The 2007 WatchList for United States Birds WatchList Here we present the 2007 WatchList for United States birds. We present this list in hopes that it will help prioritize conservation efforts in the United States and in other countries that also host these species. Our WatchList includes three related lists (see Appendix 1): 1) Species of Highest National Concern (or Red WatchList; 59 species), 2) Declining Species (or Yellow WatchList, in part; 49 species), and 3) Rare Species (or Yellow WatchList, in part; 70 species). Species are assessed on the basis of four factors: population size, range size, Immature Red-headed Woodpecker threats, and population trend (for more (Melanerpes erythrocephalus). detail, see below under Species Photo/Ardith Bondi Assessment). Species that score high in all four categories are of highest national Gregory S. Butcher1, Daniel K. Niven2, Arvind O. Panjabi 3, concern, species that score high for David N. Pashley4, and Kenneth V. Rosenberg5 threats and population trend go on the list of declining species, and species that 1 National Audubon Society, 1150 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20036; [email protected] score high for population and range size are categorized as rare. Our main list 2 National Audubon Society and Illinois Natural History Survey, 607 East Peabody Drive, Champaign, IL 61820; [email protected] consists of species found in the 49 con- 3 Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory, 230 Cherry Street, Fort Collins, CO 80521; tinental states; we maintain separate lists [email protected] for Hawaii and for Puerto Rico/Virgin 4 American Bird Conservancy, P.O. Box 249, The Plains, VA 20198; Islands, but these are not presented here. [email protected] Lists of birds of conservation concern 5 Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, 159 Sapsucker Woods Road, Ithaca, NY 14850; have been created for decades. Perhaps the [email protected] best known of such lists is the United States Gregory S. Butcher is Director of Bird Conservation for the National Audubon Society. He has a Ph.D. in Zoology from the University of Washington. Butcher previously served as Director of Bird Population Studies at Cornell University’s Laboratory of Ornithology and is an elective member of the American Ornithologists’ Union. Daniel K. Niven is Audubon’s Senior Scientist for Bird Conservation. Previously he directed Audubon’s Important Bird Program, where he guided the development of IBA criteria and helped launch state IBA programs. Niven, who received his Ph.D. from the University of Illinois, brings to Audubon a lifelong interest in birds and conserva- tion, having participated in CBCs since he was a toddler. Arvind O. Panjabi is director of the International Program at the Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory in Colorado, where he focuses on grassland and forest bird conser- vation in Mexico. He also manages the Partners in Flight Species Assessment Database, an international online database of conservation status assessment scores and related information for U.S., Canadian, and Mexican birds. David N. Pashley is Vice-President for Conservation Programs at American Bird Conservancy. Previously, he received a Ph.D. in Wildlife and Fisheries from Louisiana State University and worked for several years for The Nature Conservancy in Louisiana. He was National Coordinator for Partners in Flight for six years and United States Coordinator for the North American Bird Conservation Initiative for four years. Kenneth V. Rosenberg is Director of Conservation Science at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology and is also Chair of Partners in Flight’s International Science Committee. With a Ph.D. from Louisiana State University, Ken is a lifelong birder and has studied birds in Peru, Mexico, and throughout the United States. 18 AMERICAN BIRDS Endangered Species List (http://www.fws. 1): five critical, 10 endangered, 15 vul- next BirdLife list. Another reason for gov/endangered/wildlife.html), which nerable, and 12 near threatened. differences is that BirdLife puts strong carries the force of law. Most such lists, Seventeen of our Red WatchList species stress on population trend (especially including this WatchList, are merely are considered of least concern by 10-year trends) and threats and less on advisory. We have long been concerned BirdLife. On the other hand, 25 species population and range size. Several that there are too many different lists listed by BirdLife (17 of them near species with tiny ranges and populations with similar purposes, so here we combine threatened, the least-threatened catego- have been recently downlisted (but not the efforts of two organizations that for- ry) are not on our Red WatchList; all but delisted) by BirdLife because conserva- merly published separate lists—National three of them are listed in one of our tion efforts have resulted in recent Audubon Society (http://www.audubon. other two categories. population trends that are stable or org/bird/watchlist/) and American Bird increasing. (However, these species Conservancy (ABC) (http://www.abcbirds. remain on both their list and ours.) org/greenlist.htm). In addition, we pro- Similarly, several species with moderate- pose steps to unify our list with other ly large ranges and population sizes have U.S. lists and to adopt a process by shown steep declines and are thus listed which international, continental, nation- by BirdLife despite these relatively large al, regional, and state lists can relate to range and population sizes; these each other appropriately. include one Endangered and seven This list is based primarily on the Vulnerable species that occur on our Partners in Flight (PIF) approach to Yellow WatchList (Appendix 1), plus the species assessment for several reasons: Bathing Allen’s Hummingbird Northern Bobwhite, which we do not because the authors know it best, because (Selasphorus sasin). Photo/Jackie Allison list and they consider Near Threatened. it has been peer-reviewed (Carter et al. 2000, Beissinger et al. 2000) and Only Northern Bobwhite, Ferruginous Yellow WatchList: improved as a result of that peer review Hawk, and Cassin’s Finch are considered Declining or Rare Species (Panjabi et al. 2005), and because we as near threatened by BirdLife but remain The Yellow WatchList is an early have been able to score all U.S. species unlisted by us. (Northern Bobwhite was warning list that includes two groups of using this system. However, we know that the number one common bird in decline birds that might easily join the Red there are experts who prefer modifications in a recent article in Audubon magazine WatchList. The Declining list includes to this system, and we hope to work with [Butcher 2007], showing that we share 70 species that would join the Red them to obtain a consensus approach prior with IUCN/BirdLife a major concern for WatchList should their declines con- to the next edition of the WatchList. its population decline.) CBC data show tinue long enough to cause their Although heavily influenced by the PIF stable populations for Cassin’s Finch, population or range sizes to fall below process, this is not an official exercise of lending a little less weight to the popula- certain thresholds. The Rare list includes PIF or the PIF Science Committee. tion declines shown on the Breeding 49 species that would join the Red Bird Survey (BBS) (Butcher and Niven WatchList should they begin to decline Red WatchList: 2007). Both BBS and CBC show in population (or accelerate declines that Highest National Concern increasing populations for Ferruginous have already begun). The Red WatchList, the list of species Hawk, suggesting that it should be of highest national concern, is essentially delisted at this time (Sauer et al. 2005; Species Assessment a list of globally threatened birds that Butcher and Niven 2007). As mentioned previously, determining occur in the United States. The World Given that the lists are quite similar the placement of a bird on or off the Conservation Union (IUCN) is respon- in intent, why do there remain so many WatchList is based on the assessment of sible for creating Red lists of globally differences in the final result? One four factors: population size, range size, threatened species; they have delegated answer is timing. Each list uses the most threats, and population trend (Panjabi et the authority for the bird list to BirdLife up-to-date information available. al. 2005). Each of these factors is scored International (http://www.birdlife.org/ BirdLife updates some species every on a scale of one to five, where one datazone/species/index.html). Categories year and all species every four years, means low vulnerability to extinction for globally threatened birds include which is more frequent than most other due to that factor and five means high Critcally Endangered, Endangered, lists. Nonetheless, we expect that there vulnerability. For range size and threats, Vulnerable, and Near Threatened. Of is some new information relied upon for separate scores are calculated for breed- the 59 Red WatchList birds, 42 are in this report (especially on population ing and nonbreeding seasons; to create one of the four IUCN categories (Table trends) that will justify changes in the a combined national score, only the THE 107TH CHRISTMAS BIRD COUNT AMERICAN BIRDS 19 highest of the respective breeding and how much evaluation schemes have nonbreeding scores is used. Thus, the evolved over time, it is often difficult to combined score is a sum of four scores determine when a change in assessment and ranges from 4 to 20. is due to an actual improvement or dete- To be on the WatchList, a species rioration of a species’ conservation needs a combined score of 14 (or 13 if condition. We hope to put more empha- the population trend score is 5). To be sis on this in the near future. on the list of species of Highest National To begin the process of comparing Concern (Red WatchList), a species assessments, we compared this WatchList needs a combined score of 16, plus a Roosting Marbled Godwits with the previous Audubon and American score of 8 or more for threats plus trend, (Limosa fedoa).