Branta bernicla - (Linnaeus, 1758)
Brant
Other English Common Names: brant
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Branta bernicla (Linnaeus, 1758) (TSN 175011)
French Common Names: bernache cravant
Spanish Common Names: Ganso de Collar
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.103759
Element Code: ABNJB05010
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Birds - Waterfowl
Image 21532

© Dennis Donohue

 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Aves Anseriformes Anatidae Branta
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: Branta bernicla
Taxonomic Comments: Includes B. nigricans, formerly regarded as a distinct species. Populations from Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, North Slope of Alaska, Anderson River (NWT), and Victoria Island are genetically homogeneous; Melville Island population is distinctive, apparently long isolated from other breeding populations (Shields, 1990).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 06Apr2016
Global Status Last Changed: 20Nov1996
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Nation: United States
National Status: N5B,N5N (19Mar1997)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N5B,N3N,N5M (30Aug2017)

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 Alaska (S4B), California (S2?), Connecticut (SNA), Delaware (S4N), Idaho (SNA), Maine (S3S4N), Maryland (S3N), Massachusetts (S4N), Navajo Nation (SNR), New Hampshire (SNA), New Jersey (S4N), New York (SNRN), North Carolina (S3N), Ohio (SNA), Oregon (S3N), Pennsylvania (SNA), Rhode Island (SNA), South Dakota (SNA), Texas (S2), Vermont (SNA), Virginia (SNRN), Washington (S3N)
Canada British Columbia (S3M), Manitoba (SNA), New Brunswick (S1N,S2S3M), Northwest Territories (S3B), Nova Scotia (S2M), Nunavut (S5B,S5M), Ontario (S4N), Prince Edward Island (S2M), Quebec (S3M), Yukon Territory (S1B,S3M)

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: The breeding range encompasses arctic North America and eastern Russia. In winter, brant occur along the Pacific coast from Alaska to Baja California and mainland Mexico, along the Atlantic coast from Massachusetts to North Carolina (mainly New Jersey to North Carolina), and from the British Isles to the Mediterranean area and south to coastal China.

BREEDS: arctic North America and Russia: Prince Patrick and Melville islands in the western Canadian high arctic and the Beaufort Sea islands to the coastal plain of Canada and Alaska, with small colonies on the north side of the Chukotka Peninsula in Russia and on Wrangel Island (Derksen and Ward 1993). In western North America, about 80% of the total black brant population nests in four major colonies on the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta in western Alaska (Derkson and Ward 1993). WINTERS: in North America, along the Pacific coast from Alaska to Baja California and mainland Mexico, along Atlantic from Massachusetts to North Carolina (mainly New Jersey to North Carolina); from British Isles to Mediterranean area, south to coastal China; occasional in Hawaii. A major shift in the winter distribution in western North America occurred during the 1950s and 1960s, with increased numbers using lagoons along the Mexican mainland and much decreased numbers wintering in California; since the mid-1960s, more than 80% of the counted winter population has occurred in Mexico (Derksen and Ward 1993). In the 1980s, an average of several thousand wintered in the Izembek Lagoon area of the Alaska Peninsula (Derksen and Ward 1993). Kasegaluk Lagoon on the Chukchi Sea in northwestern Alaska is an important migration stop during southward migration; as much as 49% of the entire Pacific flyway population may use the lagoon (Johnson 1993). Izembek Lagoon on the Alaska Peninsula is a critically important stop in spring and late summer, hosting at least the majority of the eastern Pacific population (Johnson and Herter 1989); nearly the entire black brant population spends as long as nine weeks there before departing for wintering areas to the south (Derksen and Ward 1993). Important summer molting areas occur on Alaska's north slope and Wrangel Island (Derksen and Ward 1993).

Overall Threat Impact Comments: Spring subsistence harvest in western Alaska coupled with fox predation on reduced Yukon-Kuskokwim delta populations have limited the recovery of key nesting colonies in western North America (Derksen and Ward 1993). Declines in eelgrass may affect habitat use, bird condition, and reproductive success (Wilson and Atkinson 1995). Declines in British Columbia and Pacific states are due to degradation and loss of important staging and winter estuarine habitats caused by commercial and recreational development and disturbance (Derksen and Ward 1993). In Mexico, industrial and recreational development in several estuaries may further limit winter habitat (Derksen and Ward 1993).
Disturbance by humans also is a threat to birds wintering in Mexico (Derksen and Ward 1993). Habitats in Alaska, Russia, and northern Canada presently are relatively secure (Derksen and Ward 1993). Molting individuals are susceptible to disturbance by aircraft (see Taylor 1995, Auk 112:904-919).

Short-term Trend Comments: Three of four major colonies on the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta declined an average of 60% during the first half of the 1980s; because few other breeding colonies have been monitored, we have little understanding of their dynamics (Derksen and Ward 1993). Winter population on the North American west coast has exhibited much annual variability, but a significant downward trend occurred from 1964 to 1992 (Derksen and Ward 1993).

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Protection Needs: Protect key nesting, staging, molting, and wintering habitats (especially eelgrass beds).

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)) The breeding range encompasses arctic North America and eastern Russia. In winter, brant occur along the Pacific coast from Alaska to Baja California and mainland Mexico, along the Atlantic coast from Massachusetts to North Carolina (mainly New Jersey to North Carolina), and from the British Isles to the Mediterranean area and south to coastal China.

BREEDS: arctic North America and Russia: Prince Patrick and Melville islands in the western Canadian high arctic and the Beaufort Sea islands to the coastal plain of Canada and Alaska, with small colonies on the north side of the Chukotka Peninsula in Russia and on Wrangel Island (Derksen and Ward 1993). In western North America, about 80% of the total black brant population nests in four major colonies on the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta in western Alaska (Derkson and Ward 1993). WINTERS: in North America, along the Pacific coast from Alaska to Baja California and mainland Mexico, along Atlantic from Massachusetts to North Carolina (mainly New Jersey to North Carolina); from British Isles to Mediterranean area, south to coastal China; occasional in Hawaii. A major shift in the winter distribution in western North America occurred during the 1950s and 1960s, with increased numbers using lagoons along the Mexican mainland and much decreased numbers wintering in California; since the mid-1960s, more than 80% of the counted winter population has occurred in Mexico (Derksen and Ward 1993). In the 1980s, an average of several thousand wintered in the Izembek Lagoon area of the Alaska Peninsula (Derksen and Ward 1993). Kasegaluk Lagoon on the Chukchi Sea in northwestern Alaska is an important migration stop during southward migration; as much as 49% of the entire Pacific flyway population may use the lagoon (Johnson 1993). Izembek Lagoon on the Alaska Peninsula is a critically important stop in spring and late summer, hosting at least the majority of the eastern Pacific population (Johnson and Herter 1989); nearly the entire black brant population spends as long as nine weeks there before departing for wintering areas to the south (Derksen and Ward 1993). Important summer molting areas occur on Alaska's north slope and Wrangel Island (Derksen and Ward 1993).

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, CA, CT, DE, ID, MA, MD, ME, NC, NH, NJ, NN, NY, OH, OR, PA, RI, SD, TX, VA, VT, WA
Canada BC, MB, NB, NS, NT, NU, ON, PE, QC, 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)
WA Pierce (53053), Skagit (53057)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
17 Strait of Georgia (17110002)+, Puget Sound (17110019)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
General Description: A small goose. Head, neck, back, and upper breast basically all black, with a small white necklace (absent in juveniles in summer and fall). Belly dark to pale gray. Dark taill surrounded by white coverts. Wingspan around 42 inches (107 cm).
Reproduction Comments: Egg laying occurs in June-July. Female incubates an average of 3-4 eggs for 22-26 days. Male stands guard. Individual females produce up to one brood each year (do not renest if first attempt fails). Nestlings are precocial, tended by both adults, sometimes congregate in large creches, fledge in 45-50 days, remain with adults until following spring. Some first breed at two years, most at three years. Lifelong pair bond. Nesting often occurs in loose colonies. Large numbers of subadults and nonbreeders concentrate around nesting colonies and other areas during nesting season and molt period (Johnson and Herter 1989). Brant are long lived. Some live 20-25 years.
Ecology Comments: Storms accompanied by high tides may destroy large numbers of nests (Johnson and Herter 1989). The arctic fox is the most important predator of eggs and young in the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta colonies, where glaucous gulls and parasitic jaegers also take eggs and young (Derksen and Ward 1993).

Flightless period during summer molt lasted 23-24 days in northern Alaska (Taylor 1995, Auk 112:904-919).

Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: Y
Mobility and Migration Comments: Spring migration in western North America occurs during a 4-month period starting in mid-February (Derksen and Ward 1993). Spring migration also may begin in February in the eastern United States. Migrants arrive in nesting areas between late May and early June.

Southward migration begins around mid-August in the west, late August-early September in the east. Adults with fledged young follow traditional routes from breeding areas to fall migration staging sites (in western North America-Asia, along the Siberian, Beaufort, Cuckchi, and Bering seas) (Derksen and Ward 1993). Migrants arrive along the U.S. Atlantic coast in mid-October.

Entire or majority of east Pacific brant population congregates in April and August-September at Izembek Lagoon on Alaska Peninsula. Fall departure from the lagoon occurs with favorable winds in late October or early November; these birds arrive in Baja California within 60-95 hours of their departure from Alaska (Derksen and Ward 1993).

Pale-bellied brant breeding in northeastern Canadian arctic winter in Ireland. Those wintering on the U.S. Atlantic coast breed on Southhampton Island and Foxe Basin. The pale-bellied form that breeds chiefly on high arctic islands in Canada winters in the Puget Sound area. Majority of dark-bellied western brant from northwestern Canada and Alaska winter farther south on the Pacific coast, mainly in Mexico (see Shields 1990). See Johnson and Herter (1989) for many further details on migration.

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
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Cropland/hedgerow, Grassland/herbaceous, Tundra
Habitat Comments: In winter, this species occurs primarily in marine situations that are marshy, along lagoons and estuaries, and on shallow bays (AOU 1998), often in areas with eelgrass (e.g., see Wilson and Atkinson 1995). Areas dominated by large freshwater lakes and estuaries provide important summer molting areas (Derksen and Ward 1993).

Nesting occurs mostly on coastal tundra, in low and barren terrain; on islands, deltas, lakes, and sandy areas among puddles and shallows, and in vegetated uplands. In western North America, preferred nest sites are one peninsulas or islets in large wetland complexes, some of which are subject to tidal action (Derksen and Ward 1993). Nests are on the ground in a depression lined, or built up, with mosses and lichens. Adults with broods move from colony sites to rearing habitats along tidal flats (Derksen and Ward 1993).

Adult Food Habits: Herbivore, Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Herbivore, Invertivore
Food Comments: Winter diet includes eelgrass, sea lettuce (ULVA) and sea cabbage (ENTEROMORPHA). Summer diet: grasses, algae, mosses, other plants. Also eats marine invertebrates. Creeping alkali grass and Hoppner sedge are important foods for adults and developing young in breeding areas in western North America (Derksen and Ward 1993). Accumulates nutritional reserves in winter and in staging areas; important foods in western North American staging areas include eelgrass, sea lettuce, and other marine algae; also eats roe of Pacific herring, crustaceans, and mollusks (Derksen and Ward 1993).
Adult Phenology: Diurnal
Immature Phenology: Diurnal
Colonial Breeder: Y
Length: 64 centimeters
Weight: 1370 grams
Economic Attributes
Help
Economic Comments: Subject to spring subsistence harvest in western Alaska (Derkson and Ward 1993).
Management Summary
Help
Management Requirements: Predators, especially arctic fox, can limit numbers and distribution of nesting brant and prevent or slow increases in brant colony size where colonies have been diminished by other mortality factors; removal or management of arctic fox at or near brant colonies may increase nest success and assist re-establishment or expansion of depleted brant colonies (Raveling 1989, Anthony et al. 1991). Control measures to eliminate foxes enhanced nesting success and nesting numbers at the Tutakoke River colony on the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta (Derksen and Ward 1993).

Disturbance should be kept to a minimum in summer molting areas and in traditional foraging areas; vessel and aircraft traffic should be regulated to eliminate excessive disturbance (Derksen and Ward 1993).

In northern breeding areas, development related to petroleum should be monitored and strategies developed for the protection of habitats that are not managed for waterfowl (Derksen and Ward 1993).

Monitoring Requirements: In refuges, disturbance levels should be monitored and, if necessary, regulated (Derksen and Ward 1993).
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Swans and Geese

Use Class: Breeding
Subtype(s): Foraging Area, Nest Site
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.
Mapping Guidance: Map Foraging Areas in separate polygons from the nest site if they are separated from the nest by areas simply flown over on commuting routes.
Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Justification: Breeding occurrences include nesting areas and foraging areas used during the nesting season, but the separation distance is based on nesting-area polygons. Thus different occurrences may overlap if birds from different nesting areas travel to the same foraging area during the nesting season. The separation distance is arbitrary but is intended to yield occurrences that are not impracticably large for conservation purposes.

Canada Geese usually forage near nest site, but adults will forage up to 8 kilometers away (Williams and Sooter 1941, Hammond and Mann 1956) and young will occasionally travel up to 16 kilometers to a foraging area as well (Palmer 1976). Mean home ranges of brood-rearing Snow Geese ranged from 6.6 to 21.7 square kilometers on Bylot Island (Hughes et al. 1994).

Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): 3 km
Inferred Minimum Extent Justification: Based on the conservative, smaller mean home range for Snow Geese of 6.6 square kilometers (Hughes et al. 1994).
Date: 26Apr2004
Author: Cannings, S. and G. Hammerson
Notes: Contains all species of swans and geese, as well as whistling-ducks.

Use Class: Migratory stopover
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Some swans - Cygnus buccinator, in particular - have known migratory routes and staging areas. For these, evidence of past or present recurring presence of migrating or staging flocks and potential recurring presence at a given location. Occurrences should be locations where the species is resident for some time during the appropriate season and habitat; 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 Barriers: None
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Justification: Separation distance arbitrary, set to yield occurrences of managable size for conservation purposes.
Date: 07Aug2017
Author: Ormes, M.
Notes: Created at request of NE; needs review by zoologist.

Use Class: Nonbreeding
Subtype(s): Foraging area, Roosting site
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Evidence of past or present recurring presence of flocks of nonbreeding birds, including nonbreeding birds within the breeding season and breeding individuals outside the breeding season, and potential recurring presence at a given location. Normally only areas where concentrations greater than 50 birds occur regularly for at least 20 days per year would be deemed EOs.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Justification: Separation distance arbitrary, set to yield 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. Swans and geese can travel considerable distances on a daily basis; in winter, flocks of Canada Geese foraged up to 48 km from roost in Texas (Glazener 1946).
Date: 26Apr2004
Author: Cannings, S., and G. Hammerson
Notes: Contains all species of swans and geese, as well as whistling-ducks.

Use Class: Wintering site
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Overlaps with Nonbreeding LUC, but some swans - Cygnus buccinator in particular - have distinct wintering and staging areas. For these, evidence of past or present recurring presence of flocks of nonbreeding birds, and potential recurring presence at a given location. Occurrences should be locations where the species is resident for some time during the appropriate season and habitat; 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 Barriers: None
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Date: 07Aug2017
Author: Ormes, M.
Notes: Created at request of NE; needs review by zoologist.
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 29Jan2010
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Hammerson, G.
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 29Jan2010
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
  • Allen, C. R., S. Demarais, and R. S. Lutz. 1994. Red imported fire ant impact on wildlife: an overview. The Texas Journal of Science 46(1):51-59.

  • 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/.

  • Anthony, R. M., P. L. Flint, and J. S. Sedinger. 1991. Arctic fox removal improves nest success of black brant. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 19:176-184.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Campbell, R.W., N.K. Dawe, I.McT. Cowan, J.M. Cooper, G. Kaiser, and M.C.E. McNall. 1990. The Birds of British Columbia, Vol. 1. Nonpasserines: Introduction, Loons through Waterfowl. Royal B.C. Mus. in association with Environ. Can., Can. Wildl. Serv. 514pp.

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

  • Carter, M., C. Hunter, D. Pashley, and D. Petit. 1998. The Watch List. Bird Conservation, Summer 1998:10.

  • Denson, E.P. 1964. Comparison of waterfowl hunting techniques at Humboldt Bay, California. J. Wildl. Manage. 28:103-119.

  • Derksen, D. V., and D. H. Ward. 1993. Life history habitat needs of the black brant. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Waterfowl Management Handbook, Fish and Wildlife Leaflet 13.1.15. 6 pp.

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

  • Di Silvestro, R. L., editor. 1986. Audubon wildlife report1986. National Audubon Society, New York. 1094 pp. [available from Academic Press, San Diego, CA]

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

  • Einarsen, A. S. 1966. Black brant: sea goose of the Pacific coast. Univ. Washington Press. 160 pp.

  • Gauthier, J., and Y. Aubry (editors). 1996. The breeding birds of Quebec. Atlas of the breeding birds of southern Quebec. Association quebecoise des groupes d'ornithologues, Province of Quebec Society for the Protection of Birds, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, Quebec Region, Montreal, 1302 pp.

  • Glazener, W. C. 1946. Food habits of wild geese on the Gulf Coast of Texas. Journal of Wildlife Management 10:322-329.

  • 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.

  • Godfrey, W.E. 1986. The Birds of Canada. Revised edition. National Museum of Natural Sciences, Ottowa, Canada. 595 pp.

  • Hammond, M. C., and G. E. Mann. 1956. Waterfowl nesting islands. Journal of Wildlife Management 20:345-352.

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

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

  • Hughes, R. J., A. Reed, and G. Gauthier. 1994. Space and habitat use by Greater Snoow Goose broods on Bylot Island, Northwest Territories. Journal of Wildlife Management 58:536-545.

  • Johnson, S. R. 1993. An important early-autumn staging area for Pacific Flyway brant: Kasegaluk Lagoon, Chukchi Sea, Alaska. J. Field Ornithol. 64:539-548.

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

  • Manitoba Avian Research Committee. 2003. The Birds of Manitoba. Manitoba Naturalists Society, Winnipeg, Manitoba. 504 pp.

  • Manitoba Conservation Data Centre. 2019. Manitoba Bird Rank Review by Ken De Smet and Christian Artuso.

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

  • 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.

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

  • Nygren, E.L. 1990. Population and habitat monitoring of Brant during spring migration in the Strait of Georgia. Rep. for Can. Wildl. Serv. Delta, B.C. 69pp.

  • 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. 2. Waterfowl (first part). Whistling ducks, swans, geese, sheld-ducks, dabbling ducks. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven. 521 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. 1980b. A field guide to the birds of eastern and central North America. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Raveling, D. G. 1989. Nest-predation rates in relation to colony size of black brant. J. Wildl. Manage. 53:87-90.

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

  • Sciascia, Jim. 1998-08-27. Electronic mail to Rick Dutko, NJNHP, regarding SRANK changes.

  • Shields, G. F. 1990. Analysis of mitochondrial DNA of Pacific black brant (Branta bernicla nigricans). Auk 107:620-623.

  • Sibley, C.G., and B.L. Monroe, Jr. 1990. Distribution and Taxonomy of Birds of the World. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. xxiv + 1111 pp.

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

  • 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

  • Williams, C. S., and C. A. Sooter. 1941. Canada Goose habitats in Utah and Oregon. Transactions of the North American Wildlife Conference 5:383-387.

  • Wilson, U. W., and J. B. Atkinson. 1995. Black brant winter and spring-staging use at two Washington coastal areas in relation to eelgrass abundance. Condor 97:91-98.

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