Recovery Plan for the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker (Campephilus Principalis)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for the Ivory-billed Woodpecker (Campephilus principalis) I Recovery Plan for the Ivory-billed Woodpecker (Campephilus principalis) April, 2010 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Southeast Region Atlanta, Georgia Approved: Regional Director, Southeast Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date: II Disclaimer Notice of Copyrighted Material Cover Illustration Credit: Recovery Plans delineate Permission to use copyrighted A male Ivory-billed Woodpecker reasonable actions that are illustrations and images in the at a nest hole. (Photo by Arthur believed to be required to final version of this recovery plan Allen, 1935/Copyright Cornell recover and/or protect listed has been granted by the copyright Lab of Ornithology.) species. Plans published by holders. These illustrations the U.S. Fish and Wildlife are not placed in the public Service (Service) are sometimes domain by their appearance prepared with the assistance herein. They cannot be copied or of recovery teams, contractors, otherwise reproduced, except in state agencies, and other affected their printed context within this and interested parties. Plans document, without the consent of are reviewed by the public and the copyright holder. submitted for additional peer review before the Service adopts Literature Citation Should Read them. Objectives will be attained as Follows: and any necessary funds made U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. available subject to budgetary 200x. Recovery Plan for the and other constraints affecting Ivory-billed Woodpecker the parties involved, as well as the (Campephilus principalis). need to address other priorities. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Recovery plans do not obligate Atlanta, Georgia. 156 pp. other parties to undertake specific tasks and may not represent the Additional copies of this Recovery views nor the official positions Plan are available on the U.S. or approval of any individuals or Fish and Wildlife Service web agencies involved in developing site at: http://endangered.fws. the plan, other than the Service. gov/RECOVERY/RECPLANS/ Recovery plans represent the Index.htm official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, only after Common names for birds are in they have been signed by the accordance with the American Regional Director or Director as Ornithologists’ Union (American approved. Approved recovery Ornithologists’ Union 1983). plans are subject to modification Scientific names of species in the as dictated by new findings, text are found in Appendix G. changes in species’ status, and the completion of recovery actions. By approving this recovery plan, the Regional Director certifies that the data used in its development represent the best scientific and commercial data available at the time it was written. Copies of all documents reviewed in the development of this plan are available in the administrative record located at the Service Field Office in Lafayette, Louisiana. III Although the Ivory-billed Ralph Costa, Chuck Hunter, Erin Acknowledgments Woodpecker has been listed as an Rivenbark, Laurie Fenwood, and endangered species since 1967, no Robert V. Smith made substantial recovery plan was ever prepared contributions. for the species. Charles Baxter and Bill Uihlein Perspectives with regard to of the Lower Mississippi Valley the need for a plan changed Joint Venture Office and their dramatically when substantial and interagency partners at the compelling evidence suggesting USGS National Wetlands the presence of at least one Research Center in Lafayette, bird in the Bayou DeView Louisiana, contributed many area of Cache River National technical aspects of the plan. Wildlife Refuge was announced in April 2005. Primary needs The following individuals provided for recovering the Ivory-billed summaries of information on Woodpecker were to learn more the Ivory-billed Woodpecker in about the bird’s occurrence, to their respective state: Dwight locate birds, and to determine Cooley, Alabama; Mike Harris, how to improve conditions for Georgia; Cliff Shackelford, long-term recovery. Texas; Richard Hines, Kentucky; Catherine Rideout, Arkansas; As might be imagined about such Laurel Barnhill, South Carolina; a charismatic species, there was Erik Baca, Louisiana; Karl Miller, widespread interest in assisting Florida; Nick Winstead and Paul with Ivory-billed Woodpecker Hamel, Mississippi; and Bob Ford recovery. A team of more than 60 and Scott Somershoe, Tennessee. technical experts, scientists, and managers was identified. This The hard work and dedication list eventually grew to nearly 80 of those mentioned above, as people. A list of team members well as the Recovery Team is provided in Appendix A. All members listed in Appendix A, members are acknowledged for are gratefully acknowledged. The their expertise and commitment Recovery Plan is much better to the recovery planning effort. for the involvement and critical thinking of this talented group The Nature Conservancy of of people. The thoughtful peer Arkansas, the Cornell Laboratory review of 7 scientists, led by The of Ornithology, the Arkansas Wildlife Society, was essential in Game and Fish Commission, making the final recovery plan a the Arkansas Natural Heritage better document. Foundation, and Audubon Arkansas contributed greatly Importantly, the work of James during the initial stages of the Tanner must be acknowledged search and recovery effort as the basis of much of what and as the plan began to take we currently understand about shape. Especially instrumental this magnificent bird. His early in preparing the plan were contributions to the conservation Scott Henderson and David of the species through scientific Goad, Arkansas Game and field work allowed us a window Fish Commission; Tom Foti, into the life history and habitat Arkansas Natural Heritage of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker. Commission; Robert Cooper, We stand on his shoulders and University of Georgia; Kenneth gratefully acknowledge his Rosenberg, Cornell Laboratory of contributions. Ornithology; and Kenny Ribbeck, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. Martjan Lammertink from Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, and Jerome Jackson from Florida Gulf Coast University contributed written portions of the plan. Among U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service staff, Deborah Fuller, IV Current Status Number for the Ivory-billed Executive Summary The Ivory-billed Woodpecker Woodpecker is 5, indicating a high (Campephilus principalis) degree of threat and low recovery belongs to a genus composed potential for this species (U.S. of 11 species of woodpeckers Fish and Wildlife Service 2005). inhabiting the Western When additional compelling Hemisphere— primarily Central evidence exists of a nest or roost, and South America. Two forms or there are repeated sightings of Ivory-billed Woodpecker have of birds, the actions described in been recognized (American the recovery plan will provide the Ornithologists’ Union 1983): the initial guidance for conservation North American form with a of the species. historical range covering most of the southeastern and a small Habitat Requirements portion of south-central United The Ivory-billed Woodpecker States (Figure 1) and the Cuban was historically described as form with a historical range a resident of large, contiguous throughout Cuba. The Ivory- forests with numerous large billed Woodpecker was listed as trees. A significant portion of the endangered throughout its range forest must also be in some stage on March 11, 1967, (32 FR 4001) of decay, providing a continuous and June 2, 1970 (35 FR 8495). supply of food (Jackson 2002). Information on the status of the Bottomland hardwood forests are population is limited, and current frequently noted as important population size and distribution is (Jackson 2002, Tanner 1942). It not known. In 2005, information is unclear if this view is biased was released on the presence of at by the scant information on least one Ivory-billed Woodpecker habitat use having been gathered in Central Arkansas (Fitzpatrick near the end of a long period et al. 2005, see Appendix B). of population decline. Habitats Additionally, the existence of occupied at the time most of the potential habitat and numerous studies occurred may not have reports from credible sources been typical or preferred by of Ivory-billed Woodpeckers the species. Rather, the habitat in recent decades provided may have been occupied simply motivation to carry out surveys because it was the last suitable for the species throughout its habitat available. range. Searches have taken place in Texas, Arkansas, In Florida, bald cypress was Louisiana, western Tennessee, noted as an important component Mississippi, southern Illinois, of the forest used by Ivory- Georgia, South Carolina, North billed Woodpeckers, especially Carolina, and Florida. While in conjunction with an adjacent suggestive evidence has been pine forest (Jackson 2002). On found in several states, no clear, the Singer Tract near Tensas conclusive photograph or video in northeastern Louisiana, has been made as of the date of Tanner (1942) documented use in this writing. State, Federal and higher parts of “first bottoms,” private partners will continue to bottomland forests infrequently search for evidence of the species’ flooded and forested primarily presence (e.g., sightings, nest with species such as Nuttall cavities) in order to document oak (Quercus texana Buckley an active nest or roost when [syn., Q. nuttallii]), sweetgum sufficient additional evidence (Liquidambar