Zonotrichia querula - (Nuttall, 1840)
Harris's Sparrow
Other English Common Names: Harris' Sparrow
Synonym(s): Zonotrichia querula querula
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Zonotrichia querula (Nuttall, 1840) (TSN 179454)
French Common Names: bruant ā face noire
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.101459
Element Code: ABPBXA4050
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Birds - Perching Birds
 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Aves Passeriformes Passerellidae Zonotrichia
Genus Size: C - Small genus (6-20 species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American birds. Seventh edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. [as modified by subsequent supplements and corrections published in The Auk]. Also available online: http://www.aou.org/.
Concept Reference Code: B98AOU01NAUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Zonotrichia querula
Taxonomic Comments: Mitochondrial DNA data indicate that relative to most congeneric avian comparisons, the five species of ZONOTRICHIA are closely related (Zink et al. 1991).
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 10Apr2016
Global Status Last Changed: 04Dec1996
Ranking Methodology Used: Ranked by inspection
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Nation: United States
National Status: N5N (05Jan1997)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N4B,NUN,N5M (08Jan2018)

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 (SNRN), Alaska (SNA), Arizona (S1N), Arkansas (S3N), California (SNA), Colorado (S4N), Idaho (SNA), Illinois (SNA), Indiana (S1N), Iowa (S4N), Kansas (S4N), Louisiana (S2N), Michigan (SNRN), Minnesota (SNRN), Missouri (SNRN), Montana (SNA), Navajo Nation (S2S3N), Nebraska (SNRN), New Mexico (S4N), North Dakota (SNA), Oklahoma (S5N), Oregon (SNA), South Dakota (SNA), Texas (S4), Utah (S3N), Washington (SNA), Wisconsin (SNA), Wyoming (S5N)
Canada Alberta (S3M), British Columbia (SUM), Manitoba (S3S4B), Northwest Territories (S3B), Nunavut (SUB,SUM), Ontario (SNA), Saskatchewan (S5B)

Other Statuses

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC): Special Concern (28Apr2017)
Comments on COSEWIC: Reason for designation: This northern ground?nesting bird is the only songbird that breeds exclusively in Canada. Data from Christmas Bird Counts in the US Midwest wintering grounds show a significant long?term decline of 59% over the past 35 years, including 16% over the past decade. The species may be affected by climate change on the breeding grounds, while threats on the wintering grounds include habitat loss, pesticide use, road mortality, and predation by feral cats.

Status history: Designated Special Concern in April 2017.

IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent Comments: BREEDING: northwestern and east-central Mackenzie and southern Keewatin south to northeastern Saskatchewan, northern Manitoba, and northwestern Ontario (Norment and Shackleton 1993, AOU 1998). NON-BREEDING: primarily northern Nebraska, South Dakota, and central Iowa south to south-central Texas, but also regularly north to southeastern Alaska, southern British Columbia, Idaho, Montana, northeastern Saskatchewan and North Dakota, west to southern California, southern Nevada, southern Utah, southern Arizona, and southern New Mexico, and east to western Tennessee, Arkansas, and northwestern Louisiana (Norment and Shackleton 1993, AOU 1998).

Overall Threat Impact Comments: PREDATION: Preyed upon by shrikes (LANIUS spp.) in breeding and non-breeding habitat (Baumgartner 1968, Nice 1929, Norment 1992, 1994, Swenk and Stevens 1929). On the breeding grounds, gray jays (PERISOREUS CANADENSIS) also prey upon adults; merlins (FALCO COLUMBARIS), parasitic jaegers (STERCORARIUS PARASITICUS) and short-tailed weasels (MUSTELA ERMINEA) are suspected predators. Known nest predators include arctic ground squirrels (SPERMOPHILUS PARRYII) and short-tailed weasels; suspected nest predators include red squirrels (TAMIASCIURUS HUDSONICUS) and gray jays (Norment 1992). INCLEMENT WEATHER: Late snow storms can kill young in the nest (Jehl and Hussell 1966). FIRE: Fires can convert preferred lichen-spruce breeding habitat to lichen-tundra vegetation (Arsenault and Payette 1992). PARASITES: Known ectoparasites include nasal mites (PTILONYSCUS MOROFSKYI and P. SAIRAE), lice (RICINUS HASTATUS, R. FRINGILLAE, PHILOPTERUS SUBFLAVESCENS, and BRUELIA), ticks (HAEMAPHYSALIS) and fleas (CERATPHYLUS GAREI). The only known internal parasite is the blood protozoan, HAEMOPROTEUS (Norment and Shackleton 1993).

Short-term Trend Comments: Analysis of Christmas Bird Count (CBC) data indicate a significant population decline (-2.2 percent per year), 1959-1988 (Sauer et al. 1996). The perceived decline may be due, in part, to an expanding winter range (Norment, pers. comm.). CBC data also indicate a significant decline in Missouri (-5.1 percent per year) and a significant increase in Montana (1.8 percent per year; Sauer et al. 1996). If the decline is real, it is likely due to factors operating in the wintering habitat (e.g., loss of favored shrubby habitats) given the isolation of the breeding grounds (Norment, pers. comm.).

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Distribution
Help
Global Range: BREEDING: northwestern and east-central Mackenzie and southern Keewatin south to northeastern Saskatchewan, northern Manitoba, and northwestern Ontario (Norment and Shackleton 1993, AOU 1998). NON-BREEDING: primarily northern Nebraska, South Dakota, and central Iowa south to south-central Texas, but also regularly north to southeastern Alaska, southern British Columbia, Idaho, Montana, northeastern Saskatchewan and North Dakota, west to southern California, southern Nevada, southern Utah, southern Arizona, and southern New Mexico, and east to western Tennessee, Arkansas, and northwestern Louisiana (Norment and Shackleton 1993, AOU 1998).

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, but breeds in a single nation

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AK, AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, LA, MI, MN, MO, MT, ND, NE, NM, NN, OK, OR, SD, TX, UT, WA, WI, WY
Canada AB, BC, MB, NT, NU, ON, 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; WILDSPACETM 2002

Ecology & Life History
Help
Basic Description: A bird (sparrow).
Reproduction Comments: In the Northwest Territories, most nests are initiated during the second or third week in June, after the breeding habitat is at least 60 percent snow-free (Norment 1992). Only females build nests, incubate and brood young; both sexes feed young (Norment 1992, 1993). The incubation period is 12-13.5 days (mean = 12.8) and the nestling period is 8.5-10 days (mean = 9.2). Incubation extends through the first week of July, with hatching occurring in late June and early July, and fledging in early to mid-July (Norment 1992). Average clutch size for 155 clutches summarized by Norment (1992) is 4.07 eggs (range = three to five). Hatching among nests is relatively synchronous. In the Northwest Territories, the hatching rate was 76 percent, fledging rate was 62.5 percent, and overall nest success was 47.5 percent. The number of young fledged per pair was 2.07. Nest failure was due principally to predation (30 percent; Norment 1992). Successful nests are concealed in denser vegetation with thicker cover than depredated nests (Norment 1993). In Manitoba, hatching success of eggs was 89 percent (Jehl 1971) and the average nestling period was 8.9 days (Norment and Shackleton 1993). Lost clutches may be replaced (Norment 1992).
Ecology Comments: Age at first breeding is unknown, but is probably one year as in other ZONOTRICHIA (Norment, pers. comm.). Longevity record is 11 years, 8 months (Norment and Shackleton 1993). Densities of breeding populations are estimated to be 0.025 territorial males per hectare, and 0.125-0.82 breeding pairs per hectare (Gillespie and Kendeigh 1982, Norment 1992, Norment and Shackleton 1993). The maximum number observed during a Christmas Bird Count was 26.1 birds per party hour (Root 1988). Numbers observed at particular localities during winter varies within and among years because birds frequently shift locations (Graul 1967). The sex ratio on the breeding grounds is 1:1 (Norment 1992).

In the Northwest Territories, overall return rate for banded birds (both sexes) to the breeding grounds was 38 percent. Males and females that nest successfully usually return to the same breeding area in subsequent years; some unsuccessful breeders also exhibit site fidelity. Males sometimes occupy the same nesting territory in different years, but females apparently do not (Norment 1994). Territories averaged 2 hectares, but birds foraged up to 500 meters outside territories (Norment 1992).

Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: Y
Mobility and Migration Comments: Migrates mainly at night in flocks (Norment and Shackleton 1993). Early spring migrants begin moving northward in late February and early March, but large numbers do not move until late April or May (Baumgartner 1968). Generally arrive on breeding grounds in late May, but arrival dates vary with weather (Norment and Shackleton 1993, Semple and Sutton 1932). Males and females arrive simultaneously (Norment 1992). Leave breeding grounds in late August and early September and arrive on wintering grounds from mid-November through mid-December (Bridgwater 1966, Graul 1967, Norment and Shackleton 1993, Swenk and Stevens 1929).
Palustrine Habitat(s): Riparian
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Cropland/hedgerow, Savanna, Shrubland/chaparral, Woodland - Conifer
Habitat Comments: BREEDING: Forest-tundra zone of northern Canada bounded on the south by a 1000:1 ratio of tree:upland tundra cover and on the north by a 1:1000 ratio of tree:upland tundra cover (Norment and Shackleton 1993, Timoney et al. 1992). Woody vegetation of this forest-tundra mosaic includes white spruce (PICEA GLAUCA), black spruce (P. MARIANA), larch (LARIX LARICINA), jack pine (PINUS BANKSIANA), paper birch (BETULA PAPYRIFERA), dwarf birch (BETULA GLANDULOSA), willow (SALIX spp.), alder (ALNUS spp.), Labrador tea (LEDUM spp.), bilberry (VACCINIUM ULIGINOSUM), mountain cranberry (VACCINIUM VITIS-IDAEA), and crowberry (EMPETRUM NIGRUM).

Nests are located on the ground, typically under a shrub that is on top of, or next to, a hummock. Nests may also be located beneath rock or turf overhangs (Norment and Shackleton 1993). In The Northwest Territories, most nests are concealed amid dwarf birch (68 percent), alder (8 percent) spruce (8 percent), and Labrador tea (8 percent; Norment 1992). In Manitoba, most nests are hidden by Labrador tea (53 percent), willow (11 percent), and dwarf birch (11 percent; Norment and Shackleton 1993). Nest entrances are often oriented to the southeast, opposite the direction of prevailing storms (Norment 1993, Norment and Shackleton 1993).

NON-BREEDING: Habitat descriptions from throughout the winter range include: thickets/brush bordering streams, edges of low woodlands, brush and brushy places, hedgerows, and willow thickets in ravines (Swenk and Stevens 1929). In Oklahoma, concentrates in forested ravines, thick shrubbery along creeks and at the edges of woods, brush piles, and vine-covered trees and thickets (Bridgwater 1966, Nice 1929). In Kansas, inhabits hedgerows (Graul 1967).

Adult Food Habits: Frugivore, Granivore, Invertivore
Immature Food Habits: Frugivore, Granivore, Invertivore
Food Comments: Feeds primarily on the ground, scratching and kicking away ground litter with its feet; forages less frequently among branches of trees (Nice 1929, Semple and Sutton 1932).

BREEDING: Stomach contents of six individuals was 66 percent plant material and 34 percent animal material. Plant foods included seeds of grasses, sedges (CAREX spp., CYPERUS spp.), bulrushes (SCIRPUS spp.), birch (BETULA spp.), pigweed (AMARANTHUS spp.), and lamb's-quarters (CHENOPODIUM spp.); fruits of blueberry (VACCINIUM spp.), crowberry, and bearberry (ARCTOSTAPHYLOS UVA-URSI); and oats (spilled on nearby railroad tracks). The six stomachs also contained grit and the remains of insects (Coleoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, Lepidoptera, Homoptera), spiders and snails (Semple and Sutton 1932). Based on foraging observations of adults and analysis of 18 stomachs of adults, persistent fruits (ARCTOSTAPHYLOS ALPINA, E. NIGRUM, VACCINIUM VITIS-IDAEA, VACCINIUM ULIGINOSUM) comprised most of the diet prior to nesting (82 percent of foraging observations) and arthropods comprised most of the diet during the nestling period (72.5 percent of observations). Arthropods comprised 81.5 percent of the diet of nestlings Norment and Fuller 1997).

NON-BREEDING: In Oklahoma, food includes seeds of sunflower and pigweed (AMARANTHUS spp.), poison-ivy berries (RHUS TOXICODENDRON), elm blossoms (ULMUS spp.) and weed seeds (Bridgwater 1966, Nice 1929). In Kansas, consumed grit from the roads (Graul 1967). Based on the dissection of 100 stomachs collected from Texas through Saskatchewan, the winter diet is 92 percent plant material and 8 percent animal material. Winter plant foods include seeds of ragweed (AMBROSIA spp.), knotweed (POLYGONUM spp.), pigweed, lamb's-quarters, gromwell (LITHOSPERMUM spp.), sunflowers, bluestem (ANDROPOGON spp.), crabgrass (DIGITARIA spp.), foxtail (SETARIA spp.), and Johnson grass (SORGHUM spp.). Also consumes wild fruits, waste corn, wheat, and oats. Winter animal foods include insects (principally leafhoppers), spiders and snails (Judd 1901 cited in Swenk and Stevens 1929). Stomach contents of five birds collected in fall was 99 percent plant and 1 percent animal matter, 75 specimens collected in winter consumed 94 percent plant and 6 percent animal material, and 21 spring-collected individuals consumed 80 percent plant and 25 percent animal material. Plant foods include seeds of ragweed, knotweed, foxtail, lamb's-quarters, panic grass (PANICUM spp.), timothy (PHLEUM spp.). Also waste corn, wheat, and oats. Animal foods include insects (especially leafhoppers), spiders and snails (Martin et al. 1951).

Adult Phenology: Diurnal
Immature Phenology: Diurnal
Length: 19 centimeters
Weight: 39 grams
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Stewardship Overview: Not immediately threatened on the breeding grounds due to their remoteness; however, factors operating on the wintering grounds may be responsible for the population declines indicated by Christmas Bird Count (CBC) data. Wintering ecology is poorly known. Quantitative winter population monitoring techniques need to be developed and implemented to supplement CBC.
Restoration Potential: Apparently not extirpated from any portion of its range and extirpation is not likely due to the remoteness of the breeding habitat and preference for edge habitat on the winter range (Norment and Shackleton 1993).
Management Requirements: Management is unnecessary at this time. Protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (Norment and Shackleton 1993).
Management Research Needs: The relative impact of factors that control population (e.g., predation on eggs, nestlings, adults; effects of severe weather during nesting; overwinter survival) need study. Also need data on wintering ecology, especially habitat selection and factors affecting local populations (Norment, pers. comm.).
Biological Research Needs: Additional basic natural history data is needed, such as determination of migration corridors and physiological determinants of migration, quantitative studies of foraging behavior and habitat selection during the non-breeding season, competitive interactions with other species, determination of age at first reproduction, nest site selection, and dispersal of young from natal site (Norment and Shackleton 1993).
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
Management Information Edition Date: 30Nov1999
Management Information Edition Author: PALIS, J.; REVISIONS BY M. KOENEN AND D.W. MEHLMAN
Management Information Acknowledgments: The author thanks Dr. Christopher Norment for his review and insightful comments on a draft of the abstract. Funding for the preparation of this abstract was provided through the Great Plains Bird Conservation Planning Team, supported by The Nature Conservancy's Wings of the Americas, Ecoregional Conservation, and Great Plains Programs.
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 14Feb1995
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): HAMMERSON, G.

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

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

  • Allen, C. R., S. Demarais, and R. S. Lutz. 1994. Red imported fire ant impact on wildlife: an overview. The Texas Journal of Science 46(1):51-59.

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

  • American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1983. Check-list of North American Birds, 6th edition. Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas. 877 pp.

  • American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American birds. Seventh edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. [as modified by subsequent supplements and corrections published in The Auk]. Also available online: http://www.aou.org/.

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

  • Arsenault, D. and S. Payette. 1992. A post-fire shift from lichen-spruce to lichen-tundra vegetation at tree line. Ecology 73:1067-1081.

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

  • Baumgartner, A.M. 1968. Harris' Sparrow. Pages 1249-1273 in Life Histories of North American Cardinals, Grosbeaks, Buntings, Towhees, Finches, Sparrows, and Allies. A.C. Bent, editor. U.S. National Museum Bulletin 237, Part 3. Washington, DC.

  • Bent, A.C., et al. 1968. Life histories of North American cardinals, grosbeaks, buntings, towhees, finches, sparrows, and allies. Part Two. U.S. National Museum Bulletin 237. (reprinted by Dover Publications, Inc., New York, NY).

  • Bridgwater, D. D. 1966. Winter movements and habitat use by Harris' sparrow, ZONOTRICHIA QUERULA (Nuttall). Proceedings of the Oklahoma Academy of Science 46:53-59.

  • Campbell, R.W., N.K. Dawe, I.McT.-Cowan, J.M. Cooper, G. Kaiser, A.C. Stewart, and M.C.E. McNall. 2001. The Birds of British Columbia, Vol. 4, Passerines: Wood-Warblers through Old World Sparrows. UBC Press, in cooperation with Environ. Can., Can. Wildl. Serv., and B.C. Minist. Environ., Lands and Parks, Wildl. Branch and Resour. Inventory Branch, and Royal B.C. Mus. 744pp.

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

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

  • Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 2017. COSEWIC Assessment Results, April 2017. Online. Available: http://www.cosewic.gc.ca/.

  • Downes, C.M., E.H. Dunn and C.M Francis. 2000. Canadian Landbird Monitoring Strategy: monitoring needs and priorities into the new millenium. Partners in Flight - Canada. Ottawa, Ontario.

  • Gillespie, W. L. and S. C. Kendeigh. 1982. Breeding bird populations of northern Manitoba. Canadian Field-Naturalist 96:272-281.

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

  • Graul, W. D. 1967. Population movements of the Harris' sparrow and tree sparrow in eastern Kansas. Southwestern Naturalist 12:303-310.

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

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

  • Imhof, T. A. 1976. Alabama birds. Second edition. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. 445 pages.

  • JOHNSGARD,P.A.1979.BIRDS OF THE GREAT PLAINS,BREEDING SPECIES AND THEIR DISTRIBUTION. UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA PRESS. LINCOLN.

  • JOHNSTON,R.F.1960. DIRECTORY TO THE BIRD LIFE OF KANSAS. MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY, THE UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS. LAWRENCE.

  • JOHNSTON,R.F.1965. A DIRECTORY TO THE BIRDS OF KANSAS. MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY, THE UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS. LAWRENCE.

  • Jehl, J. R. 1971. Patterns of hatching success in subarctic birds. Ecology 52:169-173.

  • Jehl, J. R., and D. J. T. Hussell. 1966. Effects of weather on reproductive success of birds at Churchill, Manitoba. Arctic 19:185-191.

  • Judd, S. D. 1901. The relation of sparrows to agriculture. Div. Biol. Surv., Bull. No. 15, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 98 pp.

  • KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE AND PARKS. 1989. COLLECTION OF STATE MAPS DEPICTING COUNTY RECORDS FOR OCCURENCE OF KANSAS BIRD SPECIES.

  • Keller, Charles E. 1992. The Birds of Greater Indianapolis and Adjacent Areas. 70 Ind. Aud. Q. 1-5.

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

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

  • Martin, A.C., H.S. Zim, and A.L. Nelson. 1951. American wildlife and plants: A guide to wildlife food habits. Dover Publications, Inc., New York, NY. 500 pp.

  • 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.

  • Nice, M. M. 1929. The Harris' sparrow in central Oklahoma. Condor 31:57-61.

  • Norment, C. J. 1992. Comparative breeding biology of Harris' sparrows and Gambel's white-crowned sparrows in the Northwest Territories, Canada. Condor 94:955-975.

  • Norment, C. J. and M. E. Fuller. 1997. Breeding-season frugivory by Harris' sparrows (ZONOTRICHIA QUERULA) and white-crowned sparrows (ZONOTRICHIA LEUCOPHRYS) in a low-arctic ecosystem. Canadian Journal of Zoology 75:670-679.

  • Norment, C.J. 1993. Nest-site characteristics and nest predation in Harris' Sparrows and White-Crowned Sparrows in the Northwest Territories, Canada. Auk 110(4):769-777.

  • Norment, C.J. 1994. Breeding site fidelity in Harris' Sparrows, ZONOTRICHIA QUERULA, in the Northwest Territories. Canadian Field-Naturalist 108(2):234-236.

  • Norment, C.J. and S.A. Shackleton. 1993. Harris Sparrow; The Birds of North America. Vol. 2, No. 64. American Orinithologists' Union. The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia.

  • Norment, C.J., and S.A. Shackleton. 1993. Harris' Sparrow (Zonotrichia querula). In A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The Birds of North America, No. 64. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, DC. 20 pp.

  • 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.

  • Root, T. 1989. Atlas of wintering North American birds: an analysis of Christmas Bird Count data. Univ. Chicago Press. 336 pp., 42 line drawings, 613 maps, 11 overlays.

  • Sauer, J.R., S. Schwartz, and B. Hoover. 1996. The Christmas Bird Count Home Page. Version 95.1 U.S.G.S. Biological Resource Division, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD. Online. Available: http://www.mbr.nbs.gov/bbs/cbc.html.

  • See SERO listing

  • Semple, J. B. and G. M. Sutton. 1932. Nesting of Harris's sparrow (ZONOTRICHIA QUERULA) at Churchill, Manitoba. Auk 49:166-183.

  • Stevens, O. A. 1957. Fall migration and weather, with special reference to Harris' sparrow. Wilson Bulletin 69:352-359.

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

  • Swenk, M. H. and O. A. Stevens. 1929. The Harris' sparrow and the study of it by trapping. Wilson Bulletin 41:129-177.

  • TORDOFF,H.B.1956.CHECK-LIST OF THE BIRDS OF KANSAS. UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS PUBLICATIONS,MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY.LAWRENCE.

  • 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.

  • Timoney, K. P., G. H. La Roi, S. C. Zoltai, and A. L. Robinson. 1992. The high subarctic-tundra of northwestern Canada: position, width, and vegetation gradients in relation to climate. Arctic 45:1-9.

  • 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.

  • Zink, R. M., D. L. Dittman, and W. L. Rootes. 1991b. Mitochondrial DNA variation and the phylogeny of ZONOTRICHIA. Auk 108:578-584.

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 2018.
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 © 2018 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. 2018. 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.