Cypseloides niger - (Gmelin, 1789)
Black Swift
Other English Common Names: black swift
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Cypseloides niger (Gmelin, 1789) (TSN 177997)
French Common Names: martinet sombre
Spanish Common Names: Vencejo Negro
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.101434
Element Code: ABNUA01010
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Birds - Other Birds
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Aves Apodiformes Apodidae Cypseloides
Genus Size: C - Small genus (6-20 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: Cypseloides niger
Taxonomic Comments: Considered a superspecies with C. lemosi and C. fumigatus (both of South America) by some authors (AOU 1998).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G4
Global Status Last Reviewed: 07Apr2016
Global Status Last Changed: 02Dec1996
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by calculator
Rounded Global Status: G4 - Apparently Secure
Reasons: Large nesting range extends discontinuously from southeast Alaska to Costa Rica and West Indies; winters in South America and West Indies; global population probably exceeds 100,000; specialized nesting habitat on cliffs near waterfalls; population trend uncertain--some data suggest major decline over recent decades, whereas other data indicate relative stability; potentially threatened by climate change and consequent reduced streamflows in nesting range and by habitat alteration in winter range; better information on trend and threat impacts is needed.
Nation: United States
National Status: N4B (19Mar1997)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N2N3B,N2N3M (05Dec2017)

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 (S2N), California (S2), Colorado (S3B), Idaho (S1B), Montana (S1B), New Mexico (S2B,S2N), Oregon (S2?B), Utah (S2B), Washington (S3B)
Canada Alberta (SU), British Columbia (S2S3B)

Other Statuses

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC): Endangered (01May2015)
Comments on COSEWIC: Reason for designation: Canada is home to about 80% of the North American population of this bird species. It nests in cliff-side habitats (often associated with waterfalls) in British Columbia and western Alberta. Like many other birds that specialize on a diet of flying insects, this species has experienced a large population decline over recent decades. The causes of the decline are not well understood, but are believed to be related to changes in food supply that may be occurring at one or more points in its life cycle. The magnitude and geographic extent of the decline are causes for conservation concern.

Status history: Designated Endangered in May 2015.

IUCN Red List Category: VU - Vulnerable

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent: >2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments: Breeding occurs locally from southeastern Alaska, British Columbia, and southwestern Alberta south through the Pacific states to southern California; northwestern Montana, Colorado, Utah, northern New Mexico (Johnson 1990), and southeastern Arizona (Knorr and Knorr 1990); locally in highlands from Nayarit, Puebla, and Veracruz south to Guatemala, Honduras, and Costa Rica; locally in the West Indies in Cuba, Jamaica, Hispaniola, Puerto Rico, Montserrat, Guadeloupe, Dominica, Martinique, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent (Sibley and Monroe 1990, Lowther and Collins 2002). Winter range is poorly known but presumably includes portions of northern and western South America (including western Brazil; Beason et al. 2012), as well as Cuba, Jamaica, and Hispaniola (Raffaele et al. 1998, Lowther and Collins 2002).

Number of Occurrences:  
Number of Occurrences Comments: The number of distinct occurrences has not been determined using standardized criteria. The species is known from a large number of observation sites but a small number (fewer than 100) specific breeding localities, which tend to be remote and relatively difficult to confirm as actual nesting sites.

Population Size: 100,000 - 1,000,000 individuals
Population Size Comments: Total adult population size is unknown but certainly exceeds 10,000 and likely exceeds 100,000. Partners in Flight (2013) estimated global population size at 190,000, of which 70,000 were in North America.

Overall Threat Impact: Unknown
Overall Threat Impact Comments: The typically remote, steep, and difficult-to-access nesting sites used by this species generally are not vulnerable to outright destruction, direct major alteration, or excessive disturbance, though changes in upstream drainages could affect streamflow and consequently habitat suitability.

Climate change is a potential threat. For example, reduction in glaciers, snow pack, and precipitation may reduce stream flow and thereby render some nesting areas unsuitable. However, the population impact of this is uncertain (e.g., birds may shift to other sites).

Habitat changes (e.g., deforestation) in wintering areas (e.g., South America) might negatively affect black swifts (Beason et al. 2012), but supporting data are lacking, and threats there remain speculative.

Although threat impacts over the next 10 years or three generations are difficult to assess, the overall impact over this time frame likely will be low at most.

Short-term Trend: Relatively Stable (<=10% change)
Short-term Trend Comments: Trend over the past 10 years or 3 generations is uncertain, but overall range extent, area of occupancy, and number of nesting sites probably have been relatively stable or slowly declining.

Long-term Trend: Decline of <30% to relatively stable
Long-term Trend Comments: Long-term trend is uncertain, but area of occupancy and population size probably have declined to some degree.

Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) data for 1968-2013 suggest a very large decline (from an average of nearly 40 birds per route in the 1960s to just a few per route in the 2010s). However, the number and geographic scope of routes have changed over these decades, and the road-side BBS methods are not especially well suited to black swifts, which use remote, specialized breeding habitats. Consequently the reality of the apparent decline is uncertain and needs confirmation from other types of data. In fact, in Colorado, available information suggests that black swift populations have remained relatively stable over the past 50 years (Wiggins 2004). Lowther and Collins (2002) cited examples of absence or reductions in black swifts in a few traditional nesting areas in California and Alberta.

Intrinsic Vulnerability Comments: Low rate of reproduction (1 egg per clutch, 1 clutch per year).

Environmental Specificity: Very narrow to narrow.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)) Breeding occurs locally from southeastern Alaska, British Columbia, and southwestern Alberta south through the Pacific states to southern California; northwestern Montana, Colorado, Utah, northern New Mexico (Johnson 1990), and southeastern Arizona (Knorr and Knorr 1990); locally in highlands from Nayarit, Puebla, and Veracruz south to Guatemala, Honduras, and Costa Rica; locally in the West Indies in Cuba, Jamaica, Hispaniola, Puerto Rico, Montserrat, Guadeloupe, Dominica, Martinique, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent (Sibley and Monroe 1990, Lowther and Collins 2002). Winter range is poorly known but presumably includes portions of northern and western South America (including western Brazil; Beason et al. 2012), as well as Cuba, Jamaica, and Hispaniola (Raffaele et al. 1998, Lowther and Collins 2002).

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, CO, ID, MT, NM, OR, UT, WA
Canada AB, BC

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


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
AK Ketchikan Gateway (02130), Prince of Wales-Outer Ketchikan (CA) (02201), Wrangell-Petersburg (CA) (02280)*
CA Alpine (06003), Butte (06007), Del Norte (06015)*, Humboldt (06023)*, Los Angeles (06037), Marin (06041)*, Monterey (06053)*, Napa (06055)*, Nevada (06057)*, Placer (06061), Riverside (06065), San Bernardino (06071), San Luis Obispo (06079), San Mateo (06081)*, Santa Clara (06085)*, Santa Cruz (06087), Shasta (06089), Siskiyou (06093)*, Sonoma (06097)*, Trinity (06105)*, Tulare (06107)
CO Archuleta (08007), Boulder (08013), Chaffee (08015), Clear Creek (08019), Conejos (08021), Custer (08027), Dolores (08033), Eagle (08037), Garfield (08045), Gunnison (08051), Hinsdale (08053), Larimer (08069), Mineral (08079), Ouray (08091), Pitkin (08097), Rio Blanco (08103)*, Routt (08107), Saguache (08109), San Juan (08111), San Miguel (08113)
ID Bonner (16017), Boundary (16021), Kootenai (16055), Owyhee (16073), Shoshone (16079)
MT Flathead (30029), Lake (30047), Lincoln (30053), Missoula (30063), Ravalli (30081)
NM Sandoval (35043)
OR Douglas (41019), Hood River (41027), Jackson (41029), Lane (41039), Polk (41053)*
UT Cache (49005)*, Duchesne (49013)*, Iron (49021)*, Salt Lake (49035)*, Sevier (49041)*, Utah (49049), Wasatch (49051), Washington (49053)*
WA Chelan (53007), Clallam (53009), King (53033), Kittitas (53037), Lewis (53041), Pend Oreille (53051), Skagit (53057), Snohomish (53061), Whatcom (53073)
WY Uinta (56041), Washakie (56043)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
10 Nowood (10080008)+, Clear (10190004)+, St. Vrain (10190005)+, Big Thompson (10190006)+
11 Arkansas Headwaters (11020001)+
13 Rio Grande headwaters (13010001)+, San Luis (13010003)+, Saguache (13010004)+, Conejos (13010005)+, Rio Chama (13020102)+, Jemez (13020202)+
14 Colorado headwaters (14010001)+, Eagle (14010003)+, Roaring Fork (14010004)+, Colorado headwaters-Plateau (14010005)+, Upper Gunnison (14020002)+, Uncompahange (14020006)+, Upper Dolores (14030002)+, San Miguel (14030003)+, Blacks Fork (14040107)+, Upper Yampa (14050001)+, Upper White (14050005)+, Strawberry (14060004)+*, Upper San Juan (14080101)+, Piedra (14080102)+, Animas (14080104)+
15 Upper Virgin (15010008)+*
16 Middle Bear (16010202)+*, Little Bear-Logan (16010203)+*, Utah Lake (16020201)+, Provo (16020203)+, Jordan (16020204)+*, Middle Sevier (16030003)+*, Escalante Desert (16030006)+*, Upper Carson (16050201)+
17 Yaak (17010103)+, Lower Kootenai (17010104)+, Moyie (17010105)+, Bitterroot (17010205)+, North Fork Flathead (17010206)+*, Middle Fork Flathead (17010207)+, Swan (17010211)+, Lower Flathead (17010212)+, Lower Clark Fork (17010213)+, Pend Oreille Lake (17010214)+, Pend Oreille (17010216)+, Upper Coeur D'alene (17010301)+, Lake Chelan (17020009)+, Upper Columbia-Entiat (17020010)+, Upper Yakima (17030001)+, Bruneau (17050102)+, Middle Columbia-Hood (17070105)+, Upper Cowlitz (17080004)+, Middle Fork Willamette (17090001)+, Coast Fork Willamette (17090002)+, Mckenzie (17090004)+, Middle Willamette (17090007)+*, North Umpqua (17100301)+, Upper Rogue (17100307)+, Nooksack (17110004)+, Upper Skagit (17110005)+, Lower Skagit (17110007)+, Stillaguamish (17110008)+, Skykomish (17110009)+, Snoqualmie (17110010)+, Snohomish (17110011)+, Crescent-Hoko (17110021)+
18 Smith (18010101)+*, Lower Klamath (18010209)+*, Trinity (18010211)+*, Lower Pit (18020003)+, Sacramento headwaters (18020005)+*, Middle Fork Feather (18020123)+, Upper Yuba (18020125)+*, North Fork American (18020128)+, Upper Kern (18030001)+*, Upper Tule (18030006)+, Upper Kaweah (18030007)+, San Pablo Bay (18050002)+*, Coyote (18050003)+*, Tomales-Drake Bays (18050005)+*, San Lorenzo-Soquel (18060001)+, Central Coastal (18060006)+, Los Angeles (18070105)+, San Gabriel (18070106)+, San Jacinto (18070202)+, Santa Ana (18070203)+, Whitewater River (18100201)+
19 Southeast Mainland (19010101)+, Ketchikan (19010102)+, Mainland (19010201)+*, Icy Strait-Chatham Strait (19010500)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Basic Description: Black Swift; a small, black, aerial-feeding bird.
Reproduction Comments: One egg is laid in June-July. Nestling is altricial. Young fledges in 45 days. Nests in small colonies.
Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: Y
Mobility and Migration Comments: Breeding populations in U.S. and Canada make long migrations to winter range.
Lacustrine Habitat(s): Aerial
Palustrine Habitat(s): Aerial, Riparian
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Aerial, Bare rock/talus/scree, Cliff
Habitat Comments: Aerial; forages over forests and in open areas. Nests behind or next to waterfalls and wet cliffs (Michael 1927, Knorr 1962, Foerster and Collins 1990), on sea cliffs and in sea caves (Vrooman 1901, Legg 1956), and occasionally in limestone caves (Davis 1964). Nests in dark inaccessible sites with unobstructed flight path (Knorr and Knorr 1990). Nest site persistence and tenacity almost absolute (Knorr and Knorr 1990). Nest is a cup-like structure of mud, mosses and algae.
Adult Food Habits: Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Invertivore
Food Comments: Feeds on insects (e.g., flying ants, caddisflies, mayflies, beetles, flesh flies, hymenopterans). Catches insects in the air, often at great heights. Often forages with other swifts at leading edges of rainstorms (Costa Rica, Stiles and Skutch 1989).
Adult Phenology: Diurnal
Immature Phenology: Diurnal
Phenology Comments: In Jamaica, regularly descends to lowlying coastal areas to feed for the first hour or two after dawn (Lack 1976).
Colonial Breeder: Y
Length: 18 centimeters
Weight: 46 grams
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary Not yet assessed
Help
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Swifts

Use Class: Breeding
Subtype(s): 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 element occurrences 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: Separation distance is an arbitrary value intended to balance the high mobility of these birds against the need for occurrences that are not impractically large for conservation purposes.

Foraging ranges from breeding site cover at least several square kilometers, often much larger. White-throated Swifts: at one site not observed more than 2 kilometers from breeding cliffs, but at another site seen up to 15 kilometers away (Ryan and Collins 2000).

Breeding site fidelity often strong. White-throated Swift: few data, but individuals often faithful to traditional nest sites; high degree of site tenacity by flocks to breeding sites (Dobkin et al. 1986).

Date: 10Sep2004
Author: Cannings, S., and G. Hammerson

Use Class: Migratory stopover
Subtype(s): Roost site
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Any traditional roosting site and associated feeding area used during migration. Evidence of recurring presence of individuals (including historical); and potential recurring presence at a given location, minimally a reliable observation of 25 birds 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 element occurrences 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 somewhat arbitrary; occurrences defined primarily by large congregations of individuals, rather than distinct populations.
Date: 15Apr2002
Author: Cannings, S.

Use Class: Staging
Subtype(s): Roost site
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Any traditional roosting site and associated feeding area used after the breeding season and before migration. Evidence of recurring presence of individuals (including historical); and potential recurring presence at a given location, minimally a reliable observation of 25 birds 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 Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Justification: Separation distance somewhat arbitrary; occurrences defined primarily by large congregations of individuals; e.g. roosting concentrations of up to 500 or more Vaux's Swifts (Bull and Blumton 1997).
Date: 15Apr2002
Author: Cannings, S.
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: 14Jul2015
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Hammerson, G.
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 08Mar1995
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
  • 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/.

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

  • Beason, J. P., C. Gunn, K. M. Potter, R. A. Sparks, and J. W. Fox. 2012. The northern black swift: migration path and wintering area revealed. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 124:1-8.

  • Behle, W. H., J. B. Bushman, and C. M. White. 1963. Distributional data on uncommon birds in Utah and adjacent states. Wilson Bull. 75: 450-456.

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

  • Braun, M. J., D. W. Finch, M. B. Robbins, and B. K. Schmidt. 2000. A field checklist of the birds of Guyana. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

  • Bull, E. L., & A. K. Blumton. 1997. Roosting behavior of postfledging Vaux's Swifts in northeastern Oregon. Journal of Field Ornithology 68:302--305.

  • Bureau of Land Management. 1978. Wildlife observation report (form 6610-2), filed by Geoff Hogander, 23 September 1978. Sevier River Resource Area, Richfield District, Richfield, Utah.

  • Campbell, R. W., N. K. Dawe, I. McTaggart-Cowan, J. M. Cooper, G. W. Kaiser, and M. C. McNall. 1990b. The birds of British Columbia. Volume 2. Nonpasserines: diurnal birds of prey through woodpeckers. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver, B.C. 636 pp.

  • Campbell, R.W., N.K. Dawe, I. McTaggart-Cowan, J.M. Cooper, G.W. Kaiser, and M.C.E. McNall. 1990. The Birds of British Columbia Vol. 2: Nonpasserines: Diurnal Birds of Prey through Woodpeckers. Royal British Columbia Museum, Victoria, BC.

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

  • Carter, M., G. Fenwick, C. Hunter, D. Pashley, D. Petit, J. Price, and J. Trapp. 1996. Watchlist 1996: For the future. Field Notes 50(3):238-240.

  • Casey, D. 2000. Partners in Flight Draft Bird Conservation Plan Montana. American Bird Conservancy, Kalispell, Montana. 281 pp.

  • Colorado Bird Observatory. 1997. 1996 Reference Guide to the Monitoring and Conservation Status of Colorado's Breeding Birds. Colorado Bird Observatory, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund, and Partners, March 21, 1997.

  • Colorado Partners in Flight. 2000. Physiographic Region 62: Southern Rocky Mountains. http://www.rmbo.org/pif/bcp/phy62/cliff/blsw.htm

  • Davidson, P.J.A., R.J. Cannings, A.R. Couturier, D. Lepage, and C.M. Di Corrado (eds.). 2014. The Atlas of the Breeding Birds of British Columbia, 2008-2012. Bird Studies Canada, Delta, B.C.

  • Davis, D. G. 1964. Black Swifts nesting in a limestone cave in Colorado. Wilson Bull. 76:295-296.

  • Davis, D. G. 1964. Black Swifts nesting in a limestone cave in Colorado. Wilson Bull. 76:295-296.

  • Davis, D. G. 1964. Black Swifts nesting in a limestone cave in Colorado. Wilson Bulletin 76(3):295-296.

  • Dobkin, D. S., J. A. Holmes, and B. A. Wilcox. 1986. Traditional nest-site use by White-throated Swifts. Condor 88:252-253.

  • Downes, C.M., and B.T. Collins. 2007. Canadian Bird Trends Web site Version 2.2. Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, Gatineau, Quebec, K1A 0H3.

  • 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.

  • Foerster, K. S. and C. T. Collins. 1990. Breeding distribution of the black swift in southern California. W. Birds 21:1-9.

  • Foerster, K. S. and C. T. Collins. 1990. Breeding distribution of the black swift in southern California. W. Birds 21:1-9.

  • Foerster, Kevin and Charles T. Collins. 1990. Breeding Distribution of the Black Swift in Southern California. Western Birds 21(1): 1-9.

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

  • Godfrey, W.E. 1986. The Birds of Canada, rev. ed. Natl. Mus. Can., Ottawa, ON. 595pp.

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

  • Holroyd, G. L. 1993. Dark Secrets Discovering the Unusual Habits of the Black Swift. Birder's World. October 1993: 22-25.

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

  • Johnsgard, P. A. 1986. Birds of the Rocky Mountains with particular reference to national parks in the Northern Rocky Mountain region. Colorado Associated University Press, Boulder. xi + 504 pp.

  • Johnson, P. W. 1990. Black swift (CYPSELOIDES NIGER) nesting in the Jemez Mountains of New Mexico. New Mexico Ornithol. Soc. Bull. 18:13-15.

  • Kashin, G. 1963. Field notes. Utah Audubon News 15: 1-69.

  • Kashin, G. 1964. Field notes. Utah Audubon News 16: 3-4, 37, 50, 55.

  • Kingery, H. E. 1971. American Birds 25: 778.

  • Kingery, H. E. 1976. Amer. Birds 30: 982-985.

  • Kingery, H. E. 1979. American Birds 33: 793-795.

  • Kingery, H. E. 1982. American Birds 36: 201-203.

  • Kingery, H. E. 1988. Mountain West Region. Amer. Birds 42: 108-113.

  • Knorr, O. A. 1961. The Geographical and Ecological Distribution of the Black Swift in Colorado. The Wilson Bulletin, 73(2):155-170.

  • Knorr, O. A. 1961. The geographical and ecological distribution of the black swift in Colorado. The Wilson Bulletin 73(2):155-170.

  • Knorr, O. A. 1961. The geographical and ecological distribution of the black swift in Colorado. The Wilson Bulletin, 73(2):155-170.

  • Knorr, O. A. 1961. The geographical and ecological distribution of the black swift in Colorado. Wilson Bulletin 73: 155-170.

  • Knorr, O. A. 1962. Black swift breeds in Utah. Condor 64: 79.

  • Knorr, O. A., and M. S. Knorr. 1990. The black swift in the Chiricahua Mountains of Arizona. Southwest Nat. 35:559-560.

  • Knorr, Owen A. 1961. The Geographical and Ecological Distribution of the Black Swift in Colordo. The Wilson Bulletin 73(2):155-170.

  • Lack, D. 1976. Island biology illustrated by the land birds of Jamaica. Studies in Ecology, Vol. 3. Univ. California Press, Berkeley. 445 pp.

  • Legg, K. 1956. A sea-cliff nest of the Black Swift. Condor 58:183-187.

  • Legg, K. 1956. A sea-cliff nest of the Black Swift. Condor 58:183-187.

  • Lowther, P.E. and C.T. Collins. 2002. Black Swift (Cypseloides niger). Pp.1-15 in: A. Poole and F. Gill, eds. The Birds of North America, No. 676. The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and The American Ornithologist's Union, Washington, D.C.

  • Michael, C. M. 1927. Black Swift nesting in Yosemite National Park. Condor 29:89-97.

  • Michael, C. M. 1927. Black Swift nesting in Yosemite National Park. Condor 29:89-97.

  • Montana Bird Distribution Online Database. 2001. Helena, Montana, USA. April-September 2003. http://nhp.nris.state.mt.us/mbd/.

  • National Geographic Society, 1987. Field Guide to the birds of North America, second edition. The National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C.

  • 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.

  • Partners in Flight Science Committee (PIF). 2013. Population Estimates Database, version 2013. Available at http://rmbo.org/pifpopestimates.

  • 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.

  • Resource Inventory Committee. 1998. Inventory Methods for Swallows and Swifts: Standards for Components of British Columbia's Biodiversity. No. 16. Version 2.0. Minist. Environ., Lands and Parks, Victoria, BC.

  • 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.

  • Ryan, T. P., and C. T. Collins. 2000. White-throated Swift (AERONAUTES SAXATALIS). No. 526 IN A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 20 pp.

  • Ryke, N., D. Winters, L. McMartin and S. Vest. 1994. Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species of the Pike and San Isabel National Forests and Comanche and Cimarron National Grasslands. May 25, 1994.

  • 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. 2000. National Audubon Society The Sibley Guide to Birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, New York.

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

  • Sorensen, E. 1993. Utah fall bird report--August-November 1992. Utah Birds 9: 10-15.

  • Stackhouse, M. 1997. Personal communication (e-mail message, 26 February 1997).

  • 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.

  • Stiles, F. G., and A. J. Negret. 1994. The nonbreeding distribution of the black swift: a clue from Colombia and unsolved problems. Condor 96:1091-1094.

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

  • Vrooman, A. G. 1901. Discovery of the egg of the black swift (CYPSELOIDES NIGER BOREALIS). Auk 18:394-395.

  • Vrooman, A. G. 1901. Discovery of the egg of the black swift (CYPSELOIDES NIGER BOREALIS). Auk 18:394-395.

  • Walters, R. E., and E. Sorensen (eds.). 1983. Utah bird distribution: latilong study. Publ. No. 83-10, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Salt Lake City. 97 pp.

  • Wassink, J. 1992. Birds of the Central Rockies. Mountain Press Publishing Company. Missoula, Montana. 177 pp.

  • Wauer, R. H., and D. L. Carter. 1965. Birds of Zion national Park and vicinity. Zion Nat. Hist. Assoc., Springdale, UT. 92 pp.

  • Wiggins, D. 2004. Black swift (Cypseloides niger): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: <http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/blackswift.pdf>

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

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.