Leucophaeus atricilla - Linnaeus, 1758
Laughing Gull
Other English Common Names: laughing gull
Other Common Names: Gaivota-Alegre
Synonym(s): Larus atricilla Linnaeus, 1758
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Larus atricilla Linnaeus, 1758 (TSN 176837)
French Common Names: mouette atricille
Spanish Common Names: Gaviota Reidora
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.101747
Element Code: ABNNM03010
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Birds - Other Birds
Image 7629

© Larry Master

 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Aves Charadriiformes Laridae Leucophaeus
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: Larus atricilla
Taxonomic Comments: Formerly included in Larus but separated on the basis of genetic data (Pons et al., 2005) that indicate that the genus would be paraphyletic if the following species were included: L. modestus, L. atricilla and L. pipixcan (AOU, 2008).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 09Apr2016
Global Status Last Changed: 27Nov1996
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Nation: United States
National Status: N5B,N5N (05Jan1997)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N1B,N1M (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 (S5), California (S1), Connecticut (SNA), Delaware (S4B), District of Columbia (S3N), Florida (SNR), Georgia (S5), Illinois (SNA), Indiana (SNA), Kentucky (SNA), Louisiana (S5), Maine (S2S3B), Maryland (S1B,S4N), Massachusetts (S2B), Michigan (SNRN), Mississippi (S1B,S5N), Nebraska (SNRN), New Hampshire (SNA), New Jersey (S5B), New York (S1), North Carolina (S4B), Oklahoma (S1N), Pennsylvania (SNA), Rhode Island (SNA), South Carolina (SNR), Tennessee (S3N), Texas (S5), Virginia (S3S4)
Canada Labrador (SNA), New Brunswick (S1B,S1M), Newfoundland Island (SNA), Nova Scotia (SHB), Ontario (SNA)

Other Statuses

IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent: >2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments: BREEDS: Pacific coast in Sonora and Sinaloa; Atlantic-Gulf-Caribbean region from southern New Brunswick (formerly) and southern Nova Scotia (formerly) south locally to Florida, west to southern Texas, through West Indies (major concentration on islands east of Puerto Rico, through Anegada Island) to northern coast of South America. Largest concentration in Florida is in the Tampa Bay area. Outside Florida, most of the U.S. Gulf Coast nesting population is in Texas, the rest in Louisiana. See Spendelow and Patton (1988) for further details. Formerly nested in southern California at the southern end of Salton Sea. Attempted nesting at western Lake Erie in 1984. Has not nested in eastern Canada since the early 1960s (see Belant and Dolbeer 1993). NORTHERN WINTER: Pacific coast from southern Mexico to northern Peru; North Carolina and Gulf Coast south to northern South America (Colombia to Amazon delta); casual in Hawaii.

Overall Threat Impact Comments: Pesticide use is a potential threat. For example, hundreds died near a cotton field treated with parathion (see Franson 1994).

Short-term Trend: Increase of >10%
Short-term Trend Comments: Breeding populations in New England declined after the 1940s due mostly to increases in populations of herring and great black-backed gulls. Breeding population in Jamaica Bay (New York) increased greatly from 1979 to at least the mid-1980s; recent increases also have been recorded in New Jersey and the southeastern U.S. (Clapp and Buckley 1984). See Buckley and Buckley (1984) for information on populations in the eastern U.S. Breeding Bird Survey data indicate a significant increase in North America, 1966-1988 (Sauer and Droege 1992). In 1990, total U.S. breeding populaton was about 259,000, a small increase compared to the late 1970s; population increased substantially in the region extending from Maine to Virginia, probably due to increased food availability at landfills; gull control at JFK airport in New York apparently has had minimal effect on regional or national populations (Belant and Dolbeer 1993, which see for information for particular states). May be increasing as a breeder in northern Caribbean (van Halewyn and Norton 1984).

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)) BREEDS: Pacific coast in Sonora and Sinaloa; Atlantic-Gulf-Caribbean region from southern New Brunswick (formerly) and southern Nova Scotia (formerly) south locally to Florida, west to southern Texas, through West Indies (major concentration on islands east of Puerto Rico, through Anegada Island) to northern coast of South America. Largest concentration in Florida is in the Tampa Bay area. Outside Florida, most of the U.S. Gulf Coast nesting population is in Texas, the rest in Louisiana. See Spendelow and Patton (1988) for further details. Formerly nested in southern California at the southern end of Salton Sea. Attempted nesting at western Lake Erie in 1984. Has not nested in eastern Canada since the early 1960s (see Belant and Dolbeer 1993). NORTHERN WINTER: Pacific coast from southern Mexico to northern Peru; North Carolina and Gulf Coast south to northern South America (Colombia to Amazon delta); casual in Hawaii.

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 AL, CA, CT, DC, DE, FL, GA, IL, IN, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MS, NC, NE, NH, NJ, NY, OK, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, VA
Canada LB, NB, NF, NS, ON

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)
MA Barnstable (25001)
NY Nassau (36059), Queens (36081), Suffolk (36103)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
01 Cape Cod (01090002)+
02 Southern Long Island (02030202)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Reproduction Comments: Lays clutch of 3-4 eggs, May-July (mostly June) in Virginia, April-June in Louisiana and Texas, May-June in Puerto Rico. Incubation lasts 20-23 days. Young are tended by both parents, first fly at 4-6 weeks? Tends to nest in large dense colony (sometimes 10,000s).
Non-Migrant: Y
Locally Migrant: Y
Long Distance Migrant: Y
Mobility and Migration Comments: Northern populations migratory. In Puerto Rico, common breeder but rare in winter except in San Juan Harbor (Raffaele 1983). In Costa Rica, migration mainly late September-November and early April to mid-May (Stiles and Skutch 1989).
Marine Habitat(s): Near shore
Estuarine Habitat(s): Bay/sound, Herbaceous wetland, Lagoon, River mouth/tidal river, Tidal flat/shore
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Cropland/hedgerow, Sand/dune
Habitat Comments: BREEDING: Seacoasts, bays, estuaries, rarely on large inland bodies of water (AOU 1983). Choice of nest site flexible; in different areas may nest on salt marshes (New Jersey), dunes, beaches, shell and shingle ridges of coast and offshore islands, on ground in tall herbage or weeds, or among bushes (Puerto Rico) (Harrison 1978, Burger and Gochfield 1985). Along the northern Atlantic coast south to Massachusetts, nests usually on rocky islands in areas of dense AMMOPHILA and LATHYRUS or under and around MYRICA bushes. From New York to Virginia, nests almost exclusively on tidal salt marshes on or near mats of dead vegetation in tall grasses just above high-tide line. Farther south on Atlantic and Gulf coasts, nests on mats of SPARTINA or, more often, in drier areas on spoil islands or next to clumps of low vegetation in low swales between dunes. In extreme southern Florida, small colonies nest in interior sections of keys on open marl flats or among low herbaceous plants (Spendelow and Patton 1988). NON-BREEDING: Large flocks rest on salt-pond dikes and sandspits (Costa Rica, Stiles and Skutch 1989).
Adult Food Habits: Carnivore, Invertivore, Piscivore
Immature Food Habits: Carnivore, Invertivore, Piscivore
Food Comments: Eats small fishes caught at surface of water, worms in wet fields, garbage, and sometimes eggs and young of sea birds (Terres 1980); chases crabs on mudflats, hawks flying insects (Stiles and Skutch 1989). May pirate food from brown pelican.
Adult Phenology: Diurnal
Immature Phenology: Diurnal
Colonial Breeder: Y
Length: 42 centimeters
Weight: 325 grams
Economic Attributes
Help
Economic Comments: Constitutes an aviation hazard at certain airports (Griffin and Hoopes 1992).
Management Summary
Help
Species Impacts: High populations could be harmful to tern species due to gull predation on eggs and small chicks (van Halewyn and Norton 1984).
Management Requirements: See Griffin and Hoopes (1992) for gull management recommendations for JFK International Airport in New York. Tens of thousands were killed at JFK in a gull management program in the early 1990s (Belant and Dolbeer 1993).
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Colonial Seabirds

Use Class: Breeding
Subtype(s): Foraging Area, Breeding Colony
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Evidence of historical breeding , or current and likely recurring breeding, at a given location, minimally a reliable observation of one or more breeding pairs in appropriate habitat. Be cautious about creating EOs for observations that may represent single breeding events outside the normal breeding distribution.
Mapping Guidance: Map foraging areas as separate polygons if they are separated from the breeding colony by areas simply flown over on commuting routes.
Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Alternate Separation Procedure: Where colonies are closer than 5 kilometers, separate occurrences may be created if research shows little genetic mixing between colonies.
Separation Justification: Occurrences include nesting and foraging areas, but occurrence separations are based on nesting areas (i.e., distance between nesting areas, regardless of foraging locations). Hence, different occurrences may overlap.

Occurrences are not based on discrete populations or metapopulations. Instead, the separation distance is arbitrarily small such that occurrences are of of practical size for data management purposes.

Evidence from a number of species of seabirds indicates that even though the 'home ranges' of individual nesting seabirds may be immense when foraging trips are taken into account, little movement or feeding overlap may occur between nearby colonies. For example, Thick-billed Murres may commute up to 170 kilometers one way on a feeding trip from the colony, but birds from a colony only 8 kilometers away may forage in a completely different direction; even birds from different sub-colonies only 1.5 kilometers apart mostly fed in completely separate areas (Gaston and Hipfner 2000).

Most seabirds have strong breeding site fidelity; e.g., Thick-billed Murres (Gaston and Hipfner 2000, Gaston et al. 1994), Gray-backed Tern (Mostello et al. 2000), Red-footed Booby (Schreiber et al. 1996).

Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): 2 km
Inferred Minimum Extent Justification: Somewhat arbitrary, but generally very conservative for this group, many members of which travel long distances to foraging grounds.
Date: 20Oct2004
Author: Cannings, S., and G. Hammerson

Use Class: Nonbreeding
Subtype(s): Feeding area, Loafing site, Roosting site
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Evidence of recurring presence of flocks of nonbreeding birds (including historical), including nonbreeding birds within the breeding season and breeding individuals outside the breeding season; and potential recurring presence at a given location. Normally only areas where concentrations greater than 25 birds regularly occur for more than 20 days per year would be deemed EOs; the number of individuals may be reduced for very rare species. Be cautious about creating EOs for observations that may represent single events.
Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Justification: Separation distance arbitrary; defined this small to aid in conservation planning. Sites more than 10 kilometers apart may be joined as one occurrence if research shows that predominantly the same individuals are using both sites.
Date: 07Mar2001
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: 21Apr1988
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 20Apr1994
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): HAMMERSON, G.

Zoological data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs) and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Alabama 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). 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/.

  • B77POR01LAUS - Created by EO conversion

  • Banks, R. C., R. T. Chesser, C. Cicero, J. L. Dunn, A. W. Kratter, I. J. Lovette, P. C. Rasmussen, J. V. Remsen, Jr., J. D. Rising, D. F. Stotz, and K. Winker. 2008. Forty-ninth supplement to the American Ornithologists Union check-list of North American birds. The Auk 125: 758-768.

  • Belant, J. L., and R. A. Dolbeer. 1993. Population status of nesting laughing gulls in the United States 1977-1991. Am. Birds 47:220-224.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Buckley, F.G., M. Gochfeld and P.A. Buckley. 1978. Breeding laughing gulls return to Long Island. Kingbird 28:203-207.

  • 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.

  • Buckley, P.A and F.G. Buckley. 1984. Expanding double-crested cormorant and laughing gull populations on Long Island, NY. Kingbird 34(3):146-155.

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

  • Burger, J., and M. Gochfield. 1985. Nest site selection bylaughing gulls: comparison of tropical colonies (Culebra, Puerto Rico) with temperate colonies (New Jersey). Condor 87:364-373.

  • Burger, Joanna. 1996. Laughing Gull; The Birds of North America. Vol. 6, No. 225. American Orinithologists' Union. The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.

  • Campbell, R. W., N. K. Dawe, I. McTaggart-Cowan, J. M. Cooper, G. W. Kaiser, A. C. Stewart, and M. C. E. McNall. 2001. The birds of British Columbia. Volume 4. Passerines: wood-warblers through Old World sparrows. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver. 739 pages.

  • 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.

  • Castro, I. and A. Phillips. 1996. A guide to the birds of the Galapagos Islands. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.

  • Chardine, J. W., R. D. Morris, J. F. Parnell, and J. Pierce. 2000a. Status and conservation priorities for Laughing Gull, Gull-billed Terns, Royal Terns and Bridled Terns in the West Indies. Pp. 65-79 in E. A. Schreiber and D. S. Lee (editors) Status and Conservation of West Indian Seabirds. Society of Caribbean Ornithology Special Publication 1, Ruston, Louisiana, USA.

  • Clapp, R. B., and P. A. Buckley. 1984. Status and conservation of seabirds in the southeastern United States. Pages 135-155 in Croxall et al., eds. Status and conservation of the world's seabirds. ICBP Tech. Pub. No. 2.

  • Clapp, R.B., D. Morgan Jacabs, and R.C. Banks. 1983. Marine birds of the southeastern US and Gulf of Mexico. Part III. Charadriiformes. USFWS. Div. Biology Service, Washington, D.C. FWS/OBS-83/30. 853 pp.

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

  • Gaston, A. J., and J. M. Hipfner. 2000. Thick-billed Murre (Uria lomvia). No. 497 IN A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 32pp.

  • Gaston, A. J., et al. 1994. Population parameters of thick-billed murres at Coats Island, Northwest Territories, Canada. Condor 96:935-948.

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

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

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

  • Griffin, C. R., and E. M. Hoopes. 1992. Birds and the potential for bird strikes at John F. Kennedy International Airport. Final report, National Park Service, Boston, Massachusetts. 102 pp.

  • Hagan, J. M., III, and D. W. Johnston, editors. 1992. Ecology and conservation of neotropical migrant landbirds. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. xiii + 609 pp.

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

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

  • 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.

  • Kepler, C. B. 1978. The breeding ecology of sea birds on Monito Island, Puerto Rico. Condor 80:72-87.

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

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

  • 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.

  • Mostello, C. S., N. A. Palaia, and R. B. Clapp. 2000. Gray-backed Tern (Sterna lunata). No. 525 in A. Poole and F. Gill (editors). The birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 28 pp.

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

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

  • Parker III, T. A., D. F. Stotz, and J. W. Fitzpatrick. 1996. Ecological and distributional databases for neotropical birds. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

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

  • Pitmann, R. L. and L. T. Ballance. 2002. The changing status of marine birds breeding at San Benedicto Island, Mexico. Wilson Bulletin 114:11-19.

  • Pons, J. M., A. Hassanin, and P. A. Crochet. 2005. Phylogenetic relationships within the Laridae (Charadriiformes: Aves) inferred from mitochondrial markers. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 37:686-699.

  • 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.

  • Raffaele, H. A. 1983a. A guide to the birds of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Fondo Educativo Interamericano, San Juan, Puerto Rico. 255 pp.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Sauer, J.R., and S. Droege. 1992. Geographical patterns in population trends of Neotropical migrants in North America. Pages 26-42 in J.M. Hagan, III, and D.W. Johnston, editors. Ecology and conservation of Neotropical migrant landbirds. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.

  • Schreiber, E. A., R. W. Schreiber, and G. A. Schenk. 1996. Red-footed Booby (Sula sula). No. 241 in A. Poole and F. Gill, editors. The birds of North America. The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA, and The Amerian Ornithologists' Union, Washington, DC. 24 pp.

  • See SERO listing

  • 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.

  • Sprunt, A., IV. 1984. The status and conservation of seabirds of the Bahama Islands. Pages 157-168 in Croxall et al., eds. Status and conservation of the world's seabirds. ICBP Tech. Pub. No. 2.

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

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

  • The American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). Banks, R.C., R.T. Chesser, C. Cicero, J.L. Dunn, A.W. Kratter, I.J. Lovette, P.C. Rasmussen, J.V. Remsen, Jr., J.D. Rising, D.F. Stotz, and K. Winker. 2008. Forty-ninth supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-list of North American Birds. The Auk 125(3):758-768.

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

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

  • van Halewyn, R., and R. L. Norton. 1984. The status and conservation of seabirds in the Caribbean. Pages 169-222 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.