Hydroprogne caspia - (Pallas, 1770)
Caspian Tern
Other English Common Names: Caspian tern
Synonym(s): Sterna caspia Pallas, 1770
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Sterna caspia Pallas, 1770 (TSN 176924)
French Common Names: sterne caspienne
Spanish Common Names: Charrán Caspia
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.104635
Element Code: ABNNM08020
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Birds - Other Birds
Image 11496

© Larry Master

 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Aves Charadriiformes Laridae Hydroprogne
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: Sterna caspia
Taxonomic Comments: Formerly (AOU 1983, 1998) included in the genus Sterna but separated on the basis of genetic data that correspond to plumage patterns (Bridge et al. 2005).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 08Apr2016
Global Status Last Changed: 27Nov1996
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Reasons: Large range, increasing numbers in some areas.
Nation: United States
National Status: N4N5B,N4N (05Jan1997)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N4B,N4M (07Dec2017)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
United States Alabama (S2B,S4N), Alaska (S1S2B), Arizona (S1N), Arkansas (SNA), California (S4), Colorado (SUB), Connecticut (SNA), Delaware (SNA), District of Columbia (S1S2N), Florida (S2), Georgia (S4), Idaho (S1B), Illinois (SNA), Indiana (S1B), Iowa (S3N), Kansas (SNA), Kentucky (SNA), Louisiana (S1S2B,S3N), Maryland (SNA), Massachusetts (S2N), Michigan (S2), Minnesota (SNRM), Mississippi (S4N), Missouri (SNA), Montana (S2B), Navajo Nation (SNA), Nebraska (SNRN), Nevada (S2S3B), New Jersey (S3B,S4N), New Mexico (S4N), New York (S1), North Carolina (S1B,S2N), Ohio (SNA), Oklahoma (S2N), Oregon (S4?), Pennsylvania (SNA), Rhode Island (S1N), South Carolina (SNRB,SNRN), South Dakota (S2B), Tennessee (S4N), Texas (S4B), Utah (S3B), Vermont (S1B), Virginia (S1B,S2N), Washington (S3?B), West Virginia (SNA), Wisconsin (S1B,S2N), Wyoming (S1)
Canada Alberta (S2B), British Columbia (S3B), Labrador (S1B,SUM), Manitoba (S3S4B), New Brunswick (SNA), Newfoundland Island (S2B,SUM), Northwest Territories (S3B), Nova Scotia (SNA), Nunavut (SUB,SUM), Ontario (S3B), Prince Edward Island (SNA), Quebec (S1B), Saskatchewan (S2B,S2M)

Other Statuses

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC): Not at Risk (01Apr1999)
Comments on COSEWIC: Reason for designation: The species was previously designated as a species of special concern. Numbers have increased several-fold and there are currently no significant threats to its survival.

Status history: Designated Special Concern in April 1978. Status re-examined and designated Not at Risk in April 1999.

IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent: 20,000-2,500,000 square km (about 8000-1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments: BREEDS: Eastern U.S.: locally on Atlantic and Gulf coasts, from Virginia to northern Florida (very few), also recently in New Jersey, on the central Gulf Coast of Florida, and in southeastern Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Texas; and around the Great Lakes. Canada: Labrador, southeastern Quebec, and Newfoundland; Great Lakes region in southern Ontario; southern Manitoba and central Saskatchewan, along shores of Lake Winnipeg, Lake Winnepegosis, and Dore Lake; in Lake Athabasca in northeastern Alberta; and vicinity of Great Slave Lake in southern Mackenzie. In western North America: locally (mostly in interior but on coast in Washington and California) in Washington, eastern Oregon, northern Utah, northwestern Wyoming, Idaho (recent range expansion), and North Dakota, south to southern California and western Nevada; also Baja California and Sinaloa. WINTERS: southern U.S. (mainly coastal areas north to California and North Carolina) south to Mexico; sometimes to northern South America (Colombia, Venezuela), rarely in the West Indies. Casual in Hawaii. Breeds and winters extensively also in the Old World (Africa, Eurasia, Australian region).

Population Size Comments: Great Lakes population population in 1982 was estimated at 3800 in the U.S. and 4900 in Canada (Spendelow and Patton 1988).

Overall Threat Impact Comments: Disturbance and development of nesting habitat are major threats.

Short-term Trend Comments: Pacific coast population increased 70% from 1960 to 1980 (Gill and Mewaldt 1983). Great Lakes population steadily increased from 1965 to at least the early 1990s (Kress et al. 1983; Evers 1992; Blokpoel, in Hyslop and Kennedy 1992); increase was due in part to increased food availability after invasion of alewife (Evers 1992). In Canada, as of the 1970s, there did not appear to have been a reduction in the breeding range but population trend was unknown (Martin, 1978 COSEWIC report). Decreased in numbers and range in the 1900s in northwestern Europe (Evans 1984).

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Protection Needs: Protection of nesting habitat is a major concern.

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (20,000-2,500,000 square km (about 8000-1,000,000 square miles)) BREEDS: Eastern U.S.: locally on Atlantic and Gulf coasts, from Virginia to northern Florida (very few), also recently in New Jersey, on the central Gulf Coast of Florida, and in southeastern Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Texas; and around the Great Lakes. Canada: Labrador, southeastern Quebec, and Newfoundland; Great Lakes region in southern Ontario; southern Manitoba and central Saskatchewan, along shores of Lake Winnipeg, Lake Winnepegosis, and Dore Lake; in Lake Athabasca in northeastern Alberta; and vicinity of Great Slave Lake in southern Mackenzie. In western North America: locally (mostly in interior but on coast in Washington and California) in Washington, eastern Oregon, northern Utah, northwestern Wyoming, Idaho (recent range expansion), and North Dakota, south to southern California and western Nevada; also Baja California and Sinaloa. WINTERS: southern U.S. (mainly coastal areas north to California and North Carolina) south to Mexico; sometimes to northern South America (Colombia, Venezuela), rarely in the West Indies. Casual in Hawaii. Breeds and winters extensively also in the Old World (Africa, Eurasia, Australian region).

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces

Due to latency between updates made in state, provincial or other NatureServe Network databases and when they appear on NatureServe Explorer, for state or provincial information you may wish to contact the data steward in your jurisdiction to obtain the most current data. Please refer to our Distribution Data Sources to find contact information for your jurisdiction.
Color legend for Distribution Map
NOTE: The maps for birds represent the breeding status by state and province. In some jurisdictions, the subnational statuses for common species have not been assessed and the status is shown as not-assessed (SNR). In some jurisdictions, the subnational status refers to the status as a non-breeder; these errors will be corrected in future versions of these maps. A species is not shown in a jurisdiction if it is not known to breed in the jurisdiction or if it occurs only accidentally or casually in the jurisdiction. Thus, the species may occur in a jurisdiction as a seasonal non-breeding resident or as a migratory transient but this will not be indicated on these maps. See other maps on this web site that depict the Western Hemisphere ranges of these species at all seasons of the year.
Endemism: occurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations

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

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)
AL Mobile (01097)
CA Contra Costa (06013), Imperial (06025), Solano (06095)
FL Bay (12005), Charlotte (12015), Collier (12021), Franklin (12037), Hillsborough (12057), Miami-Dade (12086), Monroe (12087), Nassau (12089), Pinellas (12103), St. Johns (12109), Walton (12131)
ID Ada (16001), Bannock (16005), Bear Lake (16007), Benewah (16009), Bingham (16011), Blaine (16013), Boise (16015), Bonner (16017), Bonneville (16019), Boundary (16021), Camas (16025), Canyon (16027), Caribou (16029), Cassia (16031), Clearwater (16035), Custer (16037), Elmore (16039), Franklin (16041), Fremont (16043), Gooding (16047), Jefferson (16051), Jerome (16053), Kootenai (16055), Latah (16057), Madison (16065), Minidoka (16067), Nez Perce (16069), Oneida (16071), Owyhee (16073), Payette (16075), Power (16077), Teton (16081), Twin Falls (16083), Valley (16085), Washington (16087)
IN Lake (18089)
LA Lafourche (22057), St. Bernard (22087)
MI Alcona (26001)*, Alpena (26007), Arenac (26011), Bay (26017), Charlevoix (26029), Cheboygan (26031), Chippewa (26033), Delta (26041), Leelanau (26089), Mackinac (26097)
MT Broadwater (30007), Garfield (30033), Lake (30047), McCone (30055), Phillips (30071), Pondera (30073), Powell (30077), Sheridan (30091), Teton (30099), Toole (30101), Valley (30105)
NC Dare (37055), Hyde (37095)
NJ Atlantic (34001), Ocean (34029)
NY Essex (36031), Jefferson (36045)
SD Butte (46019), Day (46037), Stanley (46117)
UT Box Elder (49003), Cache (49005), Davis (49011), Utah (49049), Weber (49057)
VA Accomack (51001), Northampton (51131)
WA Adams (53001), Grant (53025), Grays Harbor (53027), Kitsap (53035), Skagit (53057), Thurston (53067), Wahkiakum (53069), Walla Walla (53071), Whatcom (53073)
WI Ashland (55003), Brown (55009), Door (55029), Douglas (55031), Fond Du Lac (55039), Green Lake (55047), Oconto (55083), Winnebago (55139)
WY Albany (56001), Carbon (56007), Converse (56009), Crook (56011), Fremont (56013), Hot Springs (56017), Johnson (56019), Laramie (56021), Lincoln (56023), Natrona (56025), Park (56029), Sweetwater (56037), Teton (56039), Uinta (56041)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
02 Mullica-Toms (02040301)+, Great Egg Harbor (02040302)+, Chincoteague (02040303)+, Eastern Lower Delmarva (02040304)+
03 Albemarle (03010205)+, Pamlico Sound (03020105)+, Daytona - St. Augustine (03080201)+, Everglades (03090202)+, Florida Bay-Florida Keys (03090203)+, Big Cypress Swamp (03090204)+, Florida Southeast Coast (03090206)+, Sarasota Bay (03100201)+, Little Manatee (03100203)+, Tampa Bay (03100206)+, Crystal-Pithlachascotee (03100207)+, New (03130013)+, Apalachicola Bay (03130014)+, St. Andrew-St. Joseph Bays (03140101)+, Mobile Bay (03160205)+, Mississippi Coastal (03170009)+
04 St. Louis (04010201)+, Beartrap-Nemadji (04010301)+, Duck-Pensaukee (04030103)+, Oconto (04030104)+, Tacoosh-Whitefish (04030111)+, Upper Fox (04030201)+, Lower Fox (04030204)+, Little Calumet-Galien (04040001)+, Brevoort-Millecoquins (04060107)+, Lake Michigan (04060200)+, Carp-Pine (04070002)+*, Lone Lake-Ocqueoc (04070003)+, Lake Huron (04080300)+, Chaumont-Perch (04150102)+, Lake Champlain (04150408)+
08 Eastern Louisiana Coastal (08090203)+, West Central Louisiana Coastal (08090302)+
10 Upper Missouri (10030101)+, Marias (10030203)+, Teton (10030205)+, Fort Peck Reservoir (10040104)+, Middle Milk (10050004)+, Beaver (10050014)+, Prarie Elk-Wolf (10060001)+, Big Muddy (10060006)+, Yellowstone Headwaters (10070001)+, Upper Wind (10080001)+, Little Wind (10080002)+, Lower Wind (10080005)+, Upper Bighorn (10080007)+, Greybull (10080009)+, Dry (10080011)+, North Fork Shoshone (10080012)+, Shoshone (10080014)+, Crazy Woman (10090205)+, Clear (10090206)+, Upper Belle Fourche (10120201)+, Lower Belle Fourche (10120202)+, Lower Lake Oahe (10130105)+, Middle Big Sioux Coteau (10170201)+, Upper North Platte (10180002)+, Pathfinder-Seminoe Reservoirs (10180003)+, Medicine Bow (10180004)+, Sweetwater (10180006)+, Middle North Platte-Casper (10180007)+, Upper Laramie (10180010)+, Lower Laramie (10180011)+, Crow (10190009)+, Upper Lodgepole (10190015)+
14 Upper Green (14040101)+, Upper Green-Slate (14040103)+, Bitter (14040105)+, Upper Green-Flaming Gorge Reservoir (14040106)+, Blacks Fork (14040107)+, Muddy (14040108)+, Great Divide closed basin (14040200)+
16 Upper Bear (16010101)+, Bear Lake (16010201)+, Middle Bear (16010202)+, Little Bear-Logan (16010203)+, Lower Bear-Malad (16010204)+, Lower Weber (16020102)+, Utah Lake (16020201)+, Curlew Valley (16020309)+, Great Salt Lake (16020310)+
17 Lower Kootenai (17010104)+, Blackfoot (17010203)+, Lower Flathead (17010212)+, Pend Oreille Lake (17010214)+, Coeur D'alene Lake (17010303)+, St. Joe (17010304)+, Upper Spokane (17010305)+, Upper Columbia-Entiat (17020010)+, Banks Lake (17020014)+, Lower Crab (17020015)+, Upper Columbia-Priest Rapids (17020016)+, Snake headwaters (17040101)+, Gros Ventre (17040102)+, Greys-Hobock (17040103)+, Palisades (17040104)+, Idaho Falls (17040201)+, Upper Henrys (17040202)+, Lower Henrys (17040203)+, Teton (17040204)+, Willow (17040205)+, American Falls (17040206)+, Blackfoot (17040207)+, Portneuf (17040208)+, Lake Walcott (17040209)+, Raft (17040210)+, Upper Snake-Rock (17040212)+, Beaver-Camas (17040214)+, Big Lost (17040218)+, Big Wood (17040219)+, Camas (17040220)+, Little Wood (17040221)+, C. J. Idaho (17050101)+, Bruneau (17050102)+, Middle Snake-Succor (17050103)+, Upper Owyhee (17050104)+, Boise-Mores (17050112)+, South Fork Boise (17050113)+, Lower Boise (17050114)+, Middle Snake-Payette (17050115)+, Payette (17050122)+, North Fork Payette (17050123)+, Weiser (17050124)+, Palouse (17060108)+, Clearwater (17060306)+, Lower North Fork Clearwater (17060308)+, Walla Walla (17070102)+, Lower Columbia (17080006)+, Grays Harbor (17100105)+, Willapa Bay (17100106)+, Strait of Georgia (17110002)+, Nooksack (17110004)+, Nisqually (17110015)+, Puget Sound (17110019)+
18 San Pablo Bay (18050002)+, Salton Sea (18100204)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
General Description: A large stocky tern with a stout orange to coral red bill, grayish flight feathers, white underparts, and a moderately forked tail; adult has black cap in breeding season; immature and adults in basic plumage have a dusky or streaked crown; average length 53 cm, wingspan 127 cm (NGS 1983).
Diagnostic Characteristics: Differs from most other terns in much larger size and much thicker bill. Differs from the somewhat smaller royal tern in having a thicker bill, more extensive dark coloration on the underside of the primaries, and a less deeply forked tail; lacks the white forehead that is present in immature and basic plumages of royal and elegant terns.
Reproduction Comments: Along the U.S. mid-Atlantic coast, nesting begins by late May or early June. Clutch size usually is 2-3. Incubation, by both sexes, lasts 20-22 days. Young are tended by both parents, leave nest in a few days, first fly at 4-5 weeks. Parental care (feeding) may extend up to 5-7 months after fledging. Nests singly or usually in colonies of up to several thousand pairs (5000+ at Sand Island, Washington).
Ecology Comments: Nonbreeding: often rests with flocks of other terns. At a colony at the mouth of the Columbia River, 50% of adults foraged within 8 kilometers and 90% foraged within 21 kilometers (Collis et al. 1999); at other colonies, some adults travel long distances to obtain food; up to 50 kilometers on Lake Michigan (Cuthbert and Wires 1999) and 29-60 kilometers in another reported case (Gill 1976). At expanding colonies on the Pacific Coast, birds exhibited low natal philopatry (Collis et al. 1999), but elsewhere adults show strong fidelity to colonies (Cuthbert 1988).
Non-Migrant: Y
Locally Migrant: Y
Long Distance Migrant: Y
Mobility and Migration Comments: Juveniles in western North America disperse northward before migrating south to wintering areas, remain in wintering area through second winter, thereafter make annual migrations between breeding and wintering areas (Gill and Mewaldt 1983).

Great Lakes population winters along shores of Gulf of Mexico (Evers 1992).

Marine Habitat(s): Near shore
Estuarine Habitat(s): Bay/sound, Herbaceous wetland, Lagoon, River mouth/tidal river, Tidal flat/shore
Riverine Habitat(s): BIG RIVER, Low gradient, MEDIUM RIVER
Lacustrine Habitat(s): Deep water, Shallow water
Palustrine Habitat(s): HERBACEOUS WETLAND, Riparian
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Sand/dune
Habitat Comments: Seacoasts, bays, estuaries, lakes, marshes, and rivers.

Nests on sandy or gravelly beaches and shell banks along coasts or large inland lakes; sometimes with other water birds. Pacific coast populations formerly nested mainly in inland marshes, now mainly on human-created habitats (e.g., salt pond dikes and levees) along coast; nests on dredge-spoil islands in North Carolina and Florida. See Spendelow and Patton (1988) for further details. In northeastern Lake Michigan, tended to use same colony site in successive years unless previous reproductive effort was unsuccessful (Cuthbert 1988).

Adult Food Habits: Carnivore, Piscivore
Immature Food Habits: Carnivore, Piscivore
Food Comments: Eats mainly fishes obtained at surface of water by diving from air; sometimes feeds from surface like a gull and eats eggs and young of other terns and gulls (Terres 1980).
Adult Phenology: Diurnal
Immature Phenology: Diurnal
Colonial Breeder: Y
Length: 53 centimeters
Weight: 661 grams
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Management Requirements: Nesting sites can be augmented by providing artificially created ones (see GHABCOM).
Monitoring Requirements: See Quinn (1984) and Shugart et al. (1981) for techniques to reduce investigator-induced colony disruption and gull predation on tern nests.
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Gulls and Terns

Use Class: Adult foraging area
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Applies to both adults and juveniles. Evidence of one or more individuals seeking food in suitable habitat. Evidence of prey capture is not a prerequisite, as importance of a given location for foraging may vary temporally with shifting prey.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: Scientific basis for assigning foraging separation distances is weak because terns are widespread across the Massachusetts coast and highly mobile. Most gaps in foraging observations likely reflect lack of survey effort.
Date: 10Jan2017
Author: Mostello, C. S.

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: Occurrences include nesting areas and associated nesting-season foraging areas (regardless of how far apart they are), but separation distance pertains to nesting areas (breeding colonies). Thus different breeding occurrences may overlap if birds from different nesting areas forage in the same area. Separation distance is not intended to delineate demographically independent populations or metapopulations (such units would be quite large). Instead, separation distance is a compromise between the high mobility of these birds (see following) and the need for occurrences that are of practical size for conservation/management use.

California Gulls foraged an average of 17.4 kilometers from colony (Baird 1976); maximum foraging distances ranged from 32 to 61 kilometers (Rothweiler 1960, Baird 1976). Ring-billed Gulls foraged an average of 11 km from colony (Baird 1977). Least Terns foraged up to 3-12 kilometers from nests (summarized in Thompson et al. 1997). Forster's Terns has a reported feeding radius of 3.2 kilometers (Van Rossem 1932). Black Terns foraged up to 10 kilometers from nests, over continuous suitable but unoccupied habitat (M. A. Stern, pers. comm. 1998). Caspian terns in a colony at the mouth of the Columbia River: 90% of adults foraged within 21 kilometers (Collis et al. 1999).

Date: 21Jul2004
Author: Cannings, S., and G. Hammerson

Use Class: Migratory stopover
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Evidence of recurring presence of migrating flocks (including historical); and potential recurring presence at a given location, minimally a reliable observation of 50 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: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: Separation distance somewhat arbitrary; set such that occurrences are of managable size for conservation purposes. Occurrences are defined primarily on the basis of areas supporting concentrations of foraging birds, rather than on the basis of distinct populations.
Date: 26Apr2004

Use Class: Nonbreeding
Subtype(s): Foraging Concentration Area
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Evidence of recurring presence of wintering flocks (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 20 days annually. Be cautious about creating EOs for observations that may represent single events.
Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: Separation distance somewhat arbitrary; set such that occurrences are of managable size for conservation purposes. Occurrences are defined primarily on the basis of areas supporting concentrations of foraging birds, rather than on the basis of distinct populations.
Date: 16Apr2002
Author: Cannings, S.
Notes: Includes all inland-nesting gulls and terns, in the genera LARUS, STERNA, and CHLIDONIAS.

Use Class: Staging
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Evidence of flocks resting, roosting, and/or feeding young at a given location prior to breeding or after breeding has been completed. Staging may occur near the breeding site, preceding or following major migratory movements such as oceanic crossings, or it may occur after individuals have departed on migration, but before they have arrived at their final destination (a "stopover"). Staging may occur at sites also used for breeding, but often does not. Staging habitat may be ephemeral. For Common/Roseate Terns in Massachusetts, a minimum of 100 individuals in appropriate habitat is used.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: In Massachusetts, staging areas are separated somewhat arbitrarily, often by jurisdictional or property boundaries, as are nesting areas for coastal birds.
Date: 10Jan2017
Author: Mostello, C. 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: 01May1995
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 28Dec1994
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
  • McCaffery, B. J., C. M. Harwood, and J. R. Morgart. 1997b. First nests of Caspian Terns (Sterna caspia) for Alaska and the Bering Sea. Pacific Seabirds 24:71-73.

  • Alabama Breeding Bird Atlas 2000-2006 Homepage. 2009. T.M. Haggerty (editor), Alabama Ornithological Society. Available at http://www.una.edu/faculty/thaggerty/BBA%20website/Index.htm.

  • 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), 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). 2006. Forty-seventh supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-list of North American Birds. The Auk 123(3):1926-936.

  • American Ornithologists' Union. 2010. Check-list of North American Birds [web application], 7th edition. . Accessed 6 August 2010.

  • Andersen, M.D. 2011. HUC10-based species range maps. Prepared by Wyoming Natural Diversity Database for use in the pilot WISDOM application operational from inception to yet-to-be-determined date of update of tool.

  • Andersen, M.D. 2011. Maxent-based species distribution models. Prepared by Wyoming Natural Diversity Database for use in the pilot WISDOM application operational from inception to yet-to-be-determined date of update of tool.

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

  • 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.

  • Baird, P. 1976. Comparative ecology of California and Ring-billed Gulls (Larus californicus and L. delawarensis.)Ph.D. dissertation, University of Montana, Missoula.

  • Baird, P. A. 1977. Feeding ecology of ring-billed and California gulls (Larus delawarensis and L. californicus). Pacific Seabird Bulletin 4:16-17.

  • Banks, R. C., C. Cicero, J. L. Dunn, A. W. Kratter, P. C. Rasmussen, J. V. Remsen, Jr., J. D. Rising, and D. F. Stotz. 2006. Forty-seventh supplement to the American Ornithologists Union check-list of North American birds. The Auk 123: 926-936.

  • Behle, W. H., E. D. Sorensen, and C. M. White. 1985. Utah birds: a revised checklist. Occas. Publ. No. 4, Utah Museum of Natural History, Univ. of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. xv + 108 pp.

  • Bent, A.C. 1921. Life histories of North American gulls and terns. U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull. 113. Washington, D.C.

  • Bent, A.C. 1921. Life histories of North American gulls and terns. U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull. 113. Washington, D.C.

  • Bierly, M.L. 1980. Bird Finding in Tennessee. 3825 Bed- ford Ave., Nashville, TN 37125.

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

  • Blokpoel, H., and A. Harfenist. 1986. Comparison of 1980 and 1984 inventories of Common Tern, Caspian Tern and Double-crested Cormorant colonies in the Eastern North Channel, Lake Huron, Ontario, Canada. Colonial Waterbirds 9:61-67.

  • Bridge, E. S., A. W. Jones, and A. J. Baker. 2005. A phylogenetic framework for the terns (Sternini) inferred from mtDNA sequences: implications for taxonomy and plumage evolution. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 35:459-469.

  • Bridge, E. S., A. W. Jones, and A. J. Baker. 2005. A phylogenetic framework for the terns (Sternini) inferred from mtDNA sequences: implications for taxonomy and plumage evolution. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 35:459-469.

  • Bridge, E. S., A. W. Jones,and A. J. Baker. 2005. A phylogenetic framework for the terns (Sternini) inferred from mtDNA sequences: implications for taxonomy and plumage evolution. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 35:459-469.

  • Buckley, P. A., and F. G. Buckley. 1984. Seabirds of the north and middle Atlantic coast of the United States: their status and conservation. Pages 101-133 in Croxall et al., eds. Status and conservation of the world's seabirds. ICBP Tech. Pub. No. 2.

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

  • Burke, D., M. Austen, and D. Sutherland. 1999. COSSARO Candidate V, T, E Species Evaluation Form for Caspian Tern (Sterna caspia). Natural Heritage Information Centre. Prepared for Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO), Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Peterborough. April, 10 pp.

  • Byrd, M. A., and D. W. Johnston. 1991. Birds. Pages 477-537 in K. Terwilliger, coordinator. Virginia's endangered species: proceedings of a symposium. McDonald and Woodward Publ. Co., Blacksburg, Virginia.

  • 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.

  • Cannings, R.J. 1998. The Birds of British Columbia - a taxonomic catalogue. B.C. Minist. Environ., Lands and Parks, Wildl. Branch, Victoria, Wildl. Bull. B-86. 266pp.

  • Cannings, S. 2001. EO Specifications for Caspian Tern (Sterna caspia). NatureServe, Unpublished. 1 pp.

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

  • Chardine, J.W. (ed). 1999. Overview of seabird status and conservation in Canada. Bird Trends (Canadian Wildlife Service) 7: 1-7.

  • Collis, K., S. Adamany, D. D. Roby, D. P. Craig, and D. E. Lyons. 1999. Avian predation on juvenile salmonids on the lower Columbia River. 1998 draft annual report submitted to Bonneville Power Administration and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Second Version, October 1999. Available at: www.columbiabirdresearch.org/Reports/1998_Annual_Report.pdf.

  • Conover, Michael. 1983. Female-female pairings in Caspian Terns. Condor 85:346-349.

  • Cooper, J., A. J. Williams, and P. L. Britton. 1984. Distribution, population sizes and conservation of breeding seabirds in the Afrotropical region. Pages 403-419 in Croxall et al., eds. Status and conservation of the world's seabirds. ICBP Tech. Pub. No. 2.

  • Cunningham, R. L. 1966. Caspian Tern feeding upon carrion. Wilson Bulletin 78:319.

  • Cuthbert F.J and L.R. Wires. 1999. Caspian Tern (Sterna caspia). IN, Birds of North America, No. 403 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.).The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA.

  • Cuthbert, F. J. 1981. Caspian Tern colonies in the Great Lakes: responses to an unpredictable environment. Ph.D. thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

  • Cuthbert, F. J. 1981. Caspian tern colonies in the Great Lakes: responses to an unpredictable environment. Ph. D. thesis, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

  • Cuthbert, F. J. 1985. Mate retention in Caspian terns. Condor 87:74-78.

  • Cuthbert, F. J. 1988. Reproductive success and colony-site tenacity in Caspian terns. Auk 105:339-344.

  • Cuthbert, F. J. and L.R. Wires. 1999. Caspian Tern (Sterna caspia). In The Birds of North America, No. 403. (A. Poole and F. Gills, eds.) The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, Penn.

  • Cuthbert, F. J., and L. R. Wires. 1999. Caspian Tern (STERNA CASPIA). No. 403 IN A. Poole and F. Gill, editors. The birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 32pp.

  • Cuthbert, F.J. 1985. Intraseasonal movement between colony sites by Caspian Terns in the Great Lakes. Wilson Bull., 97(4): 502-510.

  • Cuthbert, Francesca J. and Linda R. Wires. 1999. Caspian Tern; The Birds of North America. Vol. 11, No. 403: American Orinithologists' Union. The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.

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

  • Dorn, Jane L. and R.D. Dorn. 1990. Wyoming Birds. Mountain West Publishing, Cheyenne.

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

  • Evans, P. G. H. 1984b. Status and conservation of seabirds in northwest Europe (excluding Norways and the USSR). Pages 293-321 in Croxall et al., eds. Status and conservation of the world's seabirds. ICBP Tech. Pub. No. 2.

  • Evers, D. C. 1992. A guide to Michigan's endangered wildlife. Univ. Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. viii + 103 pp.

  • Feare, C. J. 1984. Seabird status and conservation in the tropical Indian Ocean. Pages 457-471 in Croxall et al., eds. Status and conservation of the world's seabirds. ICBP Tech. Pub. No. 2.

  • Fetterolf, P. M. and H. Blokpoel. 1983. Reproductive performance of Caspian Terns at a new colony on Lake Ontario, 1979-1981. Journal of Field Ornithology 54(2):170-186.

  • Fetterolf, P.M. and H. Blokpoel. 1983. Reproductive performance of Caspian Terns at a new colony on Lake Ontario, 1979-1981. J. Field Ornithol., 54(2): 170-186.

  • Fraser, D. F., W. L. Harper, S. G. Cannings, and J. M. Cooper. 1999. Rare birds of British Columbia. Wildlife Branch and Resources Inventory Branch, British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Victoria, BC. 244pp.

  • Gallagher, M. D., et al. 1984. The distribution and conservation of seabirds breeding on the coasts and islands of Iran and Arabia. Pages 421-456 in Croxall et al., eds. Status and conservation of the world's seabirds. ICBP Tech. Pub. No. 2.

  • Gaston, A.J. 1996. Conservation issues and Canadian Wildlife Service priorities for marine birds. Canadian Wildlife Service. 32 pp.

  • Gauthier, J. et Y. Aubry (sous la direction de) 1995. Les oiseaux nicheurs du Québec : Atlas des oiseaux nicheurs du Québec méridional. Association québécoise des groupes d'ornithologues, Société québécoise de protection des oiseaux, Service canadien de l

  • Gibson, D.D. and B. Kessel. 1992. Seventy-four new avian taxa documented in Alaska 1976-1991. Condor 94:454-467.

  • Gill, R. E., Jr. 1976. Notes on the foraging of nesting Caspian terns, HYDROPROGNE CASPIA (Pallas). California Fish and Game 62:155.

  • Gill, R. E., Jr., and L. R. Mewaldt. 1983. Pacific coast Caspian terns: dynamics of an expanding population. Auk 100:369-381.

  • 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.

  • Grasman, K.A., G.A. Fox, P.F. Scanlon, and J.P. Ludwig. 1996. Organochlorine-associated immunosuppression in prefledgling Caspian Terns and Herring Gulls from the Great Lakes: An ecoepidemiological study. Environmenal Health Perspectives 104(4):829-842.

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

  • Havelka, T. 2000. Colonial Waterbird Surveys. email to Colin Jones dated Jan. 13, 2000 - includes an incomplete table of # of nests and colonies on each of the Great Lakes. 5 pp.

  • Haymes, G.T., and H. Blokpoel. 1978. Reproductive success of larids nesting on the eastern headland of the Toronto outer harbour in 1977. Ontario Field Biologist 32(2):1-17.

  • Hayward, C. L. 1935. Breeding status and migration of the Caspian tern in Utah. Condor 37: 140-144.

  • Hayward, C. L., C. Cottam, A. M. Woodbury, and H. H. Frost. 1976. Birds of Utah. Great Basin Naturalist Memoirs 1: 229 pp.

  • Hilty, S. J., J. A. Gwynne, and G. Tudor. 2003. The birds of Venezuela, 2nd edition. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.

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

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

  • Hyslop, C., and J. Kennedy, editors. 1992. Bird trends: a report on results of national ornithological surveys in Canada. Number 2, Autumn 1992. Migratory Birds Conservation Division, Canadian Wildlife Service, Ottawa, Ontario. 20 pp.

  • 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.

  • James, R. 1998. Draft. Updated status report on Caspian Tern, Sterna caspia, Sterne caspienne, in Canada. Comm. on the Status of Endangered Wildl. in Can. Available from Can. Nat. Fed., Ottawa, ON.

  • James, R.D. 1999. Update COSEWIC status report on Caspian Tern (STERNA CASPIA). Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 10 pp.

  • James, R.D. 1999. Update COSEWIC status report on Caspian Tern (Sterna caspia). COSEWIC Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildilfe in Canada.

  • Kress, S. W., E. H. Weinstein, and I. C. T. Nisbet. 1983. The status of tern populations in the northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. Colonial Waterbirds 6:84-106.

  • Leberman, R.C. 1987. A FIELD LIST OF THE BIRDS OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA AND ADJACENT REGIONS. UNPUBLISHED.

  • Ludwig, F. E. 1942. Migration of Caspian Terns banded in the Great Lakes area. Bird-Banding 13:1-9.

  • Ludwig, J. P. 1965. Biology and structure of the Caspian Tern (Hydroprogne caspia) population of the Great Lakes from 1896 - 1964. Bird-Banding 36(4):217-233.

  • Ludwig, J.P. 1965. Biology and structure of the Caspian Tern (Hydroprogne caspia) population of the Great Lakes from 1896-1964. Bird-Banding, 36(4): 217-233.

  • Martin, M. 1978. Status report on the Caspian Tern, Sterna caspia in Canada. COSEWIC report. 43 pp.

  • Martin, P.W. 1978. A winter inventory of the shoreline and marine oriented birds and mammals of the Chatham Sound. Unpubl. rep. prepared for B.C. Minist. Environ., Victoria, BC. 47pp.

  • Mazzocchi, Irene. 2008. Excel spreadsheet of Caspian tern breeding pair estimates from 1986 to 2008 on Little Galloo Island.

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

  • Melville, D. S. 1984. Seabirds of China and the surrounding seas. Pages 501-511 in Croxall et al., eds. Status and conservation of the world's seabirds. ICBP Tech. Pub. No. 2.

  • Merriman, R.O. 1932. Caspian Tern breeding on Lake Ontario. Canadian Field-Naturalist 46:22.

  • Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of July 3, 1918, Ch. 128, 40 Stat. 755 (1918) (current version at 16 U.S.C. §§ 703-712).

  • Miller, R.L. 1987. Field visit to Little Galloo Island, Lake Ontario 23 June 1987. Memo to Significant Habitat file. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Delmar, NY.

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

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

  • Montana Bird Distribution Committee. 1996. P.D. Skaar's Montana Bird Distribution, fifth edition. Montana Natural Heritage Program Special Publication No. 3.

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

  • National Geographic Society (NGS). 1983. Field guide to the birds of North America. National Geographic Society, Washington, DC.

  • National Geographic Society (NGS). 1999. Field guide to the birds of North America. Third edition. National Geographic Society, Washington, DC. 480 pp.

  • Nettleship, D.N. 1997. Ecosystem disturbance and seabirds in crisis: Eastern and Atlantic Canada. Ecosystem disturbance and seabirds in crisis: Eastern and Atlantic Canada. Pp. 54-76 IN P.J. Ewins and K. Ferguson, editors. Proceedings of the World Wildlife Fund Atlantic Canada Workshop on Recovery of Species at Risk. World Wildlife Fund Canada, Toronto.

  • Neuman, J. and H. Blokpoel. 1997. Great Lakes fact sheet: The terns of the Canadian Great Lakes. Canadian Wildlife Service.

  • New York Natural Heritage Program. 2008. Biotics Database. Albany, NY.

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

  • New York State Breeding Bird Atlas. 1985. Final breeding bird distribution maps, 1980-1985. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Wildlife Resources Center. Delmar, NY.

  • New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 1986. New York State Breeding Bird Atlas Database. Wildlife Resources Center. Delmar, NY.

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

  • New York State Department of State and Department of Environmental Conservation. 1987 - current. Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat Project narratives.

  • New York State Department of State and New York Department of Environmental Conservation. 1993. Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat Rating Form Little Galloo Island. Online. Available: http://www.nyswaterfronts.com/downloads/pdfs/sig_hab/GreatLakes/Little_Galloo_Island.pdf

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

  • Penland, S. 1976. The natural history and current status of the Caspian Tern (Hydroprogne caspia) in Washington state. Masters thesis, University of Puget Sound, Tacoma.

  • Penland, S. 1981. Natural history of the Caspian Tern in Grays Harbor, Washington. Murrelet 62:66-72.

  • Penland, S. 1982. Distribution and status of the Caspian Tern in Washington state. Murrelet 63:73-79.

  • Penland, S. T. 1984. An alternative origin of supernormal clutches in Caspian Terns. Condor 86:496.

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

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

  • 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.

  • Quinn, J. S. 1984. Egg predation reduced by nest covers during research activities in a Caspian tern colony. Colonial Waterbirds 7:149-151.

  • Quinn, J. S. and J. Sirdevan. 1998. Experimental measurement of nesting substrate preference in Caspian Terns, Sterna caspia, and the successful colonization of human constructed islands. Biological Conservation 85:63-68.

  • Quinn, J.S. 1985. Caspian Terns respond to rattlesnake predation in a colony. Wilson Bull., 97(2): 233-234.

  • 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.

  • Rail, J.-F. et G. Chapdelaine. 2002. Sterne caspienne. QuébecOiseaux, vol. 14., Hors série 2002. p. 67-69.

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

  • Reichel, J. D. 1996. Preliminary colonial nesting bird survey of the Bureau of Land Management Lewistown District: 1995. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, Montana. 97 pp.

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

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

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

  • Robertson, C. J. R., and B. D. Bell. 1984. Seabird status and conservation in the New Zealand region. Pages 573-586 in Croxall et al., eds. Status and conservation of the world's seabirds. ICBP Tech. Pub. No. 2.

  • Rothfels, M. 1999. Seabirds at Risk in Canada. Bird Trends (Canadian Wildlife Service) 7: 40-41.

  • Rothweiler, R. A. 1960. Food habits, movements, and nesting of gulls, Freezout Lake, Teton County, Montana. Montana Fish and Game Department, Helena. Paper No. 494. 26pp.

  • Sauer, J.R., J.E. Hines, I. Thomas, J. Fallon, and G. Gough. 1999. The North American Breeding Bird Survey: Results and Analysis 1966 - 1998. Version 98.1. USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD. December 3-last update. Online. Available: http://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/bbs.html.

  • Saunders, W.E. 1919. Nesting of the Caspian Tern in the Georgian Bay. Can. Field-Nat. 33: 55-57.

  • See SERO listing

  • Shugart, G. W., M. A. Fitch, and V. M. Shugart. 1981. Minimizing investigator disturbance in observational studiesof colonial birds: access to blind through tunnels. WilsonBull. 93:565-569.

  • Shugart, G.W., M.A. Fitch, and V.M. Shugart. 1981. Minimizing investigator disturbance in observational studies of colonial waterbirds: Access to blind through tunnels. Wilson Bulletin 93:565-569.

  • 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.

  • Smith, G. 2008. Caspian Tern Hydroprogne caspia. In K. McGowan and K. Corwin (Eds.) The atlas of breeding birds in New York State: 2000-2005. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.

  • Smith, G. A. 1987d. A selected and annotated bibliography for use in management of the Caspian tern (Sterna caspia). New York Dept. Environ. Conserv., Delmar, New York. 29 pp.

  • Société de la faune et des parcs du Québec. 2003. Les espèces menacées [en ligne]. Disponible sur le site Internet. - Accès :«http://www.fapaq.gouv.qc.ca/fr/etu_rec/esp_mena_vuln/index.htm». La société, 2003 [Réf. 3 novembre 2003] .

  • Spendelow, J. A. and S. R. Patton. 1988. National Atlas of Coastal Waterbird Colonies in the Contiguous United States: 1976-1982. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 88(5). x + 326 pp.

  • 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.

  • Stokes, D. W., and L. Q. Stokes. 1996. Stokes field guide to birds: western region. Little, Brown & Company Limited, Boston.

  • Struger J. and D. V. Weseloh. 1985. Great Lakes Caspian Terns: egg contaminants and biological implications. Colonial Waterbirds 8(2): 142-149.

  • THOMPSON,M.C., AND C. ELY.1989. BIRDS IN KANSAS VOLUME ONE.

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

  • Thompson, B. C., J. A. Jackson, J. Burger, L. A. Hill, E. M. Kirsch, and J. L. Atwood. 1997. Least Tern (Sterna antillarum). In A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The Birds of North America, No. 290. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, DC. 32 pp.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2006. Alaska Seabird Information Series (ASIS) Draft report: Aleutian Tern. USFWS Migratory Bird Management, Anchorage, AK.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2006c. Regulations for the 2006 Alaska subsistence spring/summer Migratory Bird Harvest. Alaska Migratory Bird Co-Mgt Council, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, AK.

  • Van Rossem, A. J. 1933. Terns as destroyers of birds' eggs. Condor 35:49-51.

  • 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.

  • Weseloh, C.V.C., C. Pekarik and H. Blokpoel. 1999. Breeding populations of cormorants, gulls and terns on the Canadian Great Lakes in 1997/98. Bird Trends (Canadian Wildlife Service) 7: 30-34.

  • Weseloh, D.V.C. and H. Blokpoel. 1993. Caspian Tern nesting at Little Galloo Island: a new nesting species for New York State. The Kingbird 43(1):6-12.

  • 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

  • Wires L.R., and F.J. Cuthbert. 2000. Trends in Caspian Tern numbers and distribution in North America: A review. Waterbirds 23(3): 388-404.

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

  • Woodbury, A. M., C. Cottam, and J. W. Sugden. 1949. Annotated check-list of the birds of Utah. Bull. Univ. Utah 39(16) [Biol. Ser. 11(2)]: 1-40.

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

  • van Tets, G. F., and P. J. Fullagar. 1984. Status of seabirds breeding in Australia. Pages 559-571 in Croxall et al., eds. Status and conservation of the world's seabirds. ICBP Tech. Pub. No. 2.

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.