Boreal Chickadee (Poecile hudsonica) Scott Hickman
Chippewa Co., MI 5/23/1998 © Allen Chartier This species sponsored by Copper Country Audubon.
(Click to view a comparison of Atlas I to II)
Perhaps no species is more commonly regarded likely due to a paucity of information; the species’ irregular pattern of short-range, as an indicator of pristine boreal habitat in sometimes irruptive, migration (Ficken et Michigan than Boreal Chickadee. This more al.1996), its preference for difficult to survey reticent relative of the extroverted Black-capped black spruce-tamarack wetlands (Green 1995), Chickadee is a resident of the coniferous forests and its relatively quiet and secretive behavior that extend from Alaska through the Canadian during the breeding season (Ficken et al. 1996). Maritimes and south to sections of the northernmost U.S. (Ficken 1996). Genetic The breeding season range of Boreal Chickadee analysis indicates that Boreal Chickadees in Michigan was determined to be confined to emerged as a species approximately one and a the UP by MBBA I. Evers (1991) concluded half million years ago when they diverged from that MBBA I revealed two disjunct nesting Eurasian ancestors that entered North America populations within the UP; a western population two million years earlier (Gill et al. 2005). In primarily west of Marquette, and an eastern Michigan, the Boreal Chickadee is a resident in population extending east from central Alger the UP where it is an uncommon breeding County. MBBA II substantiated the continued species (Payne 1983, Chartier and Ziarno 2004). existence of these same two populations, but
indicates that the western population has Distribution expanded while the eastern population has Early accounts of Boreal Chickadee distribution contracted. in Michigan are inconsistent. Cook (1893) describes it as a “rare winter visitor” to northern The reason for these distributional changes can Michigan. Barrows (1912) includes reports not be conclusively determined. Differences in indicating Boreal Chickadee as abundant in the survey effort constitute one possibility. UP, rarer in the LP, and sometimes found as far Observer hours were not recorded during south as St. Clair County, but hesitates to accept MBBA I, but were extrapolated by Kalamazoo these reports as acceptable documentations. No Nature Center data editors. These estimates “unquestionable” breeding records for Boreal indicate that effort within the species’ western Chickadee existed for Michigan even as late as UP range during MBBA II increased by 34% 1950 (Wood 1951). These inconsistencies were
© 2010 Kalamazoo Nature Center Boreal Chickadee (Poecile hudsonica) Scott Hickman from MBBA I, while effort within the eastern estimated total population decline of 73% from UP population’s range decreased by 8%. This 1965 - 2005 (Butcher and Niven 2007) has disparity may have significantly contributed to prompted the National Audubon Society to list the reported changes in distribution, particularly it as a “common songbird in decline”. if the decrease in survey effort in the eastern UP Following this continental trend, the number of was primarily within boreal habitat. UP townships listed as confirmed, probable, or possible for nesting Boreal Chickadees has Disparity in habitat loss during the interval declined by 39%, 33%, and 25%, respectively between atlases is another possibility. Logging since MBBA I. However, this decrease is in boreal forests in the western UP is generally chiefly confined to the eastern UP population. perceived as minimal on public land, light on The total number of townships reporting Boreal non-industrial, privately owned land, and only Chickadees is unchanged for the western moderate on lumber company land (J. Ferris, population with 32 townships reporting Boreal pers. comm.). The impression is similar for the Chickadees during both atlases. In stark eastern UP, except that sale of land between contrast, the number of townships within the forest companies in this region has been eastern UP population noting Boreal Chickadees preceded by heavier harvesting (D. Kuhn, pers. dropped from 24 to six, a decrease of 75%. No comm.). It is then possible that the reported eastern population townships achieved contraction of Boreal Chickadee range in the confirmed status, only one was listed as eastern UP is due to somewhat greater loss of probable, and five as possible. habitat combined with less survey effort than in the western UP. As explained above for distribution, it is possible that the decrease in eastern UP Boreal Breeding Biology Chickadees indicated by MBBA II is due to Boreal Chickadees are cavity nesters requiring relatively less survey effort and greater habitat conifer-dominated habitat, preferably wet areas loss in the eastern portion of the UP. While the containing spruce (Evers 1991). They begin importance of habitat loss is easily appreciated, forming pair bonds while members of winter the influential effect of survey effort within flocks which start dissolving in late April in habitat is often not recognized. Surveying central Ontario (McLaren 1975). Pairs nest in primarily preferred habitat underestimates existing holes or excavate their own within population declines while primarily surveying stumps or trees of a wide variety of species, as marginal habitat overestimates declines (Lawler long as there is soft heartwood underlying a and O’Connor 2004). Differences in survey more solid exterior (McLaren 1975). Their effort within habitat type are unknown for either clutch of six to nine eggs is likely laid in late MBBA I or MBBA II. May or early June in the UP (Schinkel 1994). Males feed incubating females for the 15 days it Conservation Needs takes for eggs to hatch, after which both sexes Dependence of Boreal Chickadee upon black deliver food until the young fledge 18 days later spruce/tamarack/fir wetlands makes (McLaren 1975). conservation of these habitats critical to their survival (Merkel 2006). In particular, Abundance and Population Trends availability of mature stands for winter habitat The world-wide population of Boreal Chickadee has been highlighted as a concern (Hadley and is contained within North America and is an Desrochers 2008). Suspected reasons for estimated 7,800,000 individuals (PIF 2007). decline in this species within North America as Although this is a large number, this species’ a whole include excessive logging and global
© 2010 Kalamazoo Nature Center Boreal Chickadee (Poecile hudsonica) Scott Hickman warming (National Audubon Society 2009). Philadelphia, PA, and the American Climate change has been predicted to possibly Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C. exclude Boreal Chickadee from Michigan as a Hadley, A., and A. Desrochers. 2008. Winter nesting species (Price 2002), and CBC data habitat use by Boreal Chickadee flocks in a indicate that the North American winter range managed forest. Wilson Journal of of Boreal Chickadee is already moving north Ornithology 120:139-145. (Niven et al. 2009). McLaren, M. A. 1975. Breeding biology of the Boreal Chickadee. Wilson Bulletin 87:344- Literature Cited 354. Merkel, K. 2006. In Cutright, M. J., B. R. Barrows, W.B. 1912. Michigan Bird Life. Harriman, and R. W. Howe, editors. 2006. Special Bulletin. Michigan Agricultural Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Wisconsin. College. Lansing, MI. Wisconsin Society for Ornithology, Butcher, G. S., and D. K. Niven. 2007. Waukesha, WI. Combining data from the Christmas Bird Lawler, J. J., and R. J. O’Connor. 2004. How Count and the Breeding Bird Survey to well do consistently monitored Breeding determine the general continental status and Bird Survey routes represent the trends of North American Birds. National environments of the conterminous United Audubon Society, Ivyland, PA. States? Condor 106:801-814.
© 2010 Kalamazoo Nature Center Boreal Chickadee (Poecile hudsonica) Scott Hickman
Schinkel, D. 1994. Boreal Chickadee (Parus hudsonicus). In McPeek, G.A., and R.J. Adams, editors. The Birds of Michigan. Indiana University Press, Indianapolis, IN. Wood, N.A. 1951. The Birds of Michigan. MP 75. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology. Ann Arbor, MI.
Suggested Citation
Hickman, Scott. 2010. Boreal Chickadee (Poecile hudsonica). In Chartier, A.T., J.J. Baldy, and J.M. Brenneman (eds.). 2010. The Second Michigan Breeding Bird Atlas. Kalamazoo Nature Center. Kalamazoo, MI. Accessed online at:
© 2010 Kalamazoo Nature Center