Riparia riparia - (Linnaeus, 1758)
Bank Swallow
Other Common Names: Andorinha-do-Barranco
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Riparia riparia (Linnaeus, 1758) (TSN 178436)
French Common Names: hirondelle de rivage
Spanish Common Names: Golondrina Ribereña, Golondrina Zapadora
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.101769
Element Code: ABPAU08010
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Birds - Perching Birds
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Aves Passeriformes Hirundinidae Riparia
Genus Size: B - Very small genus (2-5 species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American birds. Seventh edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. [as modified by subsequent supplements and corrections published in The Auk]. Also available online: http://www.aou.org/.
Concept Reference Code: B98AOU01NAUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Riparia riparia
Taxonomic Comments: See Sheldon and Winkler (1993) for information on intergeneric phylogenetic relationships of Hirundininae based on DNA-DNA hybridization.
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 09Apr2016
Global Status Last Changed: 02Dec1996
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Reasons: Large nesting range in North America and Eurasia; large population size; many occurences; overall trend poorly known (BBS methods not well suited to this species), but this species does not appear to warrant significant range-wide conservation concern at this time.
Nation: United States
National Status: N5B (19Mar1997)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N5B (09Sep2011)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
United States Alabama (SHB), Alaska (S5B), Arizona (S4M), Arkansas (S2B,S3N), California (S2), Colorado (S5), Connecticut (S5B), Delaware (S2B), District of Columbia (S3N), Florida (SNA), Georgia (S3S4), Idaho (S5B), Illinois (S5), Indiana (S4B), Iowa (S5B,S5N), Kansas (S3B), Kentucky (S3B), Louisiana (SNA), Maine (S5B), Maryland (S3S4B), Massachusetts (S5B), Michigan (S5), Minnesota (SNRB), Mississippi (S1?B), Missouri (SNRB), Montana (S5B), Navajo Nation (SNA), Nebraska (S5), Nevada (S3B), New Hampshire (S3B), New Jersey (S4B), New Mexico (S2B,S5N), New York (S5B), North Carolina (S1B), North Dakota (SNRB), Ohio (S4), Oklahoma (S2B), Oregon (S5B), Pennsylvania (S4B), Rhode Island (S3B), South Carolina (SNA), South Dakota (S3B), Tennessee (S3), Texas (S2B,S4N), Utah (S4B), Vermont (S4B), Virginia (S3B), Washington (S4B), West Virginia (S2B), Wisconsin (S4B), Wyoming (S5B)
Canada Alberta (S5), British Columbia (S4S5B), Labrador (S3B), Manitoba (S4B), New Brunswick (S3B), Newfoundland Island (S3B), Northwest Territories (S3S4B), Nova Scotia (S3B), Ontario (S4B), Prince Edward Island (S4B), Quebec (S4), Saskatchewan (S5B,S5M), Yukon Territory (S4B)

Other Statuses

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC): Threatened (03May2013)
Comments on COSEWIC: This widespread species has shown a severe long-term decline amounting to a loss of 98% of its Canadian population over the last 40 years. As with many other aerial insectivores, the decline continues, albeit at a slower rate since the 1980s. Breeding Bird Survey data from 2001-2011 indicate a potential loss of 31% of the population during that 10-year time period. The reasons for these declines are not well understood, but are likely driven by the cumulative effects of several threats. These include loss of breeding and foraging habitat, destruction of nests during aggregate excavation, collision with vehicles, widespread pesticide use affecting prey abundance, and impacts of climate change, which may reduce survival or reproductive potential.
Designated Threatened in May 2013.

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: Breeding range in North America extends from western and central Alaska eastward across Canada to the southern Hudson Bay region, Labrador, and Newfoundland, and south to central California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Tennessee, northern Alabama, and North Carolina, and disjunctly to southern Texas and adjacent northeastern Mexico (northern Veracruz, northeastern San Luis Potos¡, and extreme northern Coahuila) (Howell and Webb 1995, AOU 1998, Garrison 1999). In Eurasia, breeding extends from the Hebrides, Orkneys, northern Scandinavia, northern Russia, and Siberia south to the Mediterranean, Palestine, Iran, Afghanistan, northern India, southeastern China, and Japan (AOU 1998, Garrison 1999). Irregular breeding occurs south of these areas.

During the northern winter, the range in the Americas is mainly from eastern Panama southward, east of the Andes, to northern Argentina, Paraguay, and northern Chile, casually north to souithern California; also along Pacific slope of southern Mexico and in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands; and in the Old World from the Mediterranean, Near East, northern India, and eastern China south to eastern Africa, Madagascar, Arabia, southern India, Southeast Asia, Borneo, and the Philippines (AOU 1998, Garrison 1999). See Turner and Rose (1989) for further details.

Area of Occupancy: >12,500 4-km2 grid cells
Area of Occupancy Comments: This species occurs world wide across the entire northern hemisphere (Birdlife International, 2014)

Number of Occurrences: 81 to >300
Number of Occurrences Comments: This species is represented by a large number of occurrences (subpopulations).

Population Size: >1,000,000 individuals
Population Size Comments: Total adult population size is unknown but presumably exceeds 1,000,000. Rich et al. (2004) estimated population size at 46,000,000.

Number of Occurrences with Good Viability/Integrity: Many to very many (41 to >125)
Viability/Integrity Comments: Many occurrences appear to have at least good estimated viability.

Overall Threat Impact: High
Overall Threat Impact Comments: Nesting habitat is spatially and temporally dynamic, often depending on natural streamflow dynamics. Hence, streamflow regulation is a threat in many areas.

Habitat alteration by humans appears to be the only major known threat. In some areas, such as California, much nesting habitat has been eliminated by flood- and erosion-control projects (including riprapping) and streamflow regulation (see Garrison 1999). On the other hand, much suitable nesting habitat has been created by human activities such as sand and gravel mining and road construction. Some anthropogenic nesting habitats subsequently have been reduced or eliminated with closure of sand and gravel pits (see Garrison 1999).

Short-term Trend: Unknown
Short-term Trend Comments: Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) data for 1966-2007 indicate a significant survey-wide decline averaging 2% per year; this amounts to a 56% decline over this time period. The rate of decline was higher (2.8% per year) in 1980-2007, but most of the decline occurred prior to the mid-1990s, after which the trend appears to be relatively stable. However, the BBS is not well suited to monitoring this species; BBS data may not accurately reflect actual population trends. Also, the dynamic nature of nesting habitat likely results in large annual variations in population size.

Long-term Trend: Unknown
Long-term Trend Comments: Long-term trend (past 200 years) is unknown. Declines due to alteration of riverine and riparian habitats have been offset to some degree by human activities that create suitable nesting habitat. For example, road building and quarrying have increased available nest sites in some areas that formerly were unsuitable for breeding; distribution and abundance thus increased over previous circumstances (Turner and Rose 1989).

Recent declines have been noted in Europe (Turner and Rose 1989).

Intrinsic Vulnerability: Not intrinsically vulnerable
Intrinsic Vulnerability Comments: Best estimate based on large global population and given extensive amount of research conducted on this species at nesting colonies (Garrison, 1999).

Environmental Specificity: Moderate. Generalist or community with some key requirements scarce.
Environmental Specificity Comments: Nesting in holes in eroding banks along waterways should be considered a key requirement that may be scarce in certain areas.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Inventory Needs: Population dynamics of other subspecies of this bird outside of the Americas is needed (Garrison, 1999).

Protection Needs: Protect important nesting habitats from flood- and erosion-control projects (Garrison, 1999).

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)) Breeding range in North America extends from western and central Alaska eastward across Canada to the southern Hudson Bay region, Labrador, and Newfoundland, and south to central California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Tennessee, northern Alabama, and North Carolina, and disjunctly to southern Texas and adjacent northeastern Mexico (northern Veracruz, northeastern San Luis Potos¡, and extreme northern Coahuila) (Howell and Webb 1995, AOU 1998, Garrison 1999). In Eurasia, breeding extends from the Hebrides, Orkneys, northern Scandinavia, northern Russia, and Siberia south to the Mediterranean, Palestine, Iran, Afghanistan, northern India, southeastern China, and Japan (AOU 1998, Garrison 1999). Irregular breeding occurs south of these areas.

During the northern winter, the range in the Americas is mainly from eastern Panama southward, east of the Andes, to northern Argentina, Paraguay, and northern Chile, casually north to souithern California; also along Pacific slope of southern Mexico and in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands; and in the Old World from the Mediterranean, Near East, northern India, and eastern China south to eastern Africa, Madagascar, Arabia, southern India, Southeast Asia, Borneo, and the Philippines (AOU 1998, Garrison 1999). See Turner and Rose (1989) for further details.

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces
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, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NC, ND, NE, NH, 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, ON, PE, QC, SK, YT

Range Map
Note: Range depicted for New World only. The scale of the maps may cause narrow coastal ranges or ranges on small islands not to appear. Not all vagrant or small disjunct occurrences are depicted. For migratory birds, some individuals occur outside of the passage migrant range depicted. For information on how to obtain shapefiles of species ranges see our Species Mapping pages at www.natureserve.org/conservation-tools/data-maps-tools.

Range Map Compilers: NatureServe, 2002; WWF-US, 2000


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
AR Arkansas (05001), Chicot (05017), Desha (05041)
CA Alameda (06001)*, Butte (06007), Colusa (06011), Del Norte (06015), El Dorado (06017)*, Fresno (06019)*, Glenn (06021), Humboldt (06023), Inyo (06027), Lassen (06035), Los Angeles (06037)*, Madera (06039)*, Modoc (06049), Mono (06051), Monterey (06053), Napa (06055)*, Orange (06059)*, Placer (06061), Plumas (06063), Sacramento (06067), San Benito (06069)*, San Diego (06073)*, San Francisco (06075), San Joaquin (06077), San Luis Obispo (06079)*, San Mateo (06081), Santa Barbara (06083)*, Santa Clara (06085)*, Santa Cruz (06087), Shasta (06089), Sierra (06091), Siskiyou (06093), Sonoma (06097)*, Sutter (06101), Tehama (06103), Ventura (06111)*, Yolo (06113), Yuba (06115)
DE Kent (10001), New Castle (10003), Sussex (10005)
ID Bonneville (16019), Custer (16037), Franklin (16041)
KY Ballard (21007)*, Boone (21015), Carroll (21041), Daviess (21059), Fayette (21067), Fulton (21075), Henderson (21101), Hickman (21105)*, Jefferson (21111)*, Lewis (21135), Livingston (21139), McCracken (21145), Meade (21163), Muhlenberg (21177), Ohio (21183), Oldham (21185), Trimble (21223), Union (21225)
NC Avery (37011), Wilkes (37193)*
WV Randolph (54083)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
02 Brandywine-Christina (02040205)+, Broadkill-Smyrna (02040207)+, Western Lower Delmarva (02080109)+
03 Upper Yadkin (03040101)+*
05 Tygart Valley (05020001)+, Ohio Brush-Whiteoak (05090201)+, Middle Ohio-Laughery (05090203)+, Lower Kentucky (05100205)+, Middle Green (05110003)+, Silver-Little Kentucky (05140101)+, Blue-Sinking (05140104)+, Lower Ohio-Little Pigeon (05140201)+, Highland-Pigeon (05140202)+, Lower Ohio-Bay (05140203)+, Lower Ohio (05140206)+
06 Nolichucky (06010108)+
08 Lower Mississippi-Memphis (08010100)+, Bayou De Chien-Mayfield (08010201)+*, Obion (08010202)+*, Lower Arkansas (08020401)+, Lower Mississippi-Greenville (08030100)+, Deer-Steele (08030209)+, Boeuf (08050001)+, Bayou Macon (08050002)+
16 Middle Bear (16010202)+, Lake Tahoe (16050101)+*, West Walker (16050302)+
17 Willow (17040205)+, Upper Salmon (17060201)+, Chetco (17100312)+
18 Smith (18010101)+, Mad-Redwood (18010102)+, Lower Eel (18010105)+, Russian (18010110)+*, Lost (18010204)+, Butte (18010205)+, Shasta (18010207)+, Scott (18010208)+, Upper Pit (18020002)+, Lower Pit (18020003)+, Mccloud (18020004)+, Sacramento headwaters (18020005)+, Sacramento-Stone Corral (18020104)+, Lower American (18020111)+, Upper Stony (18020115)+, Upper Cache (18020116)+, East Branch North Fork Feather (18020122)+, Upper Bear (18020126)+, South Fork American (18020129)+*, Cottonwood Creek (18020152)+, Battle Creek (18020153)+, Clear Creek-Sacramento River (18020154)+, Paynes Creek-Sacramento River (18020155)+, Thomes Creek-Sacramento River (18020156)+, Big Chico Creek-Sacramento River (18020157)+, Butte Creek (18020158)+, Honcut Headwaters-Lower Feather (18020159)+, Upper Coon-Upper Auburn (18020161)+, Lower Sacramento (18020163)+, Upper Dry (18030009)+*, Middle San Joaquin-Lower (18040001)+*, Upper Mokelumne (18040012)+, Upper Cosumnes (18040013)+, San Pablo Bay (18050002)+*, San Francisco Bay (18050004)+*, San Francisco Coastal South (18050006)+, San Lorenzo-Soquel (18060001)+, Pajaro (18060002)+, Estrella (18060004)+*, Salinas (18060005)+, Alisal-Elkhorn Sloughs (18060011)+, Carmel (18060012)+, Santa Barbara Coastal (18060013)+*, Santa Clara (18070102)+*, Calleguas (18070103)+*, Santa Monica Bay (18070104)+*, Los Angeles (18070105)+*, San Gabriel (18070106)+*, Seal Beach (18070201)+*, Santa Ana (18070203)+*, Newport Bay (18070204)+*, Aliso-San Onofre (18070301)+*, Santa Margarita (18070302)+*, San Luis Rey-Escondido (18070303)+*, Madeline Plains (18080002)+*, Honey-Eagle Lakes (18080003)+, Mono Lake (18090101)+*, Crowley Lake (18090102)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Reproduction Comments: Clutch size is 2-8 (usually 4-5). Incubation, by both sexes, lasts 12-16 days (Terres 1980). Young are tended by both sexes, leave nest when 18-22 days old, return to burrow for a few days after first flight, remain dependent on parents for about 5 days after fledging. Some birds have two broods per year in some areas (not in north). Most individuals live for only one or a few years.Colony size varies; largest colonies often are in artificial sites; colonies may reach at least several hundred pairs.
Ecology Comments: Bank swallows may form flocks of 100s or 1000s prior to fall migration.

Inclement weather and resulting scarcity of food may be important factors in nestling mortality in some years; erosion of nest sites and predators also sometimes destroy nests (Turner and Rose 1989).

Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: Y
Mobility and Migration Comments: This species migrates in large flocks northward through the United States mostly in April (Terres 1980). In Puerto Rico, it is fairly common in spring, uncommon in fall (Raffaele 1983). It migrates abundantly through Costa Rica from late August or early September to early November and early March to mid-May (Stiles and Skutch 1989).

Most foraging flights are within 0.8 kilometers of colony (Stoner and Stoner 1941).

Estuarine Habitat(s): Aerial
Riverine Habitat(s): Aerial
Lacustrine Habitat(s): Aerial
Palustrine Habitat(s): Aerial, Riparian
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Aerial
Special Habitat Factors: Burrowing in or using soil
Habitat Comments: Habitat includes open and partly open situations, frequently near flowing water (AOU 1983). Nests are in steep sand, dirt, or gravel banks, in burrows dug near the top of the bank, along the edge of inland water, or along the coast, or in gravel pits, road embankments, etc. Both sexes construct the nest burrow. Pairs usually dig a new burrow each year, but sometimes they use old bank swallow burrows or abandoned cavities of the belted kingfisher. Individuals tends to return to same nesting area in successive years, though they may move several kilometers away, especially if nesting was unsuccessful the previous year; yearlings often return to the natal area or nearby (Turner and Rose 1989).
Adult Food Habits: Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Invertivore
Food Comments: Diet is mainly flying insects (e.g., beetles, mosquitoes, winged ants, flies, moths). Insects are caught in the air over fields, wetlands, water, etc. If necessary, individuals may forage up to several kilometers from the nesting area, but usually closer.
Adult Phenology: Diurnal
Immature Phenology: Diurnal
Colonial Breeder: Y
Length: 13 centimeters
Weight: 15 grams
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Restoration Potential: In California, improvements of natural habitat and construction of artificial banks have been undertaken to mitigate for habitat loss to riprapping; however, it is doubtful that these techniques will provide a long-term solution (California Department of Fish and Game 1990). Quarry managers should be encouraged to create seasonally permanent sand piles from April until July (Byrd and Johnston 1991).
Biological Research Needs: Relatively little information is known about this species relative to postbreeding dispersal, migration, and wintering ecology (Garrison, 1999). Also, the effects of ectoparasites on reproductive success nd nesting suvivorship needs additional study.
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Passerines

Use Class: Breeding
Subtype(s): Foraging Area, Nest Site, Nesting 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: Breeding occurrences include nesting areas as well as foraging areas.

For swallows and other species that have separate nesting and foraging areas, separations are based on nest sites or nesting areas, not to locations of foraging individuals. For example, nesting areas separated by a gap larger than the separation distance are different occurrences, regardless of the foraging locations of individuals from those nesting areas. This separation procedure is appropriate because nesting areas are the critical aspect of swallow breeding occurrences, tend to be relatively stable or at least somwhat predictable in general location, and so are the basis for effective conservation; foraging areas are much more flexible and not necessarily static.

Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: Significant dispersal and associated high potential for gene flow among populations of birds separated by tens of kilometers (e.g., Moore and Dolbeer 1989), and increasing evidence that individuals leave their usual home range to engage in extrapair copulations, as well as long foraging excursions of some species, make it difficult to circumscribe occurrences on the basis of meaningful population units without occurrences becoming too large. Hence, a moderate, standardized separation distance has been adopted for songbirds and flycatchers; it should yield occurrences that are not too spatially expansive while also accounting for the likelihood of gene flow among populations within a few kilometers of each other.

Be careful not to separate a population's nesting areas and foraging areas as different occurrences; include them in the same occurrence even if they are more than 5 km apart. Mean foraging radius (from nesting area) of Brown-headed Cowbird females was 4.0 kilometers in California, 1.2 kilometers in Illinois-Missouri (Thompson 1994). Yellow-headed Blackbirds, Brewer's Blackbirds, and probably Red-winged Blackbirds all forage up to 1.6 kilometers away from breeding colony (Willson 1966, Horn 1968). In one study, Brewer's Blackbirds were found as far as 10 kilometers from nesting area (Williams 1952), but this may be unusual.

For swallows and other parrerines with similar behavioral ecology, separation distance pertains to nest sites or nesting colonies, not to locations of foraging individuals. For example, nesting areas separated by a gap of more than 5 km are different occurrences, regardless of the foraging locations of individuals from those nesting areas. This separation procedure is appropriate because nesting areas are the critical aspect of swallow breeding occurrences, tend to be relatively stable or at least somwhat predictable in general location, and so are the basis for effective conservation; foraging areas are much more flexible and not necessarily static.

Be cautious about creating EOs for observations that may represent single breeding events outside the normal breeding distribution.

Unsuitable habitat: Habitat not normally used for breeding/feeding by a particular species. For example, unsuitable habitat for grassland and shrubland birds includes forest/woodland, urban/suburban, and aquatic habitats. Most habitats would be suitable for birds with versatile foraging habits (e.g., most corvids).

Date: 10Sep2004
Author: Hammerson, G.

Use Class: Migratory stopover
Subtype(s): Foraging Area, Roost Site
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: For most passerines: Evidence of recurring presence of migrating individuals (including historical) and potential recurring presence at a given location; minimally a reliable observation of 25 birds in appropriate habitat.

For swallows: Evidence of recurring presence of migrating flocks (including historical) and potential recurring presence at a given location; minimally a reliable observation of 100 birds in appropriate habitat (e.g., traditional roost sites).

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.

EOs should not be described for species that are nomadic during nonbreeding season: e.g., Lark Bunting.

Be cautious about creating EOs for observations that may represent single events.

Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: Separation distance somewhat arbitrary but intended to define occurrences of managable size for conservation purposes. Occurrences defined primarily on the basis of areas supporting concentrations of birds, rather than on the basis of distinct populations.

For swallows and other species with similar behavioral ecology, the separation distance pertains to communal roost sites rather than to foraging areas; the former tend to be more stable and specific over time than the latter.

Date: 03Sep2004
Author: Hammerson, G., and S. Cannings

Use Class: Nonbreeding
Subtype(s): Foraging Area, Roost Site
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Any area used traditionally in the nonbreeding season (used for populations that are not resident in a location year-round). Minimally, reliable observations of 10 or more individuals in appropriate habitat for 20 or more days at a time. For G1-G3 species, observations of fewer individuals could constitute an occurrence of conservation value. Sites used during migration should be documented under the 'migratory stopover' location use class.

Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: Separation distance is necessarily arbitrary but attempts to balance the high mobility of birds with the need for occurrences of reasonable spatial scope. Note that a population's roost sites and foraging areas are parts of the same occurrence, even if they are more than 5 km apart.

For swallows and other species with similar behavioral ecology, the separation distance pertains to communal roost sites rather than to foraging areas; the former tend to be more stable and specific over time than the latter.

Date: 03Sep2004
Author: Hammerson, G.

Use Class: Nonmigratory
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Occurrences are based on evidence of historical presence, or current and likely recurring presence, at a particular location. Such evidence minimally includes collection or reliable observation and documentation of one or more individuals in or near appropriate habitat.

These occurrence specifications are used for nonmigratory populations of passerine birds.

Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Justification: Significant dispersal and associated high potential for gene flow among populations of birds separated by tens of kilometers (e.g., Moore and Dolbeer 1989), and increasing evidence that individuals leave their usual home range to engage in extrapair copulations, as well as long foraging excursions of some species, make it difficult to circumscribe occurrences on the basis of meaningful population units without occurrences becoming too large. Hence, a moderate, standardized separation distance has been adopted for songbirds and flycatchers; it should yield occurrences that are not too spatially expansive while also accounting for the likelihood of gene flow among populations within a few kilometers of each other.

Be careful not to separate a population's nesting areas and breeding-season foraging areas as different occurrences; include them in the same occurrence even if they are more than 5 km apart. Blue jays have small summer home ranges but fly up to 4 kilometers to harvest mast (Tarvin and Woolfenden 1999). Flocks of pinyon jays range over 21-29 square kilometers (Ligon 1971, Balda and Bateman 1971); nesting and foraging areas may be widely separated. Tricolored blackbirds forage in flocks that range widely to more than 15 kilometers from the nesting colony (Beedy and Hamilton 1999).

Unsuitable habitat: Habitat not normally used for breeding/feeding by a particular species. For example, unsuitable habitat for grassland and shrubland birds includes forest/woodland, urban/suburban, and aquatic habitats. Most habitats would be suitable for birds with versatile foraging habits (e.g., most corvids).

Date: 10Sep2004
Author: Hammerson, G.
Notes: These specs pertain to nonmigratory species.
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: 06Oct2014
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Hammerson, G., edited by Jue, Dean K.
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 20Mar2009
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): Hammerson, G.

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

References
Help
  • Alabama Ornithological Society. 2006. Field checklist of Alabama birds. Alabama Ornithological Society, Dauphin Island, Alabama. [Available online at http://www.aosbirds.org/documents/AOSChecklist_april2006.pdf ]

  • American Ornithologists Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American Birds. 7th edition. American Ornithologists Union, Washington, D.C. 829 pages.

  • American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 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/.

  • 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.

  • Balda, R. P., and G. C. Bateman. 1971. Flocking and annual cycle of the piñon jay, Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus. Condor 73:287-302.

  • Basili, G.D., and S.A. Temple. 1999. Winter ecology, behavior, and conservation needs of Dickcissels in Venezuela. Studies in Avian Biology 19:289-299.

  • BirdLife International. (2013-2014). IUCN Red List for birds. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on various dates in 2013 and 2014. http://www.birdlife.org/

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • California Department of Fish and Game (CDF&G). 1990. 1989 annual report on the status of California's state listed threatened and endangered plants and animals. 188 pp.

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

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

  • Di Giacomo, A. S. 1996. Nuevos registros de aves uruguayas. Hornero 14:71-72.

  • 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.

  • Erskine, A. J. 1992. Atlas of breeding birds of the Maritime Provinces. Nimbus Publishing and the Nova Scotia Museum, Halifax, Nova Scotia.

  • Garrison, B.A. 1999. Bank Swallow (RIPARIA RIPARIA). In A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The Birds of North America, No. 414. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 28 pp.

  • Garrison, B.A. 1999. Bank Swallow (Riparia riparia). IN, Birds of North America, No. 414 (A. Poole and F. Gill, eds.).The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA.

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

  • Godfrey, W.E. 1966. The birds of Canada. National Museums of Canada. Ottawa. 428 pp.

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

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

  • Horn, H. S. 1968. The adaptive significance of colonial nesting in the Brewer's Blackbird. Ecology 49:682-694.

  • 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.

  • Lagacé M., L. Blais et D. Banville. 1983. Liste de la faune vertébrée du Québec. Première édition. Ministère du Loisir, de la Chasse et de la Pêche. 100

  • Ligon, J. D. 1971. Late summer-autumnal breeding of the piñon jay in New Mexico. Condor 73:147-153.

  • Lowen, J. C., J. Mazar Barnett, M. Pearman, R. Clay, and B. López Lanús. 1997. New distributional information for 25 species in eastern Paraguay. Ararajuba 5:240-243.

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

  • 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.

  • Moore, W. S., and R. A. Dolbeer. 1989. The use of banding recovery data to estimate dispersal rates and gene flow in avian species: case studies in the Red-winged Blackbird and Common Grackle. Condor 91:242-253.

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

  • Ouellet H., M. Gosselin et J.P. Artigau. 1990. Nomenclature française des oiseaux d'Amérique du Nord. Secrétariat d'État du Canada. 457 p.

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

  • Parks Canada. 2000. Vertebrate Species Database. Ecosystems Branch, 25 Eddy St., Hull, PQ, K1A 0M5.

  • Peterson, R. T. 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.

  • 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.

  • Rich, T. D., C. J. Beardmore, H. Berlanga, P. J. Blancher, M.S.W. Bradstreet, G. S. Butcher, D. W. Demarest, E. H. Dunn, W. C. Hunter, E. E. Iñigo-Elias, A. M. Martell, A. O. Panjabi, D. N. Pashley, K. V. Rosenberg, C. M. Rustay, J. S. Wendt, T. C. Will. 2004. Partners in Flight North American landbird conservation plan. Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Ithaca, NY. Online. Available:

  • 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.

  • Robbins, C. S., D. Bystrak, and P. H. Geissler. 1986. The Breeding Bird Survey: its first fifteen years. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv. Resource Publ. 157. iii + 196 pp.

  • See SERO listing

  • Sheldon, F. H., and D. W. Winkler. 1993. Intergeneric phylogenetic relationships of swallows estimated by DNA-DNA hybridization. Auk 110:798-824.

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

  • 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.

  • Stoner, D. 1936. Studies on the bank swallow RIPARIA RIPARIA (Linnaeus) in the Oneida Lake region. Roosevelt Wild Life Annals 4(2), 112 pp.

  • Stoner, D., and L. C. Stoner. 1941. Feeding of nestling Bank Swallows. Auk 58:52-55.

  • Tarvin, K. A., and G. E. Woolfenden. 1999. Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata). No. 469 IN A. Poole and F. Gill, editors. The birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 32pp.

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

  • Thompson, F. R., III. 1994. Temporal and spatial patterns of breeding brown-headed cowbirds in the midwestern United States. Auk 111:979-990.

  • Turner, A., and C. Rose. 1989. Swallows and martins an identification guide. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston.

  • Williams, L. 1952b. Breeding behavior of the Brewer blackbird. Condor 54:3-47.

  • Willson, M. F. 1966. Breeding ecology of the Yellow-headed Blackbird. Ecological Monographs 36:51-77.

  • 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 November 2016.
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 © 2017 NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Dr., 7th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22203, 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. 2017. 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.