Kentucky 2013 STWG Revision - Added Bird Species

Kentucky's Species of Greatest Conservation Need and their statuses.

Common name

Scientific name

Federal

Heritage

GRank

SRank

Aves (13 species).

American Kestrel

Falco sparverius

Black-necked Stilt

Himantopus mexicanus

Black-throated Green

Dendroica virens

Warbler

Chuck-will's-widow

Caprimulgus carolinensis

Aythya marila

Aythya affinis

Bonasa umbellus

Grus canadensis

Porzana carolina

Actitis macularius

Tundra Swan

Cygnus columbianus

Virginia Rail

Rallus limicola

Whip-poor-will

Caprimulgus vociferus

Literature cited Download all 13 new 2013 Bird Statewide Maps (27 MB)

CLASS Aves

American Kestrel Falco sparverius

Federal Heritage GRank SRank GRank SRank

Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)

N N G5 S5B,S G5 S5

G-Trend Decreasing

G-Trend Breeding Bird Surveys show a significant decrease of 0.7% survey-wide for the

Comment period 1966-2007 with a relative abundance of 0.86 individuals per route (Sauer

et al. 2008). An analysis of migration counts of American Kestrels suggest

declines in the northeastern, midwestern and western regions of the continent

(Farmer and Smith 2009). Declines have also been documented in monitored

populations of kestrels using nest boxes. Related analyses which take into

account the timing of disease and predator population increases suggest that

causes for decline may be on wintering/migration grounds (Smallwood et al

2009).

S-Trend Unknown

S-Trend Breeding Bird Surveys in Kentucky show a nonsignificant decrease of 0.6% for

Comment the period 1966-2007 with a relative abundance of 1.63 individuals per route

(Sauer et al. 2008).

Habitat / American Kestrels are usually found in semi-open and open habitats. They are

Life most abundant in rural farmland where they hunt over fields and pastures

History (Palmer-Ball 1996). However, they are also found in native grasslands and

altered habitats such as urban areas, city parks, golf courses, industrial parks,

and reclaimed surface mines.

Key Habitat condition throughout Kentucky is FAIR for this species.

Habitat

No key habitat to identify: the species will use appropriate habitat statewide.

Guilds grassland/agricultural, urban/suburban.

Statewide American_Kestrel.pdf

Map

Conservation Issues

Biological/ consumptive uses

5D Competition from introduced/invasive or native species. Competition for

cavities with starlings and other species.

5K Lack of suitable habitat for spawning, nesting, or breeding. Suitable nest site

availability- lack of natural cavities.

5Q Declining prey base. Pesticide use, over-grazed pasture and row-cropping.

Terrestrial habitat degradation

3A Row-crop agriculture (conversion to, annual reuse of fields, etc). Results in

lower prey populations in open habitat.

3F Urban/residential development

3N Removal of dead trees

3S Fire suppression/fire regime management

CLASS Aves

Black-necked Stilt Himantopus mexicanus

Federal Heritage GRank SRank GRank SRank

Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)

PS N G5 SAB G5 N

G-Trend Increasing

G-Trend Breeding Bird Surveys show a significant increase of 3.04% survey-wide for the

Comment period 1966-2007 with a relative abundance of 1.91 individuals per route (Sauer

et al. 2008).

S-Trend Stable

S-Trend Black-necked stilts first nested in Kentucky in 1993. Since that time, they have

Comment nested sporadically in far western Kentucky when proper habitat conditions are

present (Palmer-Ball 2003)

Habitat / Black-necked stilts generally nest in flooded agricultural fields along the

Life Mississippi and Ohio Rivers in western Kentucky. The sporadic nature of this

History flooding means that habitat may not be available in all years (Palmer-Ball personal

communication).

Key Habitat condition throughout Kentucky is POOR for this species.

Habitat

No key habitat to identify: the species will use appropriate habitat in western KY.

Guilds standing water.

Statewide Black-neckedStilt.pdf

Map

Conservation Issues

Aquatic habitat degradation

2F Riparian zone removal (Agriculture/development)

2H Wetland loss/drainage/alteration

Biological/ consumptive uses

5B Predation from native species

Siltation and increased turbidity

1B Agriculture. plowing of nesting areas

CLASS Aves

Black-throated Green Warbler Dendroica virens

Federal Heritage GRank SRank GRank SRank

Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)

N N G5 S4B G5 S4

G-Trend Stable

G-Trend The Breeding Bird Survey shows a significant increase of 1.2% survey-wide

Comment (USA and Canada) for the period 1980-2007. Partners in Flight estimates a

population of 9,600,000 individuals (see Rosenberg 2004 for assumptions).

S-Trend Unknown

S-Trend Only a limited number of Breeding Bird Survey routes exist in the southeast part

Comment of the state; thus, the species is detected only on 5 routes. Analysis of these

routes show a nonsignificant increase of 5.4% per year for the period 1966-2007

with an average of 0.95 individuals per route (Sauer et al. 2008) . Partners in

Flight estimates a population of 24,000 individuals (see Rosenberg 2004 for

assumptions).

Habitat / Black-throated Green Warblers are typically found in association with hemlock

Life stands, although they are found occasionally in deciduous or mixed pine-

History hardwood forests. They are most numerous in fairly mature forest, but will also

use regenerating second-growth forests and forest edges (Palmer-Ball).

Key Habitat condition in eastern Kentucky range is FAIR.

Habitat

The species will use appropriate habitat in the Cumberland Plateau and

Mountains.

Guilds Cumberland highland forest, upland forest.

Statewide Black_throated_Green_Warbler.pdf

Map

Conservation Issues

Biological/ consumptive uses

5B Predation from native species

5M Brood parasitism (Brown-headed Cowbird)

5Q Declining prey base. From insecticides

Miscellaneous Mortality Factors

6G Stochastic events (droughts, unusual weather, pine beetle damage, flooding

etc.). Potential loss of habitat due to hemlock woolly adelgid infestation.

Terrestrial habitat degradation

3G Shoreline development. Riparian corridor removal/development

3H Habitat loss outside of Kentucky

3K Surface mining. Loss of forest habitat from mining

3M Timber harvest

3R Habitat and/or Population Fragmentation. Forest fragmentation

CLASS Aves

Chuck-will's-widow Caprimulgus carolinensis

Federal Heritage GRank SRank GRank SRank

Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)

N N G5 S4S5B G5 S4

G-Trend Unknown

G-Trend Breeding Bird Surveys show a significant decrease of 1.7% survey-wide for the

Comment period 1966-2007 with a relative abundance of 1.35 individuals per route (Sauer

et al. 2008). Partners in Flight estimates a population of 15,000,000 individuals

(see Rosenberg 2004 for assumptions).

S-Trend Unknown

S-Trend Breeding Bird Surveys in Kentucky show a significant decrease of 2.6% for the

Comment period 1980-2007 (Sauer et al. 2008). Partners in Flight estimates a population of

310,400 individuals (see Rosenberg 2004 for assumptions).

Habitat / Chuck-will's-widows are found in semi-open and open habitats with scattered

Life tracts of forest. They are usually absent in extensively forested areas. Found

History more commonly in drier forests with an open mid- and understory, especially in

oak and hickory forests with scattered cedars or introduced pines (Palmer-Ball

1996)..

Key Habitat conditions in Kentucky are generally FAIR

Habitat

Key Habitat Locations (and their condition):

1. Will use appropriate habitat mostly west of the Cumberland Plateau.

Guilds grassland/agricultural, savanna/ shrub-scrub, upland forest.

Statewide Chuck_Wills_Widow.pdf

Map

Conservation Issues

Biological/ consumptive uses

5Q Declining prey base. Pesticide use

Miscellaneous Mortality Factors

6A Traffic/road kills

Terrestrial habitat degradation

3F Urban/residential development

3P Pollution/toxicity (e.g., heavy metals, pesticides, herbicides, acid rain).

Pesticides

CLASS Aves

Greater Scaup Aythya marila

Federal Heritage GRank SRank GRank SRank

Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)

N N G5 S2S3N G5 S2

G-Trend Decreasing

G-Trend Populations of both scaup species have seen dramatic declines in recent years.

Comment Breeding numbers of scaup have declined 35% from 6.4 million in 1980 to 4.2

million in 2009 (U.S, Fish and Wildlife Service 2009). Reasons for these declines

are still largely not understood.

S-Trend Decreasing

S-Trend Little data exists on wintering populations of scaup. Mid-winter waterfowl

Comment survey data indicates a 85% decline in the 10-year average (USFWS unpublished

data)

Habitat / Scaup are generally open water birds being found in large reservoirs and Rivers

Life statewide.

History

Key Habitat condition throughout Kentucky are GOOD for this species.

Habitat

No key habitat to identify: the species will use appropriate habitat statewide.

Guilds Large rivers in current, Large rivers in slackwater.

Statewide GreaterScaup.pdf

Map

Conservation Issues

Aquatic habitat degradation

2E Stream channelization/ditching

2H Wetland loss/drainage/alteration

Biological/ consumptive uses

5L Parasitism and disease

Terrestrial habitat degradation

3G Shoreline development

3P Pollution/toxicity (e.g., heavy metals, pesticides, herbicides, acid rain)

CLASS Aves

Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis

Federal Heritage GRank SRank GRank SRank

Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)

N N G5 S4N G5 S4

G-Trend Decreasing

G-Trend Populations of both scaup species have seen dramatic declines in recent years.

Comment Breeding numbers of scaup have declined 35% from 6.4 million in 1980 to 4.2

million in 2009 (U.S, Fish and Wildlife Service 2009). Reasons for these declines

are still largely not understood.

S-Trend Decreasing

S-Trend Little data exists on wintering populations of scaup. Mid-winter waterfowl

Comment survey data indicates a 85% decline in the 10-year average (USFWS unpublished

data)

Habitat / Scaup are generally open water birds being found in large reservoirs and Rivers

Life statewide.

History

Key Habitat condition throughout Kentucky is GOOD for this species.

Habitat

No key habitat to identify: the species will use appropriate habitat statewide.

Guilds Large rivers in current, Large rivers in slackwater.

Statewide LesserScaup.pdf

Map

Conservation Issues

Aquatic habitat degradation

2E Stream channelization/ditching

2H Wetland loss/drainage/alteration

Biological/ consumptive uses

5L Parasitism and disease

Terrestrial habitat degradation

3G Shoreline development

3P Pollution/toxicity (e.g., heavy metals, pesticides, herbicides, acid rain)

CLASS Aves

Ruffed Grouse Bonasa umbellus

Federal Heritage GRank SRank GRank SRank

Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)

N N G5 S4 G5 S4

G-Trend Stable

G-Trend “The ruffed grouse is a popular gamebird distributed from Alaska across central

Comment and southern Canada and the northern United States to the Atlantic Coast, south

into the central Rocky Mountains and Appalachian Mountains. Its distribution

coincides closely with that of aspen, except in the Appalachians. Throughout

most of the range of the ruffed grouse, aspen is considered a key component of

ruffed grouse diet and cover. Limited research conducted in the Appalachian

region suggested ruffed grouse ecology and thus potential management differ

greatly between the core of the species range (i.e., the Great Lakes and southern

Canada region) and the Appalachian Mountains due at least in part to the absence

of aspen. Breeding bird survey data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

show a significant decline in ruffed grouse indices over the last 35 years in both

the Ridge and Valley and Alleghany Plateau regions of the Appalachians. These

declines coincide with those of other early-successional bird species, and may be

in part a result of changes in forest age over the last 35 years.” Devers et a. 2008

S-Trend Decreasing

S-Trend Grouse populations in the Appalachian region have been declining for several

Comment decades. Habitat loss is a major cause in these declines, largely due to limited

timber harvests and long timber rotations resulting in vast acreages of mature

timber.

The Appalachian Cooperative Grouse Research Project (ACGRP) was a multi-

state cooperative effort initiated in 1996 to investigate the apparent decline of

ruffed grouse and improve management throughout the central and southern

Appalachian region (i.e., parts of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Kentucky,

West Virginia, Virginia, and North Carolina, USA) (Devers et al. 2008).

Habitat / Grouse populations in the Appalachian region have been declining for several

Life decades. Habitat loss is a major cause in these declines, largely due to limited

History timber harvests and long timber rotations resulting in vast acreages of mature

timber (Whitaker 2003).

The Appalachian Cooperative Grouse Research Project (ACGRP) was a multi-

state cooperative effort initiated in 1996 to investigate the apparent decline of

ruffed grouse and improve management throughout the central and southern

Appalachian region (i.e., parts of Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Kentucky,

West Virginia, Virginia, and North Carolina, USA) (Devers et al. 2007).

Key Habitat condition is generally POOR for Kentucky.

Habitat

Guilds Cumberland highland forest, savanna/ shrub-scrub, upland forest.

Statewide Ruffed_Grouse.pdf

Map

Conservation Issues

Biological/ consumptive uses

5B Predation from native species

Terrestrial habitat degradation

3C Lack of newly abandoned farmland

3M Timber harvest. Lack of timber harvest

3O Reforestation. Lack of early-successional forest

3R Habitat and/or Population Fragmentation

3S Fire suppression/fire regime management. Limited use of controlled burning

as a management tool

3T Suppression of disturbance regimes. Limited timber harvests = even-aged

forests

3V Long-term loss of hard mast trees (American Chestnut, poor oak

CLASS Aves

Sandhill Crane Grus canadensis

Federal Heritage GRank SRank GRank SRank

Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)

PS N G5 SZN G5 N

G-Trend Increasing

G-Trend The eastern population of sandhill cranes, which migrates through and winters

Comment in Kentucky, has increased significantly since USFWS Fall surveys began in

1979. Survey numbers increased from 14,385 in 1979 to 59,876 in 2009

(USFWS unpublished data).

S-Trend Increasing

S-Trend Wintering/transient numbers are increasing. Winter counts reached their highest

Comment levels in Feb 2010 with almost 19,000 birds in two groups in the state (KDFWR

unpublished data)

Habitat / Wintering/migrating sandhill cranes roost in shallow water (<20cm deep) at night

Life and feed in waste grain fields during the day. Corn stubble is the preferred feeding

History site (Tacha et al. 1994)

Key Habitat condition throughout Kentucky is FAIR for this species.

Habitat

No key habitat to identify: the species will use appropriate habitat in the central

portion of the state..

Guilds Emergent and shrub-dominated wetlands, grassland/agricultural.

Statewide SandhillCrane.pdf

Map

Conservation Issues

Aquatic habitat degradation

2F Riparian zone removal (Agriculture/development)

2H Wetland loss/drainage/alteration

Miscellaneous Mortality Factors

6C Powerlines

6D Human disturbance (spelunking, destruction/disturbance of nest sites)

Siltation and increased turbidity

1B Agriculture. impacts on shallow roost ponds

Terrestrial habitat degradation

3D Switch to cleaner agricultural practices

CLASS Aves

Sora Porzana carolina

Federal Heritage GRank SRank GRank SRank

Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)

N N G5 SZN G5 N

G-Trend Stable

G-Trend Breeding Bird Surveys show a nonsignificant increase of 0.9% survey-wide for

Comment the period 1966-2007 with a relative abundance of 1.04 individuals per route

(Sauer et al. 2008).

S-Trend Unknown

S-Trend No data exists for migrating Sora Rails.

Comment

Habitat / Sora rails inhabit stands of emergent vegetation within freshwater wetlands.

Life Shallow water, emergent cover, and substrate with high invertebrate abundance

History are the most important components of rail habitat (Melvin and Gibbs 1994). High

interspersion of water to and emergent vegetation are important. Sora rails avoid

emergent stands with high stem densities and seem to select larger size wetlands

(Melvin and Gibbs 1994).

Key Habitat condition throughout Kentucky is FAIR for this species.

Habitat

No key habitat to identify: the species will use appropriate habitat statewide.

Guilds Emergent and shrub-dominated wetlands.

Statewide Sora.pdf

Map

Conservation Issues

Aquatic habitat degradation

2H Wetland loss/drainage/alteration

Terrestrial habitat degradation

3Q Invasive/exotic plants (including fescue). Phragmities invasion

CLASS Aves

Spotted Sandpiper Actitis macularius

Federal Heritage GRank SRank GRank SRank

Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)

N E G5 S1B G5 S1

G-Trend Decreasing

G-Trend Breeding Bird Surveys show a significant decrease of 0.81% survey-wide for the

Comment period 1966-2007 with a relative abundance of 0.48 individuals per route (Sauer

et al. 2008).

S-Trend Unknown

S-Trend The spotted sandpiper is a rare and sporadic breeding bird in Kentucky (Palmer-

Comment Ball 1996) but no survey data exists for the species in the state.

Habitat / Spotted sandpipers utilize a wide variety of wetland habitats statewide from

Life stream and river shorelines, to shores of ponds and large reservoirs, to managed

History shallow water impoundments (Palmer-Ball 1996). For nesting, spotted

sandpipers generally nest in disturbance free areas of thick vegetation close to

exposed shorelines, but may nest some distance from water in pastures (Palmer-

Ball 1996).

Key Habitat condition throughout Kentucky is FAIR for this species.

Habitat

No key habitat to identify: the species will use appropriate habitat statewide.

Guilds Emergent and shrub-dominated wetlands, Lowland Streams in slackwater.

Statewide SpottedSandpiper.pdf

Map

Conservation Issues

Aquatic habitat degradation

2E Stream channelization/ditching

Biological/ consumptive uses

5F Low population densities

Siltation and increased turbidity

1B Agriculture

CLASS Aves

Tundra Swan Cygnus columbianus

Federal Heritage GRank SRank GRank SRank

Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)

N N G5 SZN G5 N

G-Trend Increasing

G-Trend Breeding populations have increased during the period 1980 -2009. Populatins

Comment have increased 25% from 164,500 in 1980 to 205,400 in 2009 (U.S, Fish and

Wildlife Service 2009).

S-Trend Stable

S-Trend Little evidence exists for abundance of wintering populations in Kentucky.

Comment Christmas Bird Count data has recorded Tundra Swans in 5 years since 1980.

Habitat / This is a wintering bird that uses shallow water wetlands with submerged

Life vegetation (poor) as well as larger lakes, rivers, and ponds (good).

History

Key Habitat condition ranges from POOR (shallow water wetlands) to GOOD (large

Habitat lakes, rivers, and ponds).

No key habitat to identify; the species will use appropriate habitat where available

statewide.

Guilds Emergent and shrub-dominated wetlands, grassland/agricultural, standing water.

Statewide TundraSwan.pdf

Map

Conservation Issues

Aquatic habitat degradation

2E Stream channelization/ditching

2H Wetland loss/drainage/alteration . Draining of shallow water wetlands

Biological/ consumptive uses

5D Competition from introduced/invasive or native species. introduced mute

swans and resident Canada geese

Terrestrial habitat degradation

3A Row-crop agriculture (conversion to, annual reuse of fields, etc). of shallow

water wetlands

3G Shoreline development

3H Habitat loss outside of Kentucky

CLASS Aves

Virginia Rail Rallus limicola

Federal Heritage GRank SRank GRank SRank

Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)

N N G5 S1B?, G5 S1

SZN

G-Trend Stable

G-Trend Little data exists for population trends in the secretive marsh birds. The best

Comment piece of information for Virginia rails is the Breeding Bird Survey . Breeding Bird

Surveys show an increase of 2.16% survey-wide for the period 1967-2007 with

a relative abundance of 0.04 individuals per route (Sauer et al. 2008).

Unfortunately, the BBS is not designed to detect marsh birds so data is lacking.

S-Trend Unknown

S-Trend No data exists.

Comment

Habitat / Virginia rails inhabit stands of emergent vegetation within freshwater wetlands.

Life Shallow water, emergent cover, and substrate with high invertebrate abundance

History are the most important components of Virginia rail habitat (Conway and

Eddleman 1994). Moderate water to cover ratios are important. Virginia rails

avoid emergent stands with high stem densities and seem to select larger size

wetlands (Conway and Eddleman 1994).

Key Habitat conditions in Kentucky are likely FAIR.

Habitat

No key habitat to identify; the species will use appropriate habitat range wide.

Guilds Emergent and shrub-dominated wetlands.

Statewide VirginiaRail.pdf

Map

Conservation Issues

Aquatic habitat degradation

2H Wetland loss/drainage/alteration . Wetland Losses

Terrestrial habitat degradation

3Q Invasive/exotic plants (including fescue). Phragmities monocultures in

wetlands

CLASS Aves

Whip-poor-will Caprimulgus vociferus

Federal Heritage GRank SRank GRank SRank

Status Status (Simplified) (Simplified)

N N G5 S5B G5 S5

G-Trend Unknown

G-Trend Breeding Bird Surveys show a significant decrease of 2.1% survey-wide for the

Comment period 1966-2007 with a relative abundance of 0.25 individuals per route (Sauer

et al. 2008). Partners in Flight estimates a population of 2,100,000 individuals

(see Rosenberg 2004 for assumptions).

S-Trend Unknown

S-Trend Breeding Bird Surveys in Kentucky show a nonsignificant decrease of 2.3% for

Comment the period 1980-2007 (Sauer et al. 2008). Breeding Bird Surveys in Kentucky

Partners in Flight estimates a population of 86,200 individuals (see Rosenberg

2004 for assumptions).

Habitat / Whip-poor-wills are found in areas with greater forest cover than Chuck-will's-

Life widows and in a greater range of habitats, from mesic slopes to subxeric, upland

History forests. They are found more commonly in disturbed forests and forest edges

where they can forage in openings for insect prey (Palmer-ball 1996).

Key Habitat conditions in Kentucky are likely FAIR.

Habitat

No key habitat to identify; the species will use appropriate habitat range wide.

Guilds grassland/agricultural, savanna/ shrub-scrub, upland forest.

Statewide Whip_poor_will.pdf

Map

Conservation Issues

Biological/ consumptive uses

5Q Declining prey base. Pesticide Use

Miscellaneous Mortality Factors

6A Traffic/road kills

Terrestrial habitat degradation

3A Row-crop agriculture (conversion to, annual reuse of fields, etc).

Conversion of forests to agriculture

3F Urban/residential development

3M Timber harvest

3P Pollution/toxicity (e.g., heavy metals, pesticides, herbicides, acid rain).

Pesticides

3R Habitat and/or Population Fragmentation

LITERATURE CITED

Conway, C. J. and W.R. Eddleman. 2004. Virginia rail. Pages 193-206 in Tacha, T.C and C.E. Braun. Eds. Migratory Shore and Upland Game Bird Management in North America. Allen Press, Lawrence KS.

Devers, P. K., D. F. Stauffer, G. W. Norman, D. E. Steffen, D. M. Whitaker, J. D. Sole, T. J. Allen, S. L. Bittner, D. A. Buehler, J. W. Edwards, D. E. Figert, S. T. Friedhoff, W. H. Giulliano, C. A. Harper, W. K. Igo, R. L. Kirkpatrick, M. H. Seamster, H. A. Spiker Jr., D. A. Swannson, and B. C. Tefft, 2008. Ruffed grouse population ecology in the Appalachian Region. Wildlife Monographs, Vol. 168: 1-36.

Farmer, C. J. and J. P. Smith. 2009. Migration monitoring indicates widespread declines of American kestrels (Falco sparverius) in North America. Journal of Raptor Research 43:263-273

Melvin, S. M. and J.P. Gibbs. 2004. Sora. Pages 209-217 in Tacha, T.C and C.E. Braun. Eds. Migratory Shore and Upland Game Bird Management in North America. Allen Press, Lawrence KS.

NatureServe. 2010. NatureServe homepage. <http://www.natureserve.org/>. Accessed 8 March 2010.

Sauer, J. R., J. E. Hines, and J. Fallon. 2008. The North American Breeding Bird Survey, Results and Analysis 1966 - 2007. Version 5.15.2008. USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD

Smallwood, J. A., M. F. Causey, D. H. Mossop, J. R. Klucsarits, B. Robertson, S. Robertson, J. Mason, M. J. Maurer, R. J. Melvin, R. D. Dawson, G. R. Bortolotti, J. W. Parrish, Jr., T. F. Breen, and K. Boyd. 2009. Why are American kestrels (Falco sparverius) populations declining in North America? Evidence from nest-box programs. Journal of Raptor Research 43:274-282.

Tacha, T.C., S.A. Nesbitt, and P.A. Vohs. 2004. Sandhill crane. Pages 77-94 in Tacha, T.C and C.E. Braun. Eds. Migratory Shore and Upland Game Bird Management in North America. Allen Press, Lawrence KS.

Whitaker, D.M. 2003. Ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus) habitat ecology in the central and southern Appalachians. PhD Dissertation. Virginia Tech., Blacksburg, Virginia, USA. December 2003.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. Waterfowl population status, 2009. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. USA.