Spatula clypeata - (Linnaeus, 1758)
Northern Shoveler
Other English Common Names: northern shoveler
Synonym(s): Anas clypeata Linnaeus, 1758
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Anas clypeata Linnaeus, 1758 (TSN 175096)
French Common Names: canard souchet
Spanish Common Names: Pato Cucharón-Norteño
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.101986
Element Code: ABNJB10150
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Birds - Waterfowl
Image 11097

© Jeff Nadler

 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Aves Anseriformes Anatidae Spatula
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: Anas clypeata
Taxonomic Comments: Formerly (AOU 1983, 1998) considered part of Anas, but now treated as separate on the basis of genetic data (Gonzalez et al. 2009) which indicate that Anas as previously constituted was paraphyletic, and further that it consisted of four deeply divergent clades, now recognized as the separate genera Sibirionetta, Spatula, Mareca, and Anas (cf. Livezey 1991). Linear sequence of genera and species follows Gonzalez et al. (2009). (AOU 2017).
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
Nation: United States
National Status: N5B,N5N (05Jan1997)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N5B,N5N,N5M (26Jan2018)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Alabama (S2B,S5N), Alaska (S5B), Arizona (S1B,S5N), Arkansas (S4N), California (SNRB,SNRN), Colorado (S4B), Connecticut (SNA), Delaware (SHB,S4N), District of Columbia (S1N), Florida (SNRN), Georgia (S4), Hawaii (SNA), Idaho (S4B,S4N), Illinois (S1), Indiana (SHB), Iowa (S2B,S5N), Kansas (S2B), Kentucky (S1), Louisiana (S5N), Maine (S1B), Maryland (S2N), Massachusetts (S1B,S4M), Michigan (SNRN), Minnesota (SNRB), Mississippi (S4N), Missouri (SNRN,SNRM), Montana (S5B), Navajo Nation (S4M), Nebraska (S4), Nevada (S3B,S5N), New Hampshire (SNA), New Jersey (SNRB), New Mexico (S3B,S5N), New York (S2), North Carolina (S3N), North Dakota (SNRB), Oklahoma (S4N), Oregon (S5), Pennsylvania (S3N), Rhode Island (S2N), South Carolina (SNRN), South Dakota (S5B), Tennessee (S4N), Texas (S3B,S5N), Utah (S4S5B,S3S4N), Vermont (SNA), Virginia (SNRN), Washington (S4B,S3N), West Virginia (S3N), Wisconsin (S3B), Wyoming (S4N,S5B)
Canada Alberta (S5B), British Columbia (S5B,S5N), Labrador (S3B,SUM), Manitoba (S5B), New Brunswick (S2S3B,S2S3M), Newfoundland Island (SNA), Northwest Territories (S5B), Nova Scotia (S2B), Nunavut (SUB,SUM), Ontario (S4), Prince Edward Island (S2B), Quebec (S4), Saskatchewan (S5B,S5M), Yukon Territory (S5B)

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: BREEDING: Holarctic. In North America, primarily from Alaska east to Manitoba, south to California, New Mexico, Nebraska, western Iowa, locally eastward; also in Eurasia. NON-BREEDING: southwestern British Columbia, Arizona, east to Gulf Coast, coastal Georgia and South Carolina south to northern Colombia (rarely northern Venezuela), West Indies, and Hawaii, rarely north to north-central and northeastern U.S.; also Old World. In the U.S., the highest winter densities occur in the San Joaquin and Imperial valleys and the Clear Lake refuge in California, and the Bitter Lake refuge in New Mexico; winter abundance may vary greatly from year to year at a particular location (Root 1988).

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)) BREEDING: Holarctic. In North America, primarily from Alaska east to Manitoba, south to California, New Mexico, Nebraska, western Iowa, locally eastward; also in Eurasia. NON-BREEDING: southwestern British Columbia, Arizona, east to Gulf Coast, coastal Georgia and South Carolina south to northern Colombia (rarely northern Venezuela), West Indies, and Hawaii, rarely north to north-central and northeastern U.S.; also Old World. In the U.S., the highest winter densities occur in the San Joaquin and Imperial valleys and the Clear Lake refuge in California, and the Bitter Lake refuge in New Mexico; winter abundance may vary greatly from year to year at a particular location (Root 1988).

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
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 AK, AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NN, NV, NY, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WI, WV, WY
Canada AB, BC, LB, MB, NB, NF, NS, NT, NU, ON, PE, QC, SK, YT

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)
IN Lake (18089)*, Newton (18111)*
KY Christian (21047), Warren (21227)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
04 Little Calumet-Galien (04040001)+*
05 Barren (05110002)+, Red (05130206)+
07 Iroquois (07120002)+*
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Reproduction Comments: Breeding begins in late March in the south to early June in the north. Clutch size: 6-14 (usually 10-12). Incubation: 23-25 days, by female (Terres 1980). Young are tended by female, independent in about 6-7 weeks (Harrison 1978). Clutch size may be limited by lipid reserves rather than by protein acquisition (Ankney and Afteon 1988).
Ecology Comments: Large concentrations seen at migration staging areas. Usually feeds in pairs or small groups.
Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: Y
Mobility and Migration Comments: Small flocks migrate northward in spring, break up into pairs or small groups upon arrival in nesting areas. Flocks start migrating southward in late August or early September. (departs far north July-August). Present in northern South America mostly October-March (Hilty and Brown 1986).
Estuarine Habitat(s): Bay/sound, Herbaceous wetland, Lagoon, River mouth/tidal river, Tidal flat/shore
Riverine Habitat(s): Low gradient
Lacustrine Habitat(s): Shallow water
Palustrine Habitat(s): HERBACEOUS WETLAND, Riparian
Habitat Comments: BREEDING: Shallow, often muddy, fresh-water areas with surrounding cover. Ponds, marshes, sloughs, and creeks. Nests near shallow freshwater lake, pond, marsh, etc. Nests on the ground, usually near edge of water. The nest is a hollow lined with plant material and down. NON-BREEDING: In migration and winter in both freshwater and brackish habitats, and in cultivated fields (not typical) (AOU 1983).
Adult Food Habits: Granivore, Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Granivore, Invertivore
Food Comments: Opportunistic forager. Eats seeds of sedges, bulrushes, saw grass, pondweeds, smartweeds, algae, duckweeds, etc; also mollusks, aquatic insects, and crustaceans. In Manitoba, males and females ate primarily aquatic invertebrates during prelaying and laying periods (Ankney and Afteon 1988). Aquatic invertebrates (e.g., water boatmen) may dominate winter diet in some areas. Usually dabbles at water surface.
Adult Phenology: Diurnal
Immature Phenology: Diurnal
Length: 48 centimeters
Weight: 636 grams
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Restoration Potential: No difference between natural and restored wetlands in pair counts over two years in Iowa (Dubowy 1996).
Management Requirements: See Barker et al. (1990) for information on the effects of different livestock grazing systems on nesting success in North Dakota.
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: 04Mar1994
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), Committee on Classification and Nomenclature. 1983. Check-list of North American Birds. Sixth Edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas.

  • 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/.

  • American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). Chesser, R.T., K.J. Burns, C. Cicero, J.L. Dunn, A.W. Kratter, I.J. Lovette, P.C. Rasmussen, J.V. Remsen, Jr., J.D. Rising, D.F. Stotz, and K. Winker. 2017. Fifty-eighth Supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-list of North American Birds. The Auk 134:751-773.

  • Andrews, R. R. and R. R. Righter. 1992. Colorado Birds. Denver Museum of Natural History, Denver. 442 pp.

  • Ankney, C. D., and A. D. Afteon. 1988. Bioenergetics of breeding northern shovelers: diet, nutrient reserves, clutch size, and incubation. Condor 90:459-472.

  • 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.

  • Barker, W. T., et al. 1990. Effects of specialized grazing systems on waterfowl production in southcentral North Dakota. Trans. 55th North American Wildl. & Nat. Res. Conf., pp. 462-474.

  • Bellrose, F.C. 1976. Ducks, geese and swans of North America. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, PA.

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

  • Bull, John. 1974. Birds of New York State. Doubleday, Garden City, New York. 655 pp.

  • 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.

  • DICKINSON, MARY B., ED. 1999. FIELD GUIDE TO THE BIRDS OF NORTH AMERICA, 3RD ED. NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY, WASHINGTON, D.C. 480 PP.

  • Drennan, Susan R. 1986. 86th Christmas bird count. American Birds 40(4):575-1117.

  • Dubowy, P.J. 1996. Northern Shoveler (Anas clypeata). In A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The Birds of North America, No. 217. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, DC. 24 pp.

  • Dubowy, Paul J. 1996. Northern Shoveler; The Birds of North America. Vol. 6, No. 217. American Orinithologists' Union. The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.

  • 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.

  • Eaton, E.H. 1910. Birds of New York. Part 1. New York: University of State of New York. Albany, NY.

  • 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., 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.

  • Godfrey, W.E. 1966. The birds of Canada. National Museums of Canada. Ottawa. 428 pp.

  • Harrison, C. 1978. A Field Guide to the Nests, Eggs and Nestlings of North American Birds. Collins, Cleveland, Ohio.

  • Hilty, S.L. and W. L. Brown. 1986. A Guide to the Birds of Colombia. Princeton University Press, Princeton, USA. 836 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.

  • Johnson, S. R. and D. R. Herter. 1989. The Birds of the Beaufort Sea. BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc., Anchorage, Alaska. 372 pp.

  • LaRue, C.T. 1994. Birds of northern Black Mesa, Navajo County, Arizona. Great Basin Naturalist 54(1):1-63.

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

  • Lowery, George H. 1974. The Birds of Louisiana. LSU Press. 651pp.

  • Madge, S., and H. Burn. 1988. Waterfowl: An Identification Guide to the Ducks, Geese and Swans of the World. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, Massachusetts. 298 pp.

  • Mills, Charles E. 1991. The Birds of a Southern Indiana Coal Mine Reclamation Project. 69 Ind. Aud. Q. 65-79.

  • 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.

  • New York State Breeding Bird Atlas. 1984. Preliminary species distribution maps, 1980-1984. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Wildlife Resources Center. Delmar, NY.

  • New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Checklist of the amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals of New York State, including their protective status. Nongame Unit, Wildlife Resources Center, Delmar, NY.

  • Nicholson, C.P. 1997. Atlas of the breeding birds of Tennessee. The University of Tennessee Press. 426 pp.

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

  • Pennsylvania Breeding Bird Atlas Project. 1984-1987. UNPUBLISHED

  • 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.

  • Peterson, R.T. 1980b. A field guide to the birds of eastern and central North America. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.

  • Peterson, R.T. 1990b. A field guide to western birds. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.

  • Pratt, H. D., P. L. Bruner, and D. G. Berrett. 1987. A Field Guide to the Birds of Hawaii and the Tropical Pacific. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. 409 pp. + 45 plates.

  • 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.

  • Rappole, J.H., Morton, E.S., Lovejoy, T.E. and Ruos, J.L. 1983. Nearctic avian migrants in the Neotropics. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and World Wildlife Fund, Washington D.C.

  • Reeves, T. and A. Nelson. 1996. Birds of Morgan Lake: a guide to common species. Arizona Public Service, Four Corners Power Plant. 25 p.

  • Ridgely, R. S. 2002. Distribution maps of South American birds. Unpublished.

  • Ridgely, R. S. and J. A. Gwynne, Jr. 1989. A Guide to the Birds of Panama. 2nd edition. Princeton University Press, Princeton, USA.

  • Ridgely, R. S. and P. J. Greenfield. 2001. The birds of Ecuador: Status, distribution, and taxonomy. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, USA.

  • 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

  • Semenchuk, G.P. 1992. The atlas of breeding birds of Alberta. Federation of Alberta Naturalists. 391 pp.

  • Sibley, D. A. 2000a. The Sibley guide to birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.

  • Sinclair, P.H., W.A. Nixon, C.D. Eckert and N.L. Hughes. 2003. Birds of the Yukon Territory. UBC Press, Vancouver, BC. 595pp.

  • Stiles, F. G. and A. F. Skutch. 1989. A guide to the birds of Costa Rica. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, USA. 511 pp.

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

  • Wildlife Management Information System (WMIS). 2006+. Geo-referenced wildlife datasets (1900 to present) from all projects conducted by Environment and Natural Resources, Government of the Northwest Territories, Canada.  Available at http://www.enr.gov.nt.ca/programs/wildlife-research/wildlife-management-information-services

  • Wilkins, K.A., M.C. Otto and G.W. Smith. 2000. Trends in duck breeding populations, 1955-2000. Administrative Report. Office of Migratory Bird Management. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 19 pp.

  • Wood, MERRILL. 1979. BIRDS OF PENNSYLVANIA. PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV., UNIVERSITY PARK. 133 PP.

  • Zook, J. L. 2002. Distribution maps of the birds of Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama. Unpublished.

  • eBird. 2018. eBird: An online database of bird distribution and abundance [web application]. eBird, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Available: http://www.ebird.org. Accessed in 2018.

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 March 2019.
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 © 2019 NatureServe, 2511 Richmond (Jefferson Davis) Highway, Suite 930, Arlington, VA 22202, 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. 2019. 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.