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Vesper Sparrow |
15 |
4 |
1 |
4 |
III |
|
|
Freshwater wetland -- river/lake |
||||||
|
AMERICAN BLACK DUCK |
20 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
IV |
|
|
Common Loon |
18 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
IV |
|
|
BALD EAGLE |
18 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Least Bittern |
18 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
V |
|
|
Black Tern |
17 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Osprey |
15 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
IV |
|
|
Pied-billed Grebe |
14 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
V |
|
|
Common Moorhen |
14 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
V |
|
|
American Coot |
12 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
V |
|
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. 1994. 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.
 View Area 27 Plan |
 Return to Area 27 Executive Summary |
 Download the Area 27 Priority Tables |