Campephilus principalis - (Linnaeus, 1758)
Ivory-billed Woodpecker
Other English Common Names: ivory-billed woodpecker
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Campephilus principalis (Linnaeus, 1758) (TSN 178264)
French Common Names: Pic ā bec ivoire
Spanish Common Names: Carpintero Real
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.102822
Element Code: ABNYF13040
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Birds - Other Birds
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Aves Piciformes Picidae Campephilus
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: Campephilus principalis
Taxonomic Comments: Cuban form has been considered by some authors to be a distinct species, C. bairdii (AOU 1983). May constitute a superspecies with C. imperialis (AOU 1998).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G1
Global Status Last Reviewed: 05Jun2007
Global Status Last Changed: 05Jun2007
Rounded Global Status: G1 - Critically Imperiled
Reasons: Formerly occurred in the southeastern United States and Cuba; declined to extinction or near extinction due primarily to habitat loss from logging; recent records from Arkansas and Florida are in need of confirmation.
Nation: United States
National Status: N1 (05Jun2007)

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 (SX), Arkansas (S1), Florida (SH), Georgia (SX), Illinois (SX), Kentucky (SX), Louisiana (SX), Maryland (SX), Mississippi (SX), Missouri (SX), North Carolina (SX), Ohio (SX), Oklahoma (SXB), South Carolina (SX), Tennessee (SX), Texas (SX)

Other Statuses

U.S. Endangered Species Act (USESA): LE: Listed endangered (02Jun1970)
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Lead Region: R4 - Southeast
IUCN Red List Category: CR - Critically endangered

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent Comments: Resident formerly from eastern Texas, southeastern Oklahoma, northeastern Arkansas, southeastern Missouri, southern Illinois, southern Indiana, Kentucky, and southeastern North Carolina south to the Gulf Coast and southern Florida, and throughout Cuba. The last positive sightings in Cuba (1987) were in a small tract of degraded habitat (Collar et al. 1992); intensive surveys in Cuba in 1991 and 1993 found no evidence of any remaining individuals. A sighting in southeastern Louisiana in 1999 has not been confirmed. At least one bird was reported in eastern Arkansas in 2005, but that record is controversial. Prior to that, the last confirmed sighting in the United States was in the mid-1940s in northern Louisiana. Putative sightings of this species in the Florida Panhandle in 2005 and 2006 still lack adequate confirmation an extant population there.

Number of Occurrences: 0 - 5
Number of Occurrences Comments: One or two known possibly extant occurrences. The last known population in Cuba apparently went extinct between 1987 and 1991 (Lammertink, 1995, Cotinga, Vol. 3).

Population Size: Zero to 50 individuals
Population Size Comments: Population size is very small or nonexistent.

Number of Occurrences with Good Viability/Integrity: None (zero)

Overall Threat Impact Comments: Decline was primarily the result of loss of habitat via logging; one of the last known inhabited areas in the United States (Tensas River, Louisiana) was cleared for soybean production; overhunting also may have contributed to the decline.

Long-term Trend: Decline of >90%

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Inventory Needs: Further surveys are needed to determine whether a population might be extant in Arkansas.

Distribution
Help
Global Range: Resident formerly from eastern Texas, southeastern Oklahoma, northeastern Arkansas, southeastern Missouri, southern Illinois, southern Indiana, Kentucky, and southeastern North Carolina south to the Gulf Coast and southern Florida, and throughout Cuba. The last positive sightings in Cuba (1987) were in a small tract of degraded habitat (Collar et al. 1992); intensive surveys in Cuba in 1991 and 1993 found no evidence of any remaining individuals. A sighting in southeastern Louisiana in 1999 has not been confirmed. At least one bird was reported in eastern Arkansas in 2005, but that record is controversial. Prior to that, the last confirmed sighting in the United States was in the mid-1940s in northern Louisiana. Putative sightings of this species in the Florida Panhandle in 2005 and 2006 still lack adequate confirmation an extant population there.

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 ALextirpated, AR, FL, GAextirpated, ILextirpated, KYextirpated, LAextirpated, MDextirpated, MOextirpated, MSextirpated, NCextirpated, OHextirpated, OKextirpated, SCextirpated, TNextirpated, TXextirpated

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, 2005

Ecology & Life History
Help
Basic Description: A large crested woodpecker.
Reproduction Comments: Cuba: nesting season was March-June, peak in April. Clutch size usually was 2-3. Incubation lasted about 20 days, by both sexes. Young were tended by both parents, left nest at about 5 weeks, fed by adults for additional 2 months or more.
Ecology Comments: Population density was estimated at 1 pair per 16-43 sq km (formerly, USFWS 1980, Collar et al. 1992). Reported to be either sedentary or nomadic in different areas.
Non-Migrant: Y
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Mobility and Migration Comments: Nomadic in some areas.
Palustrine Habitat(s): FORESTED WETLAND, Riparian
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Forest - Conifer, Forest - Hardwood, Forest - Mixed
Special Habitat Factors: Standing snag/hollow tree
Habitat Comments: In U.S.: swampy forests, especially large bottomland river swamps of coastal plain and Mississippi Delta and cypress swamps of Florida, in areas with many dead and dying trees. Cuba: mainly in high country in pine forests, also pine-hardwood forest and hardwood forest; formerly also in lowland forest.

Nested in tall old trees (various species in U.S., mainly old and dying pines in Cuba), at height of about 8-21 m.

Adult Food Habits: Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Invertivore
Food Comments: Ate mainly larvae and adults of wood-boring beetles that live between bark and wood of dying and newly dead trees. Sometimes dug tenches in rotten wood to obtain beetles. Also ate some fruits/seeds of trees.
Length: 50 centimeters
Weight: 511 grams
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Woodpeckers

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: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: The high potential for gene flow among populations of birds separated by fairly large distances makes it difficult to circumscribe occurrences on the basis of meaningful population units without occurrences becoming too large. Hence, a moderate, standardized separation distance has been adopted for woodpeckers; it should yield occurrences that are not too spatially expansive while also accounting for the likelihood of gene flow among populations within a few kilometers of each other.

Be careful not to separate a population's nesting areas and foraging areas as different occurrences; include them in the same occurrence even if they are more than 5 km apart.

Territories generally smaller than non-breeding home ranges. Territories/home ranges: Red-headed Woodpecker, summer territories 3.1-8.5 hectares (Venables and Collopy 1989), winter territories smaller (0.17 hectare to 1 hectare (Williams and Batzli 1979, Venables and Collopy 1989, Moskovits 1978); Lewis's Woodpecker, 1.0-6.0 hectares (Thomas et al. 1979); Golden-fronted Woodpecker, summer ranges larger than breeding territories, ranging from 15.4 to 41.7 hectares (average 24.9, Husak 1997); Gila Woodpecker, pair territories ranged from 4.45 to 10.0 hectares (n = 5) (Edwards and Schnell 2000); Nuttall's Woodpecker, about 65 hectares (0.8 kilometers diameter; Miller and Bock 1972); Hairy Woodpecker: breeding territories averaged 2.8 hectares, range 2.4 to 3.2 hectares (Lawrence 1967); Black-backed Woodpecker, home ranges 61-328 hectares (Goggans et al. 1988, Lisi 1988, Dixon and Saab 2000); White-headed Woodpecker, mean home ranges 104 and 212 hectares on old-growth sites and 321 and 342 hectares on fragmented sites (Dixon 1995a,b); Williamson's Sapsucker, home ranges 4-9 hectares (Crockett 1975).

Fidelity to breeding site: high in Red-headed Woodpeckers--15 of 45 banded adults returned to vicinity following year (Ingold 1991); one adult moved 1.04 kilometers between breeding seasons (Belson 1998).

Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): .2 km
Inferred Minimum Extent Justification: Based on a conservatively small home range of 3 hectares.
Date: 10Sep2004
Author: Cannings, S., and G. Hammerson
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: 24Mar2011
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Hammerson, G.
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 30Oct1995
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 ]

  • 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). 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). 2003. Forty-fourth supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-list of North American Birds. The Auk 120(3):923-931.

  • Barbour, R.W. et al. 1973. Kentucky Birds.

  • Belson, , M. S. 1998. Red-headed Woodpecker (MELANERPES ERYTHROCEPHALUS) use of habitat at Wekiwa Springs State Park, Florida. M.Sc. thesis, Univ. of Cnetral Florida, Orlando.

  • Bent, A.C. 1939d. Life histories of North American woodpeckers, U.S. Nat'l. Mus. Bull. 174. Washington, D.C.

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

  • Collar, N. J., L. P. Gonzaga, N. Krabbe, A. Madroņo-Nieto, L. G. Naranjo, T. A. Parker III, and D. C. Wege. 1992. Threatened Birds of the Americas. The ICBP/IUCN Red Data Book. 3rd edition, Part 2. International Council for Bird Preservation, Cambridge, UK.

  • Crockett, A. B. 1975. Ecology and behavior of the Williamson's Sapsucker in Colorado. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Colorado, Boulder.

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

  • Dixon, R. D. 1995a. Density, nest-site and roost-site characteristics, home-range, habitat-use, and behavior of white-headed woodpeckers. Deschutes and Winema National Forests, Oregon. Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Nongame Report 93-3-01.

  • Dixon, R. D. 1995b. Ecology of White-headed woodpeckers in the central Oregon Cascades. M. Sc. thesis, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID.

  • Dixon, R. D., and V. A. Saab. 2000. Black-backed Woodpecker (PICOIDES ARCTICUS). No. 509 IN A. Poole and F. Gill, editors. The birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 20pp.

  • Eagar, D.C. and Hatcher, R.M. (editors). 1980. Tennessee's Rare Wildlife - Volume 1: The Vertebrates.

  • Edwards, H. H., and G. D. Schnell. 2000. Gila Woodpecker (MELANERPES UROPYGIALIS). No. 532 IN A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 16pp.

  • Ehrlich, P. R., D. S. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1992. Birds in Jeopardy: the Imperiled and Extinct Birds of the United States and Canada, Including Hawaii and Puerto Rico. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 259 pp.

  • Fitzpatrick, J. W., M. Lammertink, M. D. Luneau Jr., T. W. Gallagher, B. R. Harrison, G. M. Sparling, K. V. Rosenberg, R. W. Rohrbaugh, E. C. H. Swarthout, P. H. Wrege,1 S. B. Swarthout, M. S. Dantzker, R. A. Charif, T. R. Barksdale, J. V. Remsen Jr., S. D. Simon, and D. Zollner. 2005. Ivory-Billed Woodpecker (Campephilus principalis) persists in continental North America. Sciencexpress 28 April 2005 pages 1-4.

  • Garrido, O. H., and A. Kirkconnell. 2000. Field guide to the birds of Cuba. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York. 253 pp.

  • Goggans, R., R. D. Dixon and L. C. Seminara. 1988. Habitat use by Three-toed and Black-backed woodpeckers, Deschutes National Forest, Oregon. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife - Nongame Wildlife Program Report 87-3-02. 43pp.

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

  • Husak, M. S. 1997. Seasonal variation in territorial behavior of the Golden-fronted Woodpecker. M.Sc. thesis, Angelo State University, San Angelo, Texas.

  • 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.

  • Ingold, D.J. 1991. Nest-site fidelity in Red-headed and Red-bellied Woodpeckers. Wilson Bulletin 103(1):118.

  • Jackson, J. J. 2004. In search of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker. Smithsonian Books, Washington, DC, USA.

  • Jacobson, E. R., et. al. 1991. Chronic upper respiratory disease of free-ranging desert tortoises (Xerobates agassizii) in Las Vegas Valley, Nevada. Journal of Wildlife diseases. 27(2):296-316.

  • Lawrence, L. deK. 1967. A comparative life-history study of four species of woodpeckers. Ornithological Monographs No. 5. 156 pages.

  • Lisi, G. 1988. A field study of Black-backed Woodpeckers in Vermont. Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department, Nongame and Endangered Species Program, Technical Report 3.

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

  • Matthews, J.R. and C.J. Moseley (eds.). 1990. The Official World Wildlife Fund Guide to Endangered Species of North America. Volume 1. Plants, Mammals. xxiii + pp 1-560 + 33 pp. appendix + 6 pp. glossary + 16 pp. index. Volume 2. Birds, Reptiles, Amphibians, Fishes, Mussels, Crustaceans, Snails, Insects, and Arachnids. xiii + pp. 561-1180. Beacham Publications, Inc., Washington, D.C.

  • Miller, A. H., and C. E. Bock. 1972. Natural history of the Nuttall Woodpecker at the Hastings Reservation. Condor 74:284-294.

  • 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.

  • Moskovits, D. 1978. Winter territorial and foraging behavior of Red-headed Woodpecker in Florida. Wilson Bulletin 90:521-535.

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

  • Oberholser, Harry C. 1974. The Bird Life of Texas, Volume 1. University of Texas Press. Austin, Texas. 530 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.

  • 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.

  • See SERO listing

  • Short, L. L. 1982. Woodpeckers of the World. Museum of Natural History [Greenville, Delaware], Monograph Series xviii + 676 pp.

  • Tanner, J.T. 1942. The ivory-billed woodpecker.

  • Tanner, J.T. 1966 (1942). The ivory-billed woodpecker. Dover, New York. 111 pp.

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

  • Thomas, J. W., R. G. Anderson, C. Maser, and E. L. Bull. 1979. Snags. Pages 60-77 in J. W. Thomas (editor). Wildlife Habitats in Managed Forests: the Blue Mountains of Oregon and Washington. U.S.D.A. Handbook 553.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1980. Selected vertebrate endangered species of the seacoast of the United States-- ivory-billed woodpecker. FWS/OBS-80/01.8. 12 pp.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1990. Endangered and threatened species recovery program: report to Congress. 406 pp.

  • Venables, A., and M. W. Collopy. 1989. Seasonal foraging and habitat requirements of Red-headed Woodpeckers in north-central Florida. Florida Game Fresh Water Fish Comm. Nongame Wildlife Program Final Report Project no. GFC-84-006.

  • Williams, J. B., and G. O. Batzli. 1979. Competition among bark-foraging birds in central Illinois: experimental evidence. Condor 81:122-132.

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.