Aix sponsa - (Linnaeus, 1758)
Wood Duck
Other English Common Names: wood duck
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Aix sponsa (Linnaeus, 1758) (TSN 175122)
French Common Names: canard branchu
Spanish Common Names: Pato Arcoiris
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.104243
Element Code: ABNJB09010
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Birds - Waterfowl
Image 10640

© Dick Cannings

 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Aves Anseriformes Anatidae Aix
Genus Size: B - Very small genus (2-5 species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American birds. Seventh edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. [as modified by subsequent supplements and corrections published in The Auk]. Also available online: http://www.aou.org/.
Concept Reference Code: B98AOU01NAUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Aix sponsa
Taxonomic Comments: See Livezey (1991) for a phylogenetic analysis and classification (supergenera, subgenera, infragenera, etc.) of dabbling ducks based on comparative morphology.
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 06Apr2016
Global Status Last Changed: 21Nov1996
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Reasons: Widespread in North America; increasing populations.
Nation: United States
National Status: N5B,N5N (05Jan1997)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N5B,N5N (14Feb2012)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
United States Alabama (S5), Arizona (S2B,S3N), Arkansas (S4B,S4N), California (SNR), Colorado (S4B), Connecticut (S4B), Delaware (S5B), District of Columbia (S3N,S4B), Florida (SNR), Georgia (S5), Idaho (S4B,S3N), Illinois (S5), Indiana (S4B,S1N), Iowa (S5B,S5N), Kansas (S4B), Kentucky (S4S5B), Louisiana (S5), Maine (S5B), Maryland (S5B,S3N), Massachusetts (S5B,S5M), Michigan (S5), Minnesota (SNRB,SNRN), Mississippi (S4B,S4N), Missouri (S5), Montana (S5B), Navajo Nation (S3M), Nebraska (S4), Nevada (S3), New Hampshire (S5B), New Jersey (S5), New Mexico (S4B,S4N), New York (S5), North Carolina (S5B,S4N), North Dakota (SNRB), Ohio (S5), Oklahoma (S4), Oregon (S4), Pennsylvania (S5B), Rhode Island (S4B,S4N), South Carolina (SNRB,SNRN,SNRM), South Dakota (S5B), Tennessee (S5B), Texas (S4B,S5N), Utah (S2S3B,S3S4N), Vermont (S4B), Virginia (S5), Washington (S3N,S4B), West Virginia (S3N,S5B), Wisconsin (S5B), Wyoming (S3B)
Canada British Columbia (S4B,S4N), Labrador (SNA), Manitoba (S5B), New Brunswick (S4B), Newfoundland Island (S1N), Nova Scotia (S4S5B), Nunavut (SNR), Ontario (S5), Prince Edward Island (S4B), Quebec (S4), Saskatchewan (S4B,S4M)

Other Statuses

IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent: >2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments: BREEDS: southern British Columbia and Alberta south to central California, northern Nevada, Idaho, and western Montana, with small number farther south to Arizona and New Mexico; also throughout most of the central and eastern U.S. and adjacent southern Canada, from Montana, Manitoba, the Great Lakes region, southern Quebec, and Nova Scotia south to Texas, the Gulf coast, and Florida, east to the Atlantic coast, west to Wyoming and Colorado; Cuba. The highest breeding densities occur in the Mississippi alluvial valley (Dugger and Fredrickson 1992). In recent decades, the breeding range expanded westward into the Great Plains region after wooded riparian corridors developed (Dugger and Fedrickson 1992). WINTERS: mostly on Pacific coast and interior California, and north to Kansas, southern Iowa, Ohio Valley, New England. The highest winter densities occur in the southern states of the Mississippii and Atlantic flyways and in California's Central Valley (Dugger and Fredrickson 1992).

Number of Occurrences: > 300

Population Size: 10,000 to >1,000,000 individuals

Overall Threat Impact Comments: Habitat destruction, market hunting, and liberal hunting seasons contributed to drastic declines; subsequent implementation of hunting restrictions, extensive nest box installation, and improved habitat conditions have allowed recovery (Dugger and Fredrickson 1992).

Short-term Trend: Increase of >10%
Short-term Trend Comments: Data from Breeding Bird Survey (1966-1994) and Christmas Bird Count (1959-1988) indicate increasing populations almost everywhere.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)) BREEDS: southern British Columbia and Alberta south to central California, northern Nevada, Idaho, and western Montana, with small number farther south to Arizona and New Mexico; also throughout most of the central and eastern U.S. and adjacent southern Canada, from Montana, Manitoba, the Great Lakes region, southern Quebec, and Nova Scotia south to Texas, the Gulf coast, and Florida, east to the Atlantic coast, west to Wyoming and Colorado; Cuba. The highest breeding densities occur in the Mississippi alluvial valley (Dugger and Fredrickson 1992). In recent decades, the breeding range expanded westward into the Great Plains region after wooded riparian corridors developed (Dugger and Fedrickson 1992). WINTERS: mostly on Pacific coast and interior California, and north to Kansas, southern Iowa, Ohio Valley, New England. The highest winter densities occur in the southern states of the Mississippii and Atlantic flyways and in California's Central Valley (Dugger and Fredrickson 1992).

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces
Color legend for Distribution Map
NOTE: The maps for birds represent the breeding status by state and province. In some jurisdictions, the subnational statuses for common species have not been assessed and the status is shown as not-assessed (SNR). In some jurisdictions, the subnational status refers to the status as a non-breeder; these errors will be corrected in future versions of these maps. A species is not shown in a jurisdiction if it is not known to breed in the jurisdiction or if it occurs only accidentally or casually in the jurisdiction. Thus, the species may occur in a jurisdiction as a seasonal non-breeding resident or as a migratory transient but this will not be indicated on these maps. See other maps on this web site that depict the Western Hemisphere ranges of these species at all seasons of the year.
Endemism: occurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DC, DE, FL, GA, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NN, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI, WV, WY
Canada BC, LB, MB, NB, NF, NS, NU, ON, PE, QC, SK

Range Map
Note: Range depicted for New World only. The scale of the maps may cause narrow coastal ranges or ranges on small islands not to appear. Not all vagrant or small disjunct occurrences are depicted. For migratory birds, some individuals occur outside of the passage migrant range depicted. For information on how to obtain shapefiles of species ranges see our Species Mapping pages at www.natureserve.org/conservation-tools/data-maps-tools.

Range Map Compilers: NatureServe, 2002; WILDSPACETM 2002


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
AZ Yavapai (04025)
ID Ada (16001), Blaine (16013), Bonner (16017), Boundary (16021), Canyon (16027), Gooding (16047), Jefferson (16051), Kootenai (16055), Nez Perce (16069)
WA Chelan (53007)+, Clallam (53009)+, Clark (53011)+, Douglas (53017)+, Grays Harbor (53027)+, Island (53029)+, Jefferson (53031)+, King (53033)+, Kitsap (53035)+, Kittitas (53037)+, Klickitat (53039)+, Lewis (53041)+, Mason (53045)+, Pacific (53049)+, Pend Oreille (53051)+, Pierce (53053)+, Skagit (53057)+, Snohomish (53061)+, Spokane (53063)+, Thurston (53067)+, Whatcom (53073)+, Yakima (53077)+
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
15 Upper Verde (15060202)+
17 Lower Kootenai (17010104)+, Pend Oreille Lake (17010214)+, Coeur D'alene Lake (17010303)+, Upper Spokane (17010305)+, Little Spokane (17010308), Upper Columbia-Entiat (17020010), Upper Yakima (17030001), Naches (17030002), Upper Snake-Rock (17040212)+, Beaver-Camas (17040214)+, Little Wood (17040221)+, Lower Boise (17050114)+, Middle Snake-Payette (17050115)+, Lower Snake-Asotin (17060103)+, Clearwater (17060306)+, Middle Columbia-Hood (17070105), Lower Columbia-Sandy (17080001), Lower Cowlitz (17080005), Lower Willamette (17090012), Hoh-Quillayute (17100101), Upper Chehalis (17100103), Lower Chehalis (17100104), Grays Harbor (17100105), Willapa Bay (17100106), Strait of Georgia (17110002), Nooksack (17110004), Lower Skagit (17110007), Stillaguamish (17110008), Snohomish (17110011), Lake Washington (17110012), Puyallup (17110014), Nisqually (17110015), Deschutes (17110016), Skokomish (17110017), Hood Canal (17110018), Puget Sound (17110019), Dungeness-Elwha (17110020)
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Reproduction Comments: Upon arrival in breeding areas, migratory females forage intensively and built up nutrient reserves prior to nesting. Nests are initiated as early as late January in the south, early March in the Midwest, and mid-March to early April in the north. Clutch size is 9-15 (usually 10-12), but more than one female may contribute eggs to a nest, resulting in nests with many more eggs (commonly up to 30 for successful nests in nest boxes). Often two broods per year are raised in the south, occasionally in the north. Incubation lasts 27-37 days, by female. Females with broods commonly move a kilometer or more from the nest site soon after hatching. Most juvenile mortality occurs during the first few weeks after hatching. Young first fly at about 9 weeks, abandoned by parent at 1-2 months. Yearlings may breed but often unsuccessfully or not at all. Most of the above information is from Dugger and Fredrickson 1992).
Ecology Comments: During migration, sometime forms roosting flocks of 100 or more; in winter, smaller groups of less than 30 are more common (Dugger and Fredrickson 1992).

High annual mortality rate (commonly 50% in adults, higher in young of year). Common predators of young include mink, raccoon, snapping turtle, bullfrog, largemouth bass, and other large predatory fishes. Summer home ranges of of fledged broods were 0-12.8 kilometers along a river (Stewart 1958). Home ranges of breeding males in Minnesota averaged 202 ha and those of unpaired males, 526 ha (Gilmer 1971).

Non-Migrant: Y
Locally Migrant: Y
Long Distance Migrant: Y
Mobility and Migration Comments: In the southernmost breeding range, populations are essentially nonmigratory. Northern breeding populations migrate south for winter. Southerly fall migration occurs mainly in October-November. Migrants depart south by mid-March, arrive in northern breeding areas by mid-April (Palmer 1976). In the southeastern U.S., migrates farther south in years when spring-summer precipitation is below average and habitat suitability presumably is negatively affected (Hepp and Hines 1991). Migrants may disperse east or west or northward prior to southward fall migration (Dugger and Fredrickson 1992).
Estuarine Habitat(s): Herbaceous wetland, Lagoon, River mouth/tidal river
Riverine Habitat(s): BIG RIVER, CREEK, Low gradient, MEDIUM RIVER
Lacustrine Habitat(s): Shallow water
Palustrine Habitat(s): Bog/fen, FORESTED WETLAND, HERBACEOUS WETLAND, Riparian
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Forest - Conifer, Forest - Hardwood, Forest - Mixed, Woodland - Conifer, Woodland - Hardwood, Woodland - Mixed
Special Habitat Factors: Standing snag/hollow tree
Habitat Comments: Quiet inland waters near woodland, such as wooded swamps, flooded forest, greentree reservoirs, ponds, marshes, and along streams. Winters on both freshwater and brackish marshes, ponds, streams, and estuaries (AOU 1983, Dugger and Fredrickson 1992).

Nests in holes in large trees in forested wetlands, and in bird boxes, usually within 0.5 km of water and near forest canopy openings, sometimes 1 km or more from water. Prefers cavities with an entrance size of at least 9 cm, an interior basal area of at least 258 sq cm, and a height of 2 m or more above ground (Dugger and Fredrickson 1992). Elms and maples are important habitat components in most areas because they provide protein-rich samaras in spring and suitable nest cavities. Often returns to same nesting area, sometimes same nest box, in successive years. If nest destroyed, moves to new site to renest. After young leave nest, female may led them up to several km to suitable habitat (food and cover). Shallowly flooded habitat with good understory cover is important cover for broods. Commonly lays eggs in nests of conspecifics.

Adult Food Habits: Granivore, Herbivore, Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Granivore, Herbivore, Invertivore
Food Comments: Eats seeds and other parts of aquatic plants; nuts, fruits, and seeds of trees (especially acorns) and shrubs; also aquatic and land insects. Winter diet consist almost entirely of plant material, with acorns often important. Animal foods are an important part of the diet inspring and summer. Young initially eat mainly insects; also duckweed, occasionally frogs (Palmer 1976). Feeds on water and on the ground.
Adult Phenology: Crepuscular, Diurnal
Immature Phenology: Crepuscular, Diurnal
Phenology Comments: Peaks in feeding activity in morning and afternoon (Palmer 1976).
Length: 47 centimeters
Weight: 681 grams
Economic Attributes
Help
Economic Comments: Popular with duck hunters; consistently ranks high among ducks harvested in the Atlantic and Mississippi flyways; hunting pressure has increased with decline in prairie duck populations; in the U.S., the average annual harvest before 1963 was less than 165,000, harvest in the 1980s averaged about 1,000,000 (Dugger and Fredrickson 1992).
Management Summary
Help
Restoration Potential: Good recovery potential due to high reproductive rate and ability to use nest boxes (Dugger and Fredrickson 1993).
Management Requirements: Improper flooding regimes can change tree species composition in a stand from desirable small-acorn oaks to unsuitable (for food) large-acorn oaks (Dugger and Fredrickson 1992). Timber management should provide suitable food plants and a constant supply of trees with suitable nest cavities.

Adding nest boxes to suitable habitat can significantly increase local nesting populations limited by low number of available natural cavities. Nest boxes should be maintained regularly; wood ducks do not nest in boxes that contain the debris from unsuccessful nesting attempts (Dugger and Fredrickson 1992). Because nest box maintenance can be expensive and time consuming, management for natural cavities should be encouraged. Ideal nest box spacing varies with the incidence of dump-nesting and nesting interference and with the cost of nest box maintenance. In Illinois, intraspecific brood parasitism and egg hatchability increased when nest boxes were placed in habitats and at densities resembling natural circumstances (Semel et al. 1988). See Lacki et al. (1987) for entry into literature on nest box use. See Ridlehuber and Teaford (1986) and USFWS (1976) for specifications for the construction and placement of nest boxes. See Bellrose and Holm (1994) for information on research and management techniques.

Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Dabbling Ducks

Use Class: Breeding
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Evidence of historical breeding, or current and likely recurring breeding, at a given location, minimally a reliable observation of one or more breeding pairs in appropriate habitat. Be cautious about creating EOs for observations that may represent single breeding events outside the normal breeding distribution.
Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Justification: Separation distance a compromise between three times average home range diameters (about 5-6 kilometers), and the great mobility of these birds. Home ranges: female Black Duck, mean 130 hectares during prelaying and laying period (n = 7, Ringelman et al. 1982); Mallards, mean 283 hectares (Dzubin 1955), 210 hectares (females) and 240 hectares (males) (Gilmer et al. 1975).
Breeding site fidelity: female Black Ducks in New England, 25% returned to nest in the following year, most within 91 meters of previous nest (Coulter and Miller 1968).

Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): 1.6 km
Inferred Minimum Extent Justification: Diameter of average home range of Mallards (Gilmer et al. 1975).
Date: 08Mar2001
Author: Cannings, S.

Use Class: Migratory stopover
Subtype(s): Staging area, Foraging area, Roosting area
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Evidence of recurring presence of migrating or staging flocks (including historical); and potential recurring presence at a given location, minimally a reliable observation of 25 birds/0.5 square kilometer in appropriate habitat. Occurrences should be locations where the species is resident for some time during the appropriate season; it is preferable to have observations documenting presence over at least 7 days annually. Be cautious about creating EOs for observations that may represent single events.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Justification: Separation distance somewhat arbitrary; set at 10 kilometers to define occurrences of managable size for conservation purposes. Occurrences defined primarily on the basis of areas supporting concentrations of foraging birds, rather than on the basis of distinct populations.
Date: 11Apr2002
Author: Cannings, S.

Use Class: Nonbreeding
Subtype(s): Molting area, Wintering area, Non-breeding feeding concentration area, Roosting area
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Evidence of recurring presence of molting or wintering flocks (including historical); and potential recurring presence at a given location, minimally a reliable observation of 25 birds/0.5 square kilometer in appropriate habitat. Occurrences should be locations where the species is resident for some time during the appropriate season; it is preferable to have observations documenting presence over at least 20 days annually. Be cautious about creating EOs for observations that may represent single events.
Mapping Guidance: Map roosting and feeding areas with separate polygons in same EO.
Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Justification: Separation distance somewhat arbitrary; set at 10 kilometers to define occurrences of managable size for conservation purposes. Wintering flocks of American Black Ducks fly an average of 10 kilometres from roost to foraging area, but have been recorded flying up to 43 kilometres (Frazer et al. 1990). However, occurrences defined primarily on the basis of areas supporting concentrations of foraging birds, rather than on the basis of distinct populations.
Date: 29May2001
Author: Cannings, S.
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 26Jan1995
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): Hammerson, G.

Zoological data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs) and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Alabama Ornithological Society. 2006. Field checklist of Alabama birds. Alabama Ornithological Society, Dauphin Island, Alabama. [Available online at http://www.aosbirds.org/documents/AOSChecklist_april2006.pdf ]

  • American Ornithologists Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American Birds. 7th edition. American Ornithologists Union, Washington, D.C. 829 pages.

  • American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1983. Check-list of North American Birds, 6th edition. Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas. 877 pp.

  • American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American birds. Seventh edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. [as modified by subsequent supplements and corrections published in The Auk]. Also available online: http://www.aou.org/.

  • Aquin, P. 1999. Évaluation de la situation des groupes taxonomiques des oiseaux du Québec. Ministère de l'Environnement et de la Faune. 13 pages.

  • B83COM01NAUS - Added from 2005 data exchange with Alberta, Canada.

  • Bellrose, F. C., and D. J. Holm, editors. 1994. Ecology and management of the wood duck. Stackpole Books, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. 588 pp.

  • BirdLife International. 2004b. Threatened birds of the world 2004. CD ROM. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK.

  • Cadman, M. D., P. F. J. Eagles, and F. M. Helleiner. 1987. The Atlas of Breeding Birds of Ontario. University of Waterloo Press, Waterloo, Canada. 617pp.

  • Canadian Wildlife Service. 1995. Last Mountain Lake and Stalwart National Wildlife Areas: Bird Checklist - Fourth Edition. Environment Canada. Ottawa, ON.

  • Canadian Wildlife Service. 1996. Population status and trends in waterfowl in Canada. Bird Trends (Canadian Wildlife Service) 5: 1-7.

  • Coulter, M. W., and W. R. Miller. 1968. Nesting biology of Black Ducks and Mallards in northern New England. Vermont Fish and Game Department Bulletin 68-2.

  • DeGraph, R.M. and Rappole, J.H. 1995. Neotropical Migratory Birds. Comstock Publishing Associates, Ithaca, NY.

  • Desrosiers A., F. Caron et R. Ouellet. 1995. Liste de la faune vertébrée du Québec. Les publications du Québec. 122

  • Dionne C. 1906. Les oiseaux de la province de Québec. Dussault et Proulx.

  • Droege, S., and J.R. Sauer. 1990. North American Breeding Bird Survey, annual summary, 1989. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 90(8). 22 pp.

  • Dugger, K. M., and L. H. Fredrickson. 1992. Life history and habitat needs of the wood duck. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv., Fish and Wildlife Leaflet 13(1.6). 8 pp.

  • Dunn, E. H., C. M. Downes, and B. T. Collins. 2000. The Canadian Breeding Bird Survey, 1967-1998. Canadian Wildlife Service Progress Notes No. 216. 40 pp.

  • Dzubin, A. 1955. Some evidence of home range in waterfowl. Transactions of the North American Wildlife Conference 20:278-298.

  • Frazer, C., J. R. Longcore, and D. G. McAuley. 1990a. Habitat use by postfledging American black ducks in Maine and New Brunswick. Journal of Wildlife Management 54:451-459.

  • Gilmer, D. S. 1971. Home range and habitat use of breeding mallards (ANAS PLATYRHYNCHOS) and wood ducks (AIX SPONSA) in north-central Minnesota as determined by radio-tracking. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Minnesota, Minneapolis. 142pp.

  • Gilmer, D. S., I. J. Ball, L. M. Cowardin, J. H. Riechmann, and J. R. Tester. 1975. Habitat use and home range of mallards breeding in Minnesota. Journal of Wildlife Management 39:781-789.

  • Godfrey, W. E. 1986. The birds of Canada. Revised edition. National Museum of Natural Sciences, Ottawa. 596 pp. + plates.

  • Hepp, G. R., and J. E. Hines. 1991. Factors affecting winter distribution and migration distance of wood ducks from southern breeding populations. Condor 93:884-891.

  • Hester, F. E., and J. Dermid. 1973. The world of the wood duck. J. B. Lippencott Co., Philidelphia. 160 pp.

  • Howell, S. N. G., and S. Webb. 1995. A guide to the birds of Mexico and northern Central America. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

  • Imhof, T. A. 1976. Alabama birds. Second edition. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. 445 pages.

  • Imhof, T. A. 1976. Alabama birds. Second edition. Univ. Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. 445 pp.

  • Kortright, F.H. 1967. The ducks, geese, and swans of North America. The Stackpole Company, Harrisburg, PA, and Wildlife Management Institute, Washington, D.C. 476 pp.

  • Lacki, M. J., S. P. George, and P. J. Viscosi. 1987. Evaluation of site variables affecting nest box use by wood ducks. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 15:196-200.

  • Lagacé M., L. Blais et D. Banville. 1983. Liste de la faune vertébrée du Québec. Première édition. Ministère du Loisir, de la Chasse et de la Pêche. 100

  • Livezey, B. C. 1991. A phylogenetic analysis and classification of recent dabbling ducks (tribe Anatini) based on comparative morphology. Auk 108:471-507.

  • McAtee W.L. 1959. Folk - names of candian birds. National Museum of Canada. Folk - names of candian birds. National Museum of Canada. 74 pages.

  • Mirarchi, R.E., editor. 2004. Alabama Wildlife. Volume 1. A checklist of vertebrates and selected invertebrates: aquatic mollusks, fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 209 pages.

  • North American Waterfowl Management Plan. 1998. Expanding the vision 1998 update. Canadian Wildlife Service. 32 pp.

  • Ouellet H., M. Gosselin et J.P. Artigau. 1990. Nomenclature française des oiseaux d'Amérique du Nord. Secrétariat d'État du Canada. 457 p.

  • Palmer, R. S., editor. 1976. Handbook of North American birds. Vol. 3. Waterfowl (concluded). Eiders, wood ducks,diving ducks, mergansers, stifftails. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven. 560 pp.

  • Parker III, T. A., D. F. Stotz, and J. W. Fitzpatrick. 1996. Ecological and distributional databases for neotropical birds. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

  • Parks Canada. 2000. Vertebrate Species Database. Ecosystems Branch, 25 Eddy St., Hull, PQ, K1A 0M5.

  • Peterson, R. T. 1980. A field guide to the birds of eastern and central North America. Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, MA. 384 pages.

  • Poole, A. F. and F. B. Gill. 1992. The birds of North America. The American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. and The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA.

  • Raffaele, H., J. Wiley, O. Garrido, A. Keith, and J. Raffaele. 1998. A guide to the birds of the West Indies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. 511 pp.

  • Ridlehuber, K. T., and J. W. Teaford. 1986. Wood duck nest boxes. Section 5.1.2, US Army Corps of Engineers Wildlife Resources Management Manual. Tech. Rep. EL-86-12. Waterways Expt. Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 21 pp.

  • Ringelman, J. K., J. R. Longcore, and R. B. Owen, Jr. 1982. Nest and brood attentiveness in female Black Ducks. Condor 84:110-116.

  • Root, T. 1988. Atlas of wintering North American birds: An analysis of Christmas Bird Count data. University of Chicago Press. 336 pp.

  • See SERO listing

  • Semel, B., P. W. Sherman, and S. M. Byers. 1988. Effects of brood parasitism and nest-box placement on wood duck breeding ecology. Condor 90:920-930.

  • Stewart, P. A. 1958. Local movements of wood ducks (AIX SPONSA). Auk 75:157-168.

  • Terres, J. K. 1980. The Audubon Society encyclopedia of North American birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1976. Nest boxes for wood ducks. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv. Wildl., Wildl. Leaflet 510. 14 pp.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1988. SEIS 88. Final supplemental environmental impact statement: issuance of annual regulations permitting the sport hunting of migratory birds. x + 340 pp.

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of November 2016.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2017 NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Dr., 7th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22203, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2017. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.