Mycteria americana - Linnaeus, 1758
Wood Stork
Other English Common Names: wood stork
Other Common Names: Cabeça-Seca
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Mycteria americana Linnaeus, 1758 (TSN 174897)
French Common Names: Tantale d'Amérique
Spanish Common Names: Cigüeña Americana, Tuyuyú, Bato Cabeza Seca
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.105982
Element Code: ABNGF02010
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Birds - Wading Birds
Image 7492

© Larry Master

 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Aves Ciconiiformes Ciconiidae Mycteria
Genus Size: A - Monotypic genus
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: Mycteria americana
Taxonomic Comments: Genetic analyses yielded no evidence of discrete subpopulations in Florida (Stangel et al. 1990). Indeed, Van Den Bussche et al. (1999) found low levels of genetic variablity among Georgia and Florida Wood Storks and recommended that "all colonies of Wood Storks in the southeastern United States be managed...as a single interbreeding population." Similar surveys of South and Central American populations are not available.
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G4
Global Status Last Reviewed: 20Nov1996
Global Status Last Changed: 20Nov1996
Rounded Global Status: G4 - Apparently Secure
Reasons: Large range from the southeastern U.S. and Mexico to South America; populations are relatively stable and apparently secure on a global basis; U.S. population has been stable in recent years, but nesting and feeding areas have been negatively impacted by human alteration of the natural hydrological conditions.
Nation: United States
National Status: N3 (05Jan1997)

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 (S2N), Arizona (S1N), Arkansas (SNA), California (S2?), District of Columbia (SHN), Florida (S2), Georgia (S3), Louisiana (S3N), Mississippi (S2N), North Carolina (S1B,S1N), South Carolina (S1S2), Tennessee (S3N), Texas (SHB,S2N)

Other Statuses

Implied Status under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (USESA): PS:LT
Comments on USESA: Reclassifiied as Threatened by USFWS in the continental U.S (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South Carolina); not listed elsewhere (USFWS 2014).
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Lead Region: R4 - Southeast
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: Resident from southern Sonora, Mexican Plateau (rarely), U.S. Gulf Coast (Florida, formerly west to Texas), and Atlantic coast (South Carolina to southern Florida), south in lowlands to South America (to western Ecuador, eastern Peru, Bolivia, northern Argentina), and Antilles (Cuba, Hispaniola). The southeastern U.S. population is probably disjunct from those in Mexico-Central America. Some individuals, especially juveniles, wander north after the breeding season; may occur up the Mississippi Valley to Arkansas and west Tennessee and up the Atlantic coast to North Carolina; Mexican breeders may range to Texas and Louisiana. Recent breeding in the U.S. has occurred in Florida, southeastern Georgia (Ruckdeschel and Shoop 1989, Bratton and Hendricks 1990), and South Carolina. Center of breeding range in the U.S. has shifted northward since the mid-1970s (Ogden et al. 1987); the Everglades has become of lesser importance as a breeding area but remains critical as a foraging area, especially during dry years (Ehrlich et al. 1992), when possibly as much as 55% of the total U.S. population may use the Water Conservation Areas north of Everglades National Park (at least 8-10% in wet years) (Bancroft et al. 1992). Southeastern U.S. breeders winter within the breeding range, rarely north to northwestern Florida and coastal Georgia. In the U.S., the highest winter densities occur in peninsular Florida (Gulf and Atlantic coasts) (Root 1988).

Number of Occurrences: 21 - 300
Number of Occurrences Comments: Occurs locally throughout range in North, Central, and South America.

Population Size: 10,000 - 1,000,000 individuals
Population Size Comments: There are no known rangewide estimates for population numbers. The largest colonies are in the Usumacinta-Grijalva delta in southeastern Mexico; these colonies had 5000-10,000 pairs in the 1980s (Ogden et al. 1989). U.S. breeding pupulation was more or less stable at 7000-10,000 pairs in the early 1990s (Bancroft et al. 1992). Manry (1993) stated that only 4086 pairs were found in U.S. range in 1991. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1996; see Federal Register, 25 March 1996, also) stated that the U.S. population was 5500-6500 pairs over the last 12 years. The Florida population was estimated at: 9400 adults in 1983; 9500 adults in 1984; 5215 pairs in 1985; and 5130 pairs in 1986. "Statewide surveys in 1993, 1994, and 1995 produced estimates of 4402 (29 colonies), 3588 (26 colonies), and 5523 (33 colonies), respectively, in Florida... The numbers of storks nesting [were]...1661 pairs at 11 colonies in Georgia (M. Harris, pers. comm), and 806 pairs at 3 colonies in South Carolina (T. Murphy, pers. comm.) during 1993." (Ogden 1996).

Number of Occurrences with Good Viability/Integrity: Unknown

Overall Threat Impact Comments: A major problem is low productivity, associated with inadequate food, caused in part by disruption and drainage of wetlands (see Van Meter 1989). The U.S. population (especially Florida) is threatened by human manipulation of water regimes, affecting both nesting sites and feeding areas. The long reproductive lifespan of the wood stork allows it to tolerate reproductive failure in some years, but artificially modified hydrological regimes, exacerbated by naturally occurring events (e.g., prolonged drought or unseasonal heavy rainfall), have caused nesting failures to become chronic in some of the important south Florida rookeries. Additional loss of habitat stems from logging and development. Nest predation by raccoons has been a problem in some areas. Human disturbance causes adults to leave their nests, exposing the eggs/young to predators (Van Meter 1989).

Short-term Trend: Relatively Stable (<=10% change)
Short-term Trend Comments: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (1990) categorized the status of the southeastern U.S. population as "stable." Breeding populations from Mexico to South America appear to be stable (Matthews and Moseley 1990).

Long-term Trend: Unknown
Long-term Trend Comments: Rangewide trends unknown. Breeding population in the southeastern U.S. declined from 16,000-20,000 pairs in the 1930s to 10,000 pairs in 1960 to 2500-5000 pairs in the late 1970s (Ogden and Patty 1981, Spendelow and Patton 1988); increased to 5000-6000 pairs in the mid-1980s. Since the 1960s, the southern Florida population has substantially declined whereas populations in northern Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina have substantially increased (USFWS 1996).

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Inventory Needs: Need numerical status and distribution information in most of its range except for the U.S. Continue monitoring populations where now monitored. Identify feeding areas essential to support rookeries and non-breeding assemblages of storks.

Protection Needs: Do whatever necessary to restore more natural hydrological conditions within the range of the wood stork. Provide adequate feeding habitat for existing rookeries. Restore and enhance habitat. Restrict the use of pesticides in stork habitat. Protect any nesting areas that are not yet protected. Increase public awareness. See recovery plan (USFWS 1996).

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)) Resident from southern Sonora, Mexican Plateau (rarely), U.S. Gulf Coast (Florida, formerly west to Texas), and Atlantic coast (South Carolina to southern Florida), south in lowlands to South America (to western Ecuador, eastern Peru, Bolivia, northern Argentina), and Antilles (Cuba, Hispaniola). The southeastern U.S. population is probably disjunct from those in Mexico-Central America. Some individuals, especially juveniles, wander north after the breeding season; may occur up the Mississippi Valley to Arkansas and west Tennessee and up the Atlantic coast to North Carolina; Mexican breeders may range to Texas and Louisiana. Recent breeding in the U.S. has occurred in Florida, southeastern Georgia (Ruckdeschel and Shoop 1989, Bratton and Hendricks 1990), and South Carolina. Center of breeding range in the U.S. has shifted northward since the mid-1970s (Ogden et al. 1987); the Everglades has become of lesser importance as a breeding area but remains critical as a foraging area, especially during dry years (Ehrlich et al. 1992), when possibly as much as 55% of the total U.S. population may use the Water Conservation Areas north of Everglades National Park (at least 8-10% in wet years) (Bancroft et al. 1992). Southeastern U.S. breeders winter within the breeding range, rarely north to northwestern Florida and coastal Georgia. In the U.S., the highest winter densities occur in peninsular Florida (Gulf and Atlantic coasts) (Root 1988).

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, AR, AZ, CA, DC, FL, GA, LA, MS, NC, SC, TN, TX

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

Range Map Compilers: NatureServe, 2002


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
AL Montgomery (01101)
FL Alachua (12001), Baker (12003), Brevard (12009), Broward (12011), Charlotte (12015), Citrus (12017), Collier (12021), Columbia (12023), Duval (12031), Flagler (12035), Gilchrist (12041)*, Glades (12043), Gulf (12045), Hamilton (12047), Hardee (12049), Hendry (12051), Hernando (12053), Hillsborough (12057), Indian River (12061), Jackson (12063), Jefferson (12065), Lafayette (12067), Lake (12069), Lee (12071), Leon (12073), Levy (12075), Madison (12079), Manatee (12081), Marion (12083), Martin (12085), Miami-Dade (12086), Monroe (12087), Nassau (12089), Orange (12095), Osceola (12097), Palm Beach (12099), Pasco (12101), Pinellas (12103), Polk (12105), Putnam (12107), Sarasota (12115), Seminole (12117), St. Johns (12109), St. Lucie (12111), Sumter (12119)*, Suwannee (12121), Taylor (12123), Volusia (12127)
GA Atkinson (13003), Berrien (13019), Brantley (13025), Brooks (13027), Camden (13039), Charlton (13049)*, Chatham (13051), Cook (13075), Dougherty (13095), Glynn (13127), Grady (13131), Jenkins (13165), Liberty (13179), Long (13183), Lowndes (13185), Mcintosh (13191), Mitchell (13205), Screven (13251), Thomas (13275), Ware (13299)*, Wayne (13305)*, Worth (13321)
MS Adams (28001), Claiborne (28021)*, Coahoma (28027), Noxubee (28103), Oktibbeha (28105), Sharkey (28125)*, Tallahatchie (28135), Warren (28149)
NC Bladen (37017), Brunswick (37019), Columbus (37047), Robeson (37155), Sampson (37163)
OK McCurtain (40089)
SC Bamberg (45009), Beaufort (45013), Berkeley (45015), Calhoun (45017), Charleston (45019), Colleton (45029), Florence (45041), Georgetown (45043), Hampton (45049), Horry (45051), Jasper (45053), Newberry (45071), Williamsburg (45089)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
03 Lower Cape Fear (03030005)+, Black (03030006)+, Lynches (03040202)+, Lumber (03040203)+, Black (03040205)+, Waccamaw (03040206)+, Carolina Coastal-Sampit (03040207)+, Coastal Carolina (03040208)+, Saluda (03050109)+, Congaree (03050110)+, Santee (03050112)+, Cooper (03050201)+, South Carolina Coastal (03050202)+, Four Hole Swamp (03050206)+, Salkehatchie (03050207)+, Broad-St. Helena (03050208)+, Bulls Bay (03050209)+*, St. Helena Island (03050210)+, Brier (03060108)+, Lower Savannah (03060109)+, Calibogue Sound-Wright River (03060110)+, Upper Ogeechee (03060201)+, Lower Ogeechee (03060202)+*, Ogeechee Coastal (03060204)+, Altamaha (03070106)+, Satilla (03070201)+, Cumberland-St. Simons (03070203)+, St. Marys (03070204)+, Nassau (03070205)+, Upper St. Johns (03080101)+, Oklawaha (03080102)+, Lower St. Johns (03080103)+, Daytona - St. Augustine (03080201)+, Cape Canaveral (03080202)+, Vero Beach (03080203)+, Kissimmee (03090101)+, Western Okeechobee Inflow (03090103)+, Lake Okeechobee (03090201)+*, Everglades (03090202)+, Big Cypress Swamp (03090204)+, Caloosahatchee (03090205)+, Florida Southeast Coast (03090206)+, Peace (03100101)+, Myakka (03100102)+, Charlotte Harbor (03100103)+, Sarasota Bay (03100201)+, Manatee (03100202)+, Little Manatee (03100203)+, Alafia (03100204)+, Hillsborough (03100205)+, Tampa Bay (03100206)+, Crystal-Pithlachascotee (03100207)+, Withlacoochee (03100208)+, Waccasassa (03110101)+, Econfina-Steinhatchee (03110102)+, Aucilla (03110103)+, Upper Suwannee (03110201)+, Alapaha (03110202)+, withlacoochee (03110203)+, Little (03110204)+, Lower Suwannee (03110205)+, Santa Fe (03110206)+, Apalachee Bay-St. Marks (03120001)+, Upper Ochlockonee (03120002)+, Lower Ochlockonee (03120003)+, Middle Flint (03130006)+, Lower Flint (03130008)+, Apalachicola (03130011)+, Lower Tallapoosa (03150110)+, Upper Alabama (03150201)+, Noxubee (03160108)+
08 Lower Mississippi-Greenville (08030100)+, Tallahatchie (08030202)+, Coldwater (08030204)+, Big Sunflower (08030207)+*, Lower Yazoo (08030208)+, Lower Mississippi-Natchez (08060100)+*, Homochitto (08060205)+
11 Upper Little (11140107)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Basic Description: Wood stork; Ciconiidae
General Description: A large, tall bird with long, broad wings; black flight feathers and tail contrast with white body; adult has bare, dark-gray head (feathered and grayish brown in immature); bill is long, thick, and downcurved; averages 102 cm long, 155 cm wingspan (NGS 1983).
Diagnostic Characteristics: Differs from the jabiru by smaller size, smaller bill that turns downward rather than slightly upward, and by black (rather than white) flight feathers and tail. Differs from white ibis in larger size, thicker bill, and black tail. Differs from egrets and herons in having a curved bill rather than a straight one. (NGS 1983).
Reproduction Comments: Nesting is tied to receding water levels and concentration of food sources, regardless of date. Clutch size is 2-5 (often 3). Incubation, by both sexes, lasts 28-32 days. Both parents tend young, which leave nest at 50-55 days (also reported as 9 weeks), return to nest for feeding and roosting until 75 days old. Nests in colonies of a few to thousands of pairs.

In Georgia, nesting was most successful if nesters did not experience (a) periods of cold weather and (b) raccoon predation that was associated with drying of the water under the colony (Coulter and Bryan 1995).

Ecology Comments: Notably gregarious. Roosts communally.

In Georgia, lower water level led to lower nesting success because of increased predation of young, presumably by alligators (Ruckdeschel and Shoop 1989). Rise in water level during nesting period may result in breeding colony abandonment (Ramo and Busto 1992).

Non-Migrant: Y
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Mobility and Migration Comments: Individuals from Mexican west coast are regular post-breeding migrants in California and Arizona; breeders from eastern Mexico appear in Texas and Louisiana (Matthews and Moseley 1990).
Estuarine Habitat(s): Lagoon, Scrub-shrub wetland
Lacustrine Habitat(s): Shallow water
Palustrine Habitat(s): FORESTED WETLAND, HERBACEOUS WETLAND, Riparian, SCRUB-SHRUB WETLAND, TEMPORARY POOL
Habitat Comments: Chiefly freshwater situations: marshes, swamps, lagoons, ponds, flooded fields; depressions in marshes are important during drought; also occurs in brackish wetlands. Nests mostly in upper parts of cypress trees, mangroves, or dead hardwoods over water or on islands along streams or adjacent to shallow lakes. Feeds in freshwater marshes, swamps, lagoons, ponds, flooded pastures and flooded ditches, depressions in marshes (especially during drought).
Adult Food Habits: Piscivore
Immature Food Habits: Piscivore
Food Comments: Eats mainly fishes (usually over 3.5 cm long), also miscellaneous other small animals, detected mainly by contact with touch-sensitive bill. Forages mainly in shallow water (about 15-50 cm deep) and flooded fields; attracted to areas with falling water level and hence concentrated food sources (Palmer 1962, Ogden et al. 1978). May feed cooperatively, wading together in shallow water (Hilty and Brown 1986). Conservative estimate is that one pair requires about 200 kg of fish in one breeding season to supply needs of adults and young (see Van Meter 1989). May travel long distances (sometimes over 100 km, usually not more than 56 km) between nesting and feeding areas when feeding young (Ogden et al. 1978).
Adult Phenology: Circadian
Immature Phenology: Circadian
Colonial Breeder: Y
Length: 102 centimeters
Weight: 2702 grams
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Restoration Potential: The earliest possible data for complete recovery of the U.S. population is 2005, but a more realistic date might be 2015-2020 (USFWS 1996).
Management Requirements: See recovery plan (USFWS 1996). Control of water level is critical to the management of this species. See Coulter (1990) and Matthews and Moseley (1990) for information on the successful creation of artificial foraging habitat at Kathwood Lake, Silverbluff Plantation Sanctuary, South Carolina.
Biological Research Needs: Continue research on the role of water management regimes in relation to productivity of rookeries. Study rookeries in north and central FL and the degree of interchange with south FL colonies. Monitor recruitment and factors that affect it. Evaluate dredge and fill activities for affects on wood stork nesting and feeding areas. Evaluate prey response to water management regimes.
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Colonial Wading Birds

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. Small heron colonies (rookeries or heronries) are often ephemeral in nature; recommend tracking rookeries which maintain a minimum of 15 active nests over 2-3 years. Where concentrations of non-breeding individuals occur within the boundaries of a breeding occurrence (especially if augmented by migrants), consider creating a separate occurrence with Location Use Class 'Nonbreeding.'
Mapping Guidance: Map Foraging Areas in separate polygons from the breeding colony if they are separated from the colony by areas simply flown over on commuting routes.
Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 5 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Justification: Occurrences include breeding colonies and foraging areas, but the separation distance pertains to breediing colonies. Hence, difference occurrences may overlap. Unsuitable habitat: upland areas, except those known to be used regularly for foraging (e.g., meadows used by great egrets).

Separation distance is an arbitrary compromise between the high mobility of these birds and the need for occurrences of practical size for conservation planning. Occurrences do not necessarily represent discrete populations or metapopulations.

Colony fidelity low in some species (e.g. Roseate Spoonbill, Dumas 2000; Glossy Ibis, Davis and Kricher 2000).

Feeding areas associated with a breeding colony (i.e. different features of the same occurrence) may be a number of kilometers away from the colony: averaging 12 kilometers for Roseate Spoonbill (Dumas 2000); 7.3 kilometers for Glossy Ibis (Davis and Kricher 2000); 2.8 to more than 5 kilometers for Snowy Egrets (Smith 1995).

Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): 3 km
Inferred Minimum Extent Justification: A low mean foraging range size for this group.
Date: 28Oct2004
Author: Cannings, S., and G. Hammerson

Use Class: Nonbreeding
Subtype(s): Roost, Foraging area
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Evidence of recurring presence of flocks of non-breeding birds (including historical), including non-breeding 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 10 birds occur regularly for at least 20 days per year would be deemed occurrences. Be cautious about creating occurrences for observations that may represent single events.
Separation Barriers: None.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Justification: Separation distance arbitrary, set at 10 kilometers to define occurrences of manageable size for conservation purposes. Occurrences defined primarily on the basis of areas supporting concentrations of foraging birds, rather than on the basis of distinct populations.
Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): 3 km
Inferred Minimum Extent Justification: Based on foraging ranges from breeding rookeries.
Date: 19Apr2002
Author: Cannings, S.
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
Justification: Use the Generic Element Occurrence Rank Specifications (2008).
Key for Ranking Species Element Occurrences Using the Generic Approach (2008).
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 09May1996
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: NeSmith, C. C., D. R. Jackson, and G. Hammerson
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 05Apr1996
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 Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries. 2005. Conserving Alabama's wildlife: a comprehensive strategy. Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries. Montgomery, Alabama. 303 pages. [Available online at http://www.dcnr.state.al.us/research-mgmt/cwcs/outline.cfm ]

  • 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), Committee on Classification and Nomenclature. 1983. Check-list of North American Birds. Sixth Edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas.

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

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

  • Bancroft, G. T., W. Hoffman, R. J. Sawicki, and J. C. Ogden. 1992. The importance of the Water Conservation Areas in the Everglades to the endangered Wood Stork (MYCTERIA AMERICANA). Conservation Biology 6:392-398.

  • Bentzien, Michael M. 1986. Recovery Plan for the U.S. Breeding population of the wood stork. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 33 pp.

  • 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.

  • Borkhataria, R. R., P. C. Frederick, R. Hylton, A. L. Bryan, Jr., and J. A. Rodgers. 2008. A preliminary model of Wood Stork population dynamics in the southeastern United States. Waterbirds 31 (Special Publication 1):42-49.

  • Bratton, S. P., S. Hendricks. 1990 (1988). Wood stork nesting, roosting, and foraging at Cumberland Island, Georgia. Oriole 53:17-24.

  • 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.

  • Brooks, W. B. and T. Dean. 2008. Measuring the biological status of the U.S. breeding population of wood storks. Waterbirds 31 (Special Publication 1):50-59.

  • Bryan, A. L., Jr., K. F. Gaines, and C. S. Eldridge. 2002. Coastal habitat use by wood storks during the non-breeding season. Waterbirds 25:429-435.

  • Bryan, A. L., Jr., W. B. Brooks, J. D. Taylor, D. M. Richardson, C. W. Jeske, and I. L. Brisbin, Jr. 2008. Satellite tracking large-scale movements of wood storks captured in the Gulf Coast region. Waterbirds 31 (Special Publication 1):35-41.

  • Coulter, M. C. 1990. Creation and management of artificial foraging habitat for wood storks. Pages 262-267 in Mitchell et al., eds. Ecosystem management: rare species and significant habitats. New York State Museum. Bull. 471.

  • Coulter, M. C., and A. L. Bryan, Jr. 1995. Factors affecting reproductive success of wood storks (MYCTERIA AMERICANA) in east-central Georgia. Auk 112:237-243.

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

  • Depkin, F.C., M.C. Coulter, and A.L. Bryan, Jr. 1992. Food of nestling wood storks in east-central Georgia. Colonial Waterbirds 15(2):219-225.

  • Dumas, J. V. 2000. Roseate Spoonbill (AJAIA AJAJA). No. 490 IN A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 32pp.

  • Dusi, J. L. and R. T. Dusi. 1968. Evidence for the breeding of the Wood Stork in Alabama. Alabama Birdlife 16:14-17.

  • Ehrlich, P. R., D. S. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1988. The birder's handbook: a field guide to the natural history of North American birds. Simon and Shuster, Inc., New York. xxx + 785 pp.

  • Ehrlich, P. R., D. S. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1992. Birds in Jeopardy: the Imperiled and Extinct Birds of the United States and Canada, Including Hawaii and Puerto Rico. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 259 pp.

  • Hancock, J. A., J. A. Kushlan, and M. P. Kahl. 1992. Storks, ibises and spoonbills of the world. Academic Press, San Diego, California. iv + 336 text pages.

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

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

  • 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.

  • Manry. 1993. [title unknown]. American Birds 47:372.

  • Matthews, J.R. and C.J. Moseley (eds.). 1990. The Official World Wildlife Fund Guide to Endangered Species of North America. Volume 1. Plants, Mammals. xxiii + pp 1-560 + 33 pp. appendix + 6 pp. glossary + 16 pp. index. Volume 2. Birds, Reptiles, Amphibians, Fishes, Mussels, Crustaceans, Snails, Insects, and Arachnids. xiii + pp. 561-1180. Beacham Publications, Inc., Washington, D.C.

  • Mirarchi, R. E., M. A. Bailey, T. M. Haggerty, and T. L. Best, editors. 2004. Alabama wildlife. Volume 3. Imperiled amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 225 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.

  • Mount, R. H., editor. 1986. Vertebrate animals of Alabama in need of special attention. Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, Alabama. 124 pages.

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

  • Ogden, J. C. 1996. Wood stork MYCTERIA AMERICANA. Pages 31-41 in J. A. Rodgers, Jr., H. W. Kale II, H. T. Smith, editors. Rare and Endangered Biota of Florida. Volume V Birds. [R. E. Ashton, Jr., series editor]. University Press of Florida, Gainsville, Florida.

  • Ogden, J. C. and B. W. Patty. 1981. The recent status of the Wood Stork in Florida and Georgia. Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Game and Fish Division Technical Bulletin WL 5:97-101.

  • Ogden, J. C., C. E. Knoder, and A. Sprunt, IV. 1989. Colonial wading bird populations in the Usumacinta delta, Mexico. Pp. 595-605 IN Ecologia y conservacion del Delta de los rios Usumacinta y Grijalva (Memorias). INIREB, Division Regional. Tabasco, Mexico.

  • Ogden, J. C., D. A. McCrimmon, Jr., G. T. Bancroft, and B. W. Patty. 1987. Breeding populations of the wood stork in the southeastern United States. Condor 89:752-759.

  • Ogden, J. C., J. A. Kushlan, and J. T. Tilmant. 1978. The food habits and nesting success of wood storks in Everglades National Park 1974. U.S.D.I. National Park Service, National Research Repirt No. 16. 25 pp.

  • Ogden, J. C., and S. A. Nesbitt. 1979. Recent wood stork population trends in the United States. Wilson Bulletin 91: 512-523.

  • Palmer, R. S. (editor). 1962. Handbook of North American birds. Vol. 1. Loons through flamingos. Yale University Press, New Haven. 567 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 - East of the Rockies.

  • Powell, H. D. 1992. Letter to Katy NeSmith regarding sightings of FNAI elements in Okeechobee and Glades County, Florida. Dated 1 July.

  • 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.

  • Ramo, C., and B. Busto. 1992. Nesting failure of the wood stork in a neotropical wetland. Condor 94:777-781.

  • 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.

  • Rodgers, J. A., Jr. 1990. Breeding chronology and clutch information for the wood stork from museum collections. J. Field Ornithology 61:47-53.

  • Rodgers, J. A., Jr., H. W. Kale, III, and H. T. Smith. 1996. Rare and endangered biota of Florida. Volume V. Birds. University Press of Florida. 736pp.

  • Root, T. 1988. Atlas of wintering North American birds: An analysis of Christmas Bird Count data. University of Chicago Press. 336 pp.

  • Ruckdeschel, C., and C. R. Shoop. 1989 (1987). Aspects of wood stork nesting ecology on Cumberland Island, Georgia. Oriole 52:21-27.

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

  • Smith, J. P. 1995. Foraging flights and habitat use of nesting wading birds (Ciconiiformes) at Lake Okeechobee, Florida. Colonial Waterbirds 18:139-158.

  • 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.

  • Spendelow, J.A., and Patton, S.R. 1988. National atlas of coastal waterbird colonies in the contiguous United States: 1976-82. Biological Report 88(5): 1-326.

  • Stangel, P. W., J. A. Rodgers, Jr., and A. L. Bryan. 1990. Genetic variation and population structure of the Florida wood stork. Auk 107:614-619.

  • 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.

  • TURCOTTE, W. BIRDS OF MISSISSIPPI (DRAFT OF BOOK; IN PREPARATION FOR PUBLICATION AS OF 1997)

  • TURCOTTE, W.H., AND DAVID L. WATTS. 1999. BIRDS OF MISSISSIPPI. MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE, FISHERIES, AND PARKS. 455pp.

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

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1990. Endangered and threatened species recovery program: report to Congress. 406 pp.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1996. Revised recovery plan for the U.S. breeding population of the wood stork.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2014. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Reclassification of the U.S. breeding population of the Wood Stork from Endangered to Threatened. Federal Register 79(125):37078-37103.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1984c. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; U.S. breeding population of wood stork determined to be endangered. Federal Register 49(40):7332-7335.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996b. Revised recovery plan for the U.S. breeding population of the wood stork. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia. 41 pages.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007c. Wood Stork (Mycteria americana) 5-year review: summary and evaluation. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Jacksonville, Florida. 31 pages.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009j. Wood stork recovery action plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife service, Jacksonville, Florida. 7 pages.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2010i. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; 90-day finding on a petition to reclassify the U.S. breeding population of wood storks from endangered to threatened. Federal Register 75(182):57426-57431.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2014b. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; reclassification of the U.S. breeding population of the Wood Stork from endangered to threatened; final rule. Federal Register 79(125):37078-37103.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2012h. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; reclassification of the continental breeding population of the Wood Stork from endangered to threatened. Federal Register 77(247):75947-75966.

  • Van Den Bussche, R. A., S. A. Harmon, R. J. Baker, A. L. Bryan, Jr., J. A. Rodgers, Jr., M. J. Harris, and I. L. Brisbin, Jr. 1999. Low levels of genetic variability in North American populations of the Wood Stork (MYCTERIA AMERICANA). Auk 116:1083-1092.

  • Van Meter, V. B. 1989. Florida's wood storks. Revised edition of 1985 publication. Florida Power & Light Company, Miami. 26 pp.

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

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of March 2019.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2019 NatureServe, 2511 Richmond (Jefferson Davis) Highway, Suite 930, Arlington, VA 22202, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2019. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.