ENT ale Rm whe ee, Ehledesibsiaiee ee inte eee esx mtntninion nel gene een scan a oe ee ee et tipnneg awn ig OAK ST. HDS® UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN NAT. HIST. SURV. “The whole world here unlocks the experience of the past to the builders of the future” —Inscription above east entrance to the Main Library building, dedicated in 1929 University of Illinois Library at Urbana-Champaign Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2021 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign https://archive.org/details/illinoisoreeding26klee The Po Vernon M. Kleen, Liane Cordle, a - oF and Robert A. Montgomery Natural History Survey Library BONE? py up TUBES ELE RELL ELLE DL LIEIS EEL SL LED TRILL, BSA UPA ORAS SE DYE OEE LN SANDY ENO SE he JYillinois Breeding Bird fitlas VERNON M. KLEEN LIANE CORDLE ROBERT A. MONTGOMERY Illinois Natural History Survey Champaign, Illinois Special Publication 26 ANANSI HA ANNAN ASA ASR UREN a bn a ’ i DALAM NNSA RR EN TK acon 4 PEE ANND \ Illinois Natural History Survey, Dr. David L. Thomas, Chief A Division of the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Joel Brunsvold, Director Illinois Natural History Survey Natural Resources Building 607 East Peabody Drive Champaign, Illinois 61820 Printed by authority of the state of Illinois. PORR89801—1M-—06-04 US ISSN 0888-9546 Editor: Thomas E. Rice Cover design: Michelle Garland Cover and title page photography: The Prothonotary Warbler on the front cover and the Henslow’s Sparrow on the book spine were provided by Joe Milosevich. Dennis Oehmke provided the photo of the Eastern Screech-Owl on the title page. Photos: Copyrights of photos in this book reside with the photographers. Citation: Kleen, V.M., L. Cordle, and R.A. Montgomery. 2004. The Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas. Illinois Natural History Survey Special Publication No. 26. xvii + 459 pp. ISBN: 1-882932-07-2 Equal opportunity to participate in programs of the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) and those funded by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other agencies is available to all individuals regardless of race, sex, national origin, disability, age, religion, or other nonmerit factors. If you believe you have been discriminated against, contact the funding source’s civil rights office and/or the Equal Employment Opportunity Officer, IDNR, One Natural Resources Way, Spring- field, IL 62702-1271; 217/785-0067; TTY 217/782-9175. This information may be provided in an alternative format if required. Contact the DNR Clearinghouse at 217/782-7498 for assistance. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Printed with soy ink on recycled and recyclable paper. Funded Cooperatively by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service ILLINOIS U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE ILLINOIS NATURAL DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY NATURAL SURVEY RESOURCES Dedicated to all birders who made this publication possible. tt™— Contents ern LIST OF FIGURES x LIST OFTABLES' x PREFACE xi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS _ xiii INTRODUCTION 1 METHODS 2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 6 NORTH AMERICAN BREEDING BIRD SURVEY — 12 PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT OF ILLINOIS — 18 GUIDE TO THE SPECIES ACCOUNTS 36 SPECIES ACCOUNTS SWANS, GEESE & DUCKS: Order Anseriformes Family: Anatidae Canada Goose Branta canadensis 38 Mute Swan Cygnus olor 40 Wood Duck Aix sponsa 42 Mallard Anas platyrhynchos 44 Blue-winged Teal Anas discors 46 Northern Shoveler Anas clypeata 48 Northern Pintail Anas acuta 50 Hooded Merganser Lophodytes cucullatus 52 Ruddy Duck Oxyura jamaicensis 54 GROUSE, TURKEY & QUAIL: Order Galliformes Family Phasianidae Gray Partridge Perdix perdix 56 Ring-necked Pheasant Phasianus colchicus 58 Ruffed Grouse Bonasa umbellus 60 Greater Prairie-Chicken Tympanuchus cupido 62 Wild Turkey Meleagris gallopavo 64 Family Odontophoridae Northern Bobwhite Colinus virginianus 66 GREBES: Order Podicipediformes Family Podicipedidae Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps 68 CORMORANTS: Order Pelecaniformes Family Phalacrocoracidae Double-crested Cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus 70 HERONS & NEW WORLD VULTURES: Order Ciconiiformes Family Ardeidae American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosus 72 Least Bittern [xobrychus exilis 74 Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias 76 Great Egret Ardeaalba_ 78 Snowy Egret Egretta thula 80 Little Blue Heron Egretta caerulea 82 Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis 84 Green Heron Butorides virescens 86 Black-crowned Night-Heron Nycticorax nycticorax 88 Yellow-crowned Night-Heron Nyctanassa violacea 90 Family: Cathartidae Black Vulture Coragyps atratus 92 Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura 94 DIURNAL BIRDS OF PREY: Order Falconiformes Family Accipitridae Osprey Pandion haliaetus 96 Mississippi Kite Jctinia mississippiensis 98 Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus 100 Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus 102 Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus 104 Cooper’s Hawk Accipiter cooperii 106 Red-shouldered Hawk Buteo lineatus 108 Broad-winged Hawk Buteo platypterus 110 Swainson’s Hawk Buteo swainsoni 112 Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis 114 Family Falconidae American Kestrel Falco sparverius 116 Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus 118 RAILS & CRANES: Order Gruiformes Family Rallidae King Rail Rallus elegans 120 Virginia Rail Rallus limicola 122 Sora Porzana carolina 124 Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus 126 American Coot Fulica americana 128 Family Gruidae Sandhill Crane Grus canadensis 130 SHOREBIRDS & GULLS: Order Charadriiformes Family Charadriidae Killdeer Charadrius vociferus 132 Family Scolopacidae Spotted Sandpiper Actitis macularia 134 Upland Sandpiper Bartramia longicauda 136 Wilson’s Snipe Gallinago delicata 138 American Woodcock Scolopax minor — 140 Family Laridae Ring-billed Gull Larus delawarensis 142 Herring Gull Larus argentatus 144 Common Tern Sterna hirundo 146 Forster’s Tern Sterna forsteri 148 Black Tern Chlidonias niger 150 PIGEONS & DOVES: Order Columbiformes Family Columbidae Rock Pigeon Columba livia 152 Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura 154 PARROTS: Order Psittaciformes Family Psittacidae Monk Parakeet Myiopsitta monachus 156 CUCKOOS: Order Cuculiformes Family Cuculidae Black-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus 160 OWLS: Order Strigiformes Family Tytonidae Barn Owl Tyto alba 162 vi 158 Family Strigidae Eastern Screech-Owl Megascops asio 164 Great Horned Owl Bubo virginianus 166 Barred Owl Strix varia 168 Short-eared Owl Asio flammeus 170 GOATSUCKERS: Order Caprimulgiformes Family Caprimulgidae Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor 172 Chuck-will’s-widow Caprimulgus carolinensis 174 Whip-poor-will Caprimulgus vociferus 176 SWIFTS & HUMMINGBIRDS: Order Apodiformes Family Apodidae Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica 178 Family Trochilidae Ruby-throated Hummingbird Archilochus colubris 180 KINGFISHERS: Order Coraciiformes Family Alcedinidae Belted Kingfisher Ceryle alcyon 182 WOODPECKERS: Order Piciformes Family Picidae Red-headed Woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus 184 Red-bellied Woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus 186 Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Sphyrapicus varius 188 Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens 190 Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus 192 Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus 194 Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus 196 PASSERINE BIRDS: Order Passeriformes FLYCATCHERS: Family Tyrannidae Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens 198 Acadian Flycatcher Empidonax virescens 200 Alder Flycatcher Empidonax alnorum 202 Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii 204 Least Flycatcher Empidonax minimus 206 Eastern Phoebe Sayornis phoebe 208 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus 210 Eastern Kingbird Tyrannus tyrannus 212 SHRIKES: Family Laniidae Loggerhead Shrike Lanius ludovicianus 214 VIREOS: Family Vireonidae White-eyed Vireo Vireo griseus 216 Bell’s Vireo Vireo bellii 218 Yellow-throated Vireo Vireo flavifrons 220 Warbling Vireo Vireo gilvus 222 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus 224 CROWS & JAYS: Family Corvidae Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata 226 American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos 228 Fish Crow Corvus ossifragus 230 LARKS: Family Alaudidae Horned Lark Eremophila alpestris 232 SWALLOWS: Family Hirundinidae Purple Martin Progne subis 234 Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolor 236 Northern Rough-winged Swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis Bank Swallow Riparia riparia 240 Cliff Swallow Petrochelidon pyrrhonota 242 Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica 244 238 Vii Vili CHICKADEES & TITMICE: Family Paridae Carolina Chickadee Poecile carolinensis 246 Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus 248 Tufted Titmouse Baeolophus bicolor 250 NUTHATCHES: Family Sittidae Red-breasted Nuthatch Sitta canadensis 252 White-breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis 2 CREEPERS: Family Certhiidae Brown Creeper Certhia americana 256 WRENS: Family Troglodytidae Carolina Wren Thryothorus ludovicianus 258 Bewick’s Wren Thryomanes bewickii 260 House Wren Troglodytes aedon 262 Sedge Wren Cistothorus platensis 264 Marsh Wren Cistothorus palustris 266 KINGLETS: Family Regulidae Golden-crowned Kinglet Regulus satrapa 268 GNATCATCHERS: Family Sylviidae Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Polioptila caerulea 270 THRUSHES: Family Turdidae Eastern Bluebird Sialia sialis 272 Veery Catharus fuscescens 274 Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina 276 American Robin Turdus migratorius 278 MOCKINGBIRDS & THRASHERS: Family Mimidae Gray Catbird Dumetella carolinensis 280 Northern Mockingbird Mimus polyglottos 282 Brown Thrasher Joxostoma rufum 284 STARLINGS: Family Sturnidae European Starling Sturnus vulgaris 286 WAXWINGS: Family Bombycillidae Cedar Waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum 288 WOOD WARBLERS: Family Parulidae Blue-winged Warbler Vermivora pinus 290 Golden-winged Warbler Vermivora chrysoptera 292 Northern Parula Parula americana 294 Yellow Warbler Dendroica petechia 296 Chestnut-sided Warbler Dendroica pensylvanica 298 Black-throated Green Warbler Dendroica virens 300 Yellow-throated Warbler Dendroica dominica 302 Pine Warbler Dendroica pinus 304 Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor 306 Cerulean Warbler Dendroica cerulea 308 Black-and-white Warbler Mniotilta varia 310 American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla 312 Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea 314 Worm-eating Warbler Helmitheros vermivorus 316 Swainson’s Warbler Limnothlypis swainsonii 318 Ovenbird Seiurus aurocapilla 320 Louisiana Waterthrush Seiurus motacilla 322 Kentucky Warbler Oporornis formosus 324 Mourning Warbler Oporornis philadelphia 326 Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas 328 Hooded Warbler Wilsonia citrina 330 Canada Warbler Wilsonia canadensis 332 Yellow-breasted Chat Jcteria virens 334 54 TANAGERS: Family Thraupidae Summer Tanager Piranga rubra 336 Scarlet Tanager Piranga olivacea 338 SPARROWS: Family Emberizidae Eastern Towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus 340 Chipping Sparrow Spizella passerina 342 Clay-colored Sparrow Spizella pallida 344 Field Sparrow Spizella pusilla 346 Vesper Sparrow Pooecetes gramineus 348 Lark Sparrow Chondestes grammacus 350 Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis 352 Grasshopper Sparrow Ammodramus savannarum 354 Henslow’s Sparrow Ammodramus henslowii 356 Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia 358 Swamp Sparrow Melospiza georgiana 360 CARDINALS & GROSBEAKS: Family Cardinalidae Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis 362 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 364 Blue Grosbeak Guiraca caerulea 366 Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea 368 Dickcissel Spiza americana 370 BLACKBIRDS, MEADOWLARKS, & ORIOLES: Family Icteridae Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus 372 Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus 374 Eastern Meadowlark Sturnella magna 376 Western Meadowlark Sturnella neglecta 378 Yellow-headed Blackbird Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus 380 Brewer’s Blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus 382 Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula 384 Brown-headed Cowbird Molothrus ater 386 Orchard Oriole Icterus spurius 388 Baltimore Oriole /cterus galbula 390 FINCHES: Family Fringillidae House Finch Carpodacus mexicanus 392 Red Crossbill Loxia curvirostra 394 Pine Siskin Carduelis pinus 396 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 398 OLD WORLD SPARROWS: Family Passeridae House Sparrow Passer domesticus 400 Eurasian Tree Sparrow Passer montanus 402 APPENDICES Appendix A. County index for sampled atlas blocks. 405 Appendix B. Summary of atlas data by block. 412 Appendix C. Summary of atlas data by county. 422 Appendix D. Summary of atlas data by species. 423 Appendix E. Summary of breeding evidence criteria in priority blocks. 426 Appendix F. Summary of breeding evidence criteria by groups for Confirmed records in priority blocks. 427 Appendix G. Population trend information for species in Illinois from the North American Breeding Bird Survey. 428 Appendix H. Population trend information for species included in the atlas for the upper Midwest from the North American Breeding Bird Survey. 430 Appendix I. Common and scientific names of plants and animals mentioned in the text. 433 Appendix J. Measurement conversions. 433 Appendix K. Locations of colonies of four species of colonial waterbirds in 2000. 434 LITERATURE CITED = 435 INDEX 455 cme FIGUres sr =e Figure 1. Counties in Illinois. Figure 2. Start-up year, contracts, and block-busting efforts by county. Figure 3. The system for identifying atlas blocks based on USGS quadrangle maps. Figure 4. Field data form. Figure 5. Data entry form. Figure 6. Blocks that were sampled for the Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas project. Figure 7. Number of observer hours per sampled priority block. Figure 8. Number of species with breeding evidence per sampled priority block. Figure 9. Breeding Bird Survey routes in Illinois, and the states in the upper Midwest region. Figure 10. Major streams and lakes in Illinois. Figure 11. Natural Divisions of Illinois. Figure 12. Land cover of Illinois in the early 1800s. Figure 13. Land cover of Illinois in the 1990s. Figure 14. Forested areas in Illinois in the 1990s. Figure 15. Urban areas in Illinois in the 1990s. Figure 16. Wetlands in Illinois in the 1980s. meen “Cables secre Table 1. Breeding status categories and breeding evidence criteria used for the Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas project. Table 2. Species of special consideration. Table 3. Frequency distribution of the number of species with breeding evidence reported per block. Table 4. The most frequently reported species with breeding evidence in priority blocks. Table 5. The most frequently Confirmed species in priority blocks. Table 6. Species reported but not Confirmed as breeding in any block during the atlas project. Table 7. Occasional breeding species in Illinois not reported during the atlas project. Table 8. Summary of atlas data for the 34 state and federally endangered and threatened species. Table 9. Summary of North American Breeding Bird Survey trend information for Illinois for 1966—2000. Table 10. Summary of North American Breeding Bird Survey trend information by breeding guilds and migration groups for Illinois based on data for 1966-2000. Table 11. Land cover of Illinois in the early 1800s. Table 12. Land cover of Illinois in the 1990s. =r == (Oye face MBrENRES arm hen I was a child growing up in western Pennsyl- \ N | vania, my family took driving trips to the western states every other summer. I vividly remember driving through Illinois because the scenery and the birds really began to change and become truly midwestern. Embedded in the endless miles of corn were small woodlots and hedgerows filled with Dickcissels, Orchard Orioles, Loggerhead Shrikes, and Red-headed Woodpeckers. Whip- poor-wills and Barred Owls called at night from every state park where we camped. All of these birds bred in my home state, but they were rare and required special efforts to see. In Illinois, even roadside rest areas had many of these birds. Much had changed when I moved to Illinois in 1984 and started working at the Illinois Natural History Survey. Most of the shrikes and hedgerows were gone and soybeans had replaced corn in about half the fields. My predecessors at the Survey, Dick and Jean Graber, had documented the almost total collapse of grassland bird populations as a result of changing agricultural practices and habitat fragmentation. But one feature remained unchanged: remnant patches of habitat were still filled with interesting birds. Not surpris- ingly, given the small amount of nonagricultural habitat available in much of central Illinois, the abundance of birds in remnant forest patches during migration was phenomenal. I had not, however, expected such high populations of breeding birds given the well-documented avoidance of small habitat patches, especially by breeding songbirds that wintered in the tropics (“Neotropical migrants” in the jargon). In my first summer in Illinois, I began studying birds in the ultra-fragmented woodlots surrounding Lake Shelbyville in east-central Illinois. To my surprise, the remnant forests around the lake were full of breeding birds, including Yellow-billed Cuckoos, Worm-eating and Ken- tucky Warblers, Wood Thrushes, Ovenbirds, Louisiana Waterthrushes, Prothonotary Warblers, and Acadian Fly- catchers. Even narrow riparian corridors had Northern Parulas, American Redstarts, and Yellow-throated Warblers. In the more extensive forests of the Shawnee National Forest, there were breeding populations numbering in the tens or even hundreds of thousands of Kentucky, Worm- eating, and Yellow-throated Warblers, Scarlet and Summer Tanagers, Ovenbirds, Acadian Flycatchers, and Yellow-billed Cuckoos. Even Swainson’s and Cerulean Warblers were still present locally. Breeding birds were also abundant in shrublands and in remnant grasslands and wetlands. The high populations of breeding birds in Ilinois’ habitats became even more puzzling, even alarming, when I started studying the nesting success of these birds. Because of the Brown-headed Cowbird, an overabundant brood parasite, much of the breeding effort of many host species was devoted to raising cowbirds instead of their own young. Those few nests that escaped being parasitized by cowbirds usually had only a small chance of escaping nest predation by generalist nest predators that thrive in the highly frag- mented habitats of Illinois. Raccoons were so abundant in many small woodlots that ground nesters had little chance, and Blue Jays, Rat Snakes, and American Crows are prob- lems for breeding birds in many woodlots. These problems were most acute in small agricultural woodlots, but nesting success also proved to be lower than expected in the much more extensive tracts of the Shawnee National Forest. The research we did while at the Illinois Natural History Survey had the perhaps unfortunate effect of making Illinois famous as a worst-case scenario of the negative conse- quences of habitat loss and fragmentation. For some of Illinois’ breeding songbirds, the entire state is a likely population “sink” where production of young is below levels necessary to compensate for natural adult mortality. If this is true, then Illinois may depend upon immigration from larger forest tracts outside the state where nesting success is much higher. By one scenario, the high populations in Illinois habitats may be bad for regional populations because the rich, productive soils of [llinois may lure birds into habitats where vegetation structure is appropriate and food is plentiful, but chances of raising young are poor (the “eco- logical trap” scenario). Over the last decade, however, reasons have emerged for a more optimistic assessment of Illinois’ breeding bird populations. Nesting success improves dramatically when fragmentation 1s reduced, even in relatively small tracts. Parts of the Shawnee National Forest may be population sources for some songbirds and efforts are under way to consolidate forest cover in some of the state’s largest remaining forests, including the lower Kaskaskia River, the Cache River, and the Shawnee National Forest. The Shawnee National Forest has created “Forest Interior Management Units” to enhance nesting success of forest birds. Compa- rable efforts are under way to create large grasslands in areas such as the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie and Lost Mound National Wildlife Refuge (the former Savanna Army Depot). Wetland birds appear to be less vulnerable to fragmentation than forest and grassland birds. The Conserva- tion Reserve Program is creating additional grassland habitat for at least some rare and declining species (Henslow’s Sparrow, Sedge Wren, Northern Bobwhite). Recent efforts to restore genetic diversity to the Greater Prairie-Chicken population appear to have succeeded. As we go to press, Forster’s Terns have returned to a newly created island in northern Illinois. Populations of Bald Eagles, Sandhill Cranes, and Cooper’s Hawks have recovered to the point where they are even nesting in heavily settled areas. Massive floodplain restorations in the Cache River provide reasons to be optimistic that Swainson’s Warblers will return and that rapidly declining populations of Red-headed Woodpeckers might stabilize over the long run. The “Chicago Wilderness” is actively promoting savanna and grassland restoration and the protection of key migratory bird stopover habitat. We are also beginning to understand ways in which many breeding birds can survive in Illinois’ fragmented landscapes. Many birds of grasslands, shrublands, residential areas, and other openlands are well adapted to coping with nest predators and parasites. Many species of open lands reject cowbird eggs (e.g., American Robin, Warbling Vireo, Baltimore Oriole, Field Sparrow, Brown Thrasher, Gray Catbird) and either chase away predators (Eastern Kingbird, Red-winged Blackbirds) or have such long nesting seasons that they eventually produce young even in the face of extraordinary losses to nest predation (e.g., Field Sparrow, Chipping Sparrow, Indigo Bunting, Northern Cardinal). Not surprisingly, most of these species are abundant, widespread, and have increasing populations. Even some forest birds may be better able to cope with high levels of nest predation than we had predicted. Prothonotary Warblers and Wood Thrushes live much longer than we thought and both leave areas where nesting success has been low. This latter trait might prove to be an effective way of reducing the extent to which small Illinois woodlots act as “ecological traps.” Clearly, Illinois is not a lost cause for avian conservya- tion. Indeed, if we can restore viable breeding populations in Illinois, then it can be done anywhere. By this view, Illinois is in the vanguard of conservation efforts at retaining bird populations in heavily settled landscapes. The Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas is an important step in efforts to conserve Illinois’ birds. It is the culmination of the efforts of hundreds of amateur birdwatchers, Illinois Depart- ment of Natural Resources employees, and other wildlife professionals. Thanks to their efforts, we now have unprec- edented data on the distribution and status of all of Illinois’ breeding birds. The layout is attractive and packed with information on life history attributes, population trends, and occurrence. It will form the basis of long-term assessments of future population and distributional changes. Such data will become especially important as we begin to see the consequences of global climate change. The authors are to be congratulated for compiling an immense amount of data. — Dr. Scott K. Robinson Florida Museum of Natural History, Ordway Eminent Scholar of Ecosystem Conservation Illinois Natural History Survey, Adjunct Professional Scientist nme Acknowledgments === he Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas project was made | possible by many individuals and organizations who contributed much time and effort in planning, data collection in the field, data management, data analysis, and publication of this book. The atlas project was sponsored by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) ina joint effort with the Illinois Audubon Society and its chap- ters, the Illinois chapters of the National Audubon Society, and independent Audubon and birding organizations in Illinois. Primary financial support from 1986 to 1991 came from the IDNR Division of Natural Heritage, including annual grants from the Illinois Wildlife Preservation Fund, a fund that comes from voluntary contributions from [linois taxpayers using the check-off appearing on the Illinois state income tax form. Some of the funding provided by the Illinois Wildlife Preservation Fund supported contracts for field work and block-busting weekends, which were critical for completing the project. The atlas project would not have been possible without the contributions of conservation- minded Illinois taxpayers and other project supporters. Financial support for the publication of this book came from a grant from the IDNR Office of Realty and Environmental Planning through the efforts of Tom Heavisides. Additional funding was provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Atlas projects are difficult to organize, manage, and operate. A large number of individuals were involved and the authors have made every attempt to include everyone who contributed to the success of the atlas project in Illinois in the following acknowledgments; our apologies to anyone we have inadvertently missed. Several people involved in the data collection phase of the atlas project deserve recognition. Special thanks go to Carl Becker and James Garner of the IDNR Division of Natural Heritage as Chief and Head of the Program Section, respectively, for their encouragement and support. John Buhnerkempe of the IDNR Division of Natural Heritage developed the computer program used for data entry. Our thanks to the Max McGraw Wildlife Foundation for support and staff assistance for data entry and quality control, especially Steven M. Byers, Brad Semel, and Robert Montgomery. Melissa Brookens organized information from multiple sources that was useful as a guide for the Illinois publication. The atlas publications committee met in the early phases of the publication process and included Dale Birkenholz, John Buhnerkempe, Dennis Campbell, James Herkert, Vernon Kleen, Robert Montgomery, George Rose, and Liane Cordle (formerly Suloway). The Illinois Natural History Survey provided data analysis and maps using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology. The maps were generated using ESRI Arc software. Our thanks to Steve Amundsen, Steve Bailey, Pat Brown, Leo Chapa, and Mike Ward for reviewing the manuscript and providing helpful comments and suggestions. The following people reviewed specific parts of the manu- script: Larry David (IDNR upland game bird program) reviewed the upland game bird accounts, Steve Havera (Illinois Natural History Survey) reviewed the waterfowl accounts, Mary Hennen (Field Musuem of Natural History) reviewed and provided information for the Peregrine Falcon account, Dan Holm (IDNR waterfowl program) provided population estimates for Illinois’ breeding population of Canada Geese, and Scott Simpson (IDNR manager of Prairie Ridge State Natural Area) reviewed the Greater Prairie- Chicken account and provided population information. Steve Bailey reviewed early versions of the species distribution maps. Marilyn Campbell (Executive Director, Illinois Audubon Society) provided several helpful comments after reviewing an early draft of the manuscript. We thank the Illinois Natural History Survey Publica- tions Committee for their support. The efforts of Sue Voegtlin and Charlie Warwick of the Illinois Natural History Survey with financial details were invaluable towards making this publication possible. Thomas Rice served as editor and provided layout design; we thank him for the many hours spent on production of the book. The book cover was designed by Michelle Garland. Carie Nixon’s generous assistance with many technical aspects of this publication was extremely helpful. We are especially indebted to the following individuals who generously donated the use of their photographs specifically for this publication: Pat Brown, Chicago Academy of Sciences, Richard Day (Daybreak Imagery), Peter Dring, David Enstrom, Adam Fikso, Todd Fink, Annalee Fjellberg, Karen Forcum, Richard Graber, Gary Herren, Nancy Herren, Kanae Hirabayashi, Cathie Hutcheson, Michael Jeffords, Vernon Kleen, James Landing, Walter Marcisz, Joe Milosevich, Dennis Oehmke, Robert Randall, and Eric Walters. Copyright for the photographs resides with the photographers and photos should not be reproduced without permission from the photographers. In addition, Cornell Lab of Ornithology provided photos from the following photographers: Betty Darling Cottrille, D. Robert Franz, Isidor Jeklin, and Jim Wedge. These photos cannot be reproduced without permission. Joe Milosevich provided the photographs of the Prothonotary Warbler on the front cover and the Henslow’s Sparrow on the book spine. Dennis Oehmke provided the photo on the title page. The North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) program provided valuable, comprehensive information on avian population trends, and we thank the helpful people at the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center (PWRC) in Laurel, MD, for providing data and advice to us. Dr. John Sauer, wildlife biologist/statistician for the PWRC, conducted the undertaking a success, as well as the many landowners who analysis of BBS data, including the data presented in the allowed access to their property. Special thanks and recogni- atlas. The BBS data were obtained directly from Dr. Sauer or __ tion are extended to those who spent extra time and effort as via the BBS Web site at www.mp2-pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/ county coordinators; their names appear in the “County (Sauer et al. 2001). Keith Pardieck, U.S. BBS Coordinator, Coordinators” list below. Names of the people who con- reviewed the Breeding Bird Survey section for the atlas and ducted the surveys of the atlas blocks are given in the provided many helpful comments. “Atlasers” list below. Alan Anderson deserves special Finally, many thanks to all of Illinois’ birders for their recognition for coordination of the large number of priority invaluable assistance throughout the atlas project. We and nonpriority blocks for the Cook County effort. We also dedicate this book to you. The completion of the Illinois thank the county coordinators for verifying the spelling of Breeding Bird Atlas project would not have been possible names (which were often difficult to read) and offer our without the nearly 1,000 birders, both amateur and profes- apology to those whose names are either inadvertently sional, who volunteered their time and effort to make this omitted or misspelled. County Coordinators County coordinators who took responsibility for multiple counties are indicated as follows: 2 to 5 counties (+), 6 to 9 (++), and 10 or more (+++). Alan Anderson Todd Fink Denny Jones Kathy Phelps Etta May Aubertin Karen Forcum Larry Jones L. H. Princen ++ Steve Bailey Edwin & Evelyn Franks Vernon Kleen +++ Alice Rakers Michael Baum Richard Gibson Bill Lubben Robert Randall + Bill Bertrand Sharon Giles + Phil Luchtefeld Doug Robinson ++ Dale Birkenholz Ron Goetz + Patti Malmborg Reilly ++ Wayne Schenum Keith Blackmore + Joel Greenberg Yvonne Maynard David Schuur, Jr. + Alan Branhagen Calvin Grimes + John McKee Deborah Scott Toby Brown + Roger Gustafson Jim McGowan John Sellers Steven Byers Jim Hampson + Kelly McKay Eric Walters Richard Call Leroy Harrison + Lynn McKeown Michael Ward + Marilyn Campbell Harold Hedden William Miles Tony Ward Robert Chapel + Alice Henry Dan Miller John Wisnewski + Hal Cohen L. Barrie Hunt Joe Milosevich Helen Wuestenfeld + Margaret Cole Joe Jobst Robert A. Montgomery + Dick Young Duff Decker David B. Johnson Richard Palmer + John Yunger + Al Dierkes Duvall Jones + Atlasers Atlasers who assisted with the completion of 2 to 5 atlas blocks are identified by an asterisk (*), 6 to 10 blocks by two asterisks (**), and 11 or more blocks by three asterisks (***). Helen Abbott Lylia Andrews Jim Aubertin * D. Bates Ross Adams Fred Anesi Tom Aubertin * Michael Baum *** Kay Alden Joanna Anesi Louise Augustine Sally Baumgardner Walter Allison Robert Appleburg Renee Baade Mona Baumgartel * Alpers Jack Armstrong ** Rita Babin Bernard Bayles Alan Anderson *** James Armstrong B. Bahrstock Ken Beach Anna Rae Anderson * Joyce Armstrong * Steve Bailey *** Evelyn Beaird Brice Anderson Judy Armstrong Paul Baker Ceola Benedict * David Anderson Karen Ashbury T. Baker Herb Benedict Dick Anderson * David Athans John Ball Irene Benjamin * Edward Anderson *** Ann Atkinson Teresa Barbier Joyce Bennett Ella Anderson ** Brad Atkinson Steve Barg Norma Bennett Eric Anderson David Atkinson Ann Barker Ric Bennett * Mitzi Anderson Dick Andrews X1V Etta May Aubertin * Jeremy Aubertin * Karl Bartel * Barb Bartelman Thomas Bennett Dick Benning Carolyn Benninghoff Susan Benson * Bill A. Bertrand *** Richard Biss * John Bivins * Richard Bjorkland * Eric Bjorklund Keith Blackmore *** Mary Blackmore ** Graig Blackwell Bob Blair Brian Blevins * Corey Blevins Lewis Blevins Richard Blewett Vonna Bley *** Jo Ann Block * Ray Boehler * Verda Boehler * Brian Bogacyzk Ann Boher David Bohlen * Marilyn Bohm Emery Boldenow Cassandra Bolen * Rusty Boone Dave Borneman K.M. Bowen * Mary Bowers * Gary Bowman * Jim Bowman * Marvin Braasch Ron Bradley George Brady * Alan Branhagen *** Judy Bransky Brastrom Richard Bready Barb Breheny David Brenner * Mary Bricker Robert Bricker Ken Brock B.J. Brown Barbara Brown * Bill Brown Dave Brown Joyce Brown * Kenneth Brown Toby Brown *** Wauneta Brown * Maury Brucker *** Robb Brumfield Kris Brunner Tim Brush * Nan Buckardt Cody Buckman * Phyllis Buegel Karen Buitcema Harold Bullerman David Burdick Mary J. Burgh D. Van Burkirk A. Burkman Clara Butterfield Steve Byers *** Vicki Byre * Richard Call ** Bill Callihan Evelyn Callihan Linda Callihan Pauline Calvert Marilyn Campbell *** Barbara Cantwell Debra Carey Alex J. Castaneda Maryann Casteneda John Cecil Robert Cecil David Cederstrom ** Robert Chapel *** Linda Chapman Robert Chapman ** Elizabeth Chato *** John Chato * Terry Chesser Rosemary Chesterson Carol Childers Gerry Cillis * John Cillis * Mary Clark Vincent Clark Neil Claussen Dale Clayton Donna Clem Herman Clem Lois Clutts Hal Cohen Jack Colbert Luke Colbert Tack Colbert Tammy Colbert * Tesa Colbert * Bob Cole Margaret Cole * E.J. Condron * Marilyn Condron Richard Conklin M. Conrath Elizabeth Cook Everett Cooley * Luella Cooley * Charles Cooper Alice Cornwell Lynda Cornwell Mary Correll Bob Cottingham Barbara Coumbe Michael Cousins Keith Cox Dan Crawford Eileen Crawford Betty Crebbe Dan Crebbe Jack Cross Bruce Crossan Steve Culberson * Kim Curtis * Mary Kay Cutcierstei Gary Dahn Bernice Dalton Bernie Dalton Frank Dani Mike Dani Diana Daniels Lily Daniels Robert Danley Donald Dann * Carol Davidson Lois Davis Laura Deangelis Myrna Deaton *** Bill Debaets * Charles Decker Duff Decker *** Orpha Decker * V. Deckert Richard Decoster Dennis DeCourcey * Leslie DeCourcey * Perry Degraw Michelle Deissault Walter Dembos, Jr. Judy Deneal * Leo Desch D. Descourouez Sheryl DeVore * Danny Diaz * Al Dierkes * Fran Dierkes Roger Digges * S.T. Dillon * Pete Dixon Ida Domazlicky Jeffery Donaldson *** William Doukas Marian Doyle P.J. Doyle Nancy Drilling Peter Dring Ed Driver Conrad Drust Doug Dufford * Laura Dufford * Aura Duke * Sylvia Dulaney T. & M. Dunker Ralph Eads Andrew Earnest Janet Earnest Rodney East M.J. Easterday *** Ivan Easton Robert Easton Sam Eaton Scott Edie Barb Edwards * John Eggert Ruth Eggert * Jim Eidel * Henry Eilers John Elliott Wannette Elliott R. Ellis Thomas Ellis * Norm Emerick Judy Emmett * Louise H. Endres *** Scott Evans Scott Farrell Alan Feldman * Hiebcirys R. Ferry Carol Fialkersten C. Fialkowski Conrad Fialkowsta Joyce Fieldstad * Findley Bob Fink Todd Fink *** Darlene Fiske * A. Flood Gary Forcum * Karen Forcum Rhonda Forcum Ted Forcum David Fortner Barbara Fox * Fred Francis Helen Francis Edwin Franks *** Evelyn Franks *** Lauren Frederick Bruce Freske * Sue Friscia * Jackie Frost Gary Fuller Andrea Funk XV Jim Funk Richard Funk Judi Galbreath Ray Ganey Gerald Garden * Sallyann Garner * Helen Gasdorf * Bob Gessner Richard Gibson ** Laura Gilbert Ron Giles * Sharon Giles * Donna Givens Jeff Givens William Glass ** Minnie Glison Betty Goeb Beth Goeppinger Don Goerne * Elaine Goerne Ron Goetz ** Theresa Goetz * Bob Gogh Virginia Gordon Doug Gortzinger Maryann Gossmann * Rob Gough Dan Graber Linda Graber Anita Grace Garland Grace Joel Greenberg * Vern Greening Gs Gtreenlee* Norb Gresey * Anna Grey Calvin Grimes *** Debra Grimes * Sylvia Grisez Norris Groves Dave Gruver Phyllis Gruver Gary Gulezian * Judy Gustafson Roger Gustafson * Sandy Hafey * Mark Hall S. Hall Jan Hallet Tom Hallet Michael Halter Pamela Hamel Pam Hamilton Patricia Hamilton Richard Hamilton Jim Hampson ** Tille Hanes * XVi Bowie Hannah Kay Hansen Liz Hansen Pat Harding Jeff Hardt * Given Harper Harrier Kim Harris Stanley Harris Leroy Harrison *** Mary Harrison John Harshman * Mary Hartley Fran Harty * Jason Hauser Ann Haverstock * Sue Hayden * Duane Heaton Myrna Heaton Harold Hedden Edith Hedges Frank Hedges Randy Heidorn Jim Heim Sue Hemp Mary Hennen * Alice Henry Bob Henry * Mark Henry Michelle Henry Francis Hensley Mathew Herbst * Ralph Herbst * Jim Herkert Danielle Herman Gary Herren * Nancy Herren * Jed Hertz David F. Hess * Sharon Hibbs Margaret Hickerson Scott Hickman * Charity Hilchen Karen Hilgers Ann Hill Cary Hillegonds Mary Jo Hillegonds Kanae Hirabayashi Joyce Hofmann *** Cindy Holloway * Charles Hollowell ** Margaret Hollowell *** D. Holmes Frank Holmes Edward Hopkins ** Eric Hopps Robert Horlock Samuel Hossin * Roger Hotham * Greg Houghton Marilyn Hougland * Ronald D. House * Vivian Howe Virginia Humphreys ** Le Batic Huntae. Susan Husar Jean Hushagen Chlora Hyrup Betty Irwin Ruth lutzi Georgie Ives Gilbert Ives Carol Jackley Jim Jackley Michael Jacob Stephanie Jacob Gerald Jaegle ** Stan Janson Suzanne Jebary Robert Jenner * Delores Jensen Bob Jessup Leslie Jette Joe Jobst * John Jobst Mary Jobst * Bob Johanson * Doris Johanson * Harold Johanson David John David B. Johnson *** Edith Johnson Gene Johnson Hal Johnson Keith Johnson * Lee Johnson Sam Johnson Isabel Johnston Denny Jones Duvall Jones Larry Jones Judith Juers * Paul Kallman R. & S. Kamine ** Andrea Kane * Ian Kaullman * Paul Kaullman Helen Keegan Jack Keegan * Helen Keepes Norman Keepes John Keister Justin Keister Mark Keister * Kevin Kellen * Paul Kendall Sue Kercher Vicky Kiefer * Mary Kiger * Leota King Scott King R. Kirauer Rose Kirnam * Sarah Kleeman Melvin Kleen Vernon Kleen: ==> Robert Kloempken Lee Roy Knuppel Mary Knuppel Helen Koetsier Nancy Kolb Mike Konrath Ken Konsis George Koutsky Joan Koutsky * John Koutsky * Alice Krauser ** Tom Kreiling * Ken Kubik * Barb Kupiec * Greg Kupiec Anton Kvernes David Kvernes Joan Lackenbacher * Raymond Lamich Bert Landes James Landing ** Tim Landing Vicki Lang * Larry Lapre * G.E. Larimore R.W. Larimore Mildred Lashbrook Fred Lastina Laura Lastina Jo Lawson Christine Lee Stephen Lee = Chuck Leib Joseph E. Leigh ** F. Lenski GeTesnick Jean Lesnuak Bob Lindsay * Carl Linhart Ed Lipinski Stacza Lipinski Vicki Lipski Jerry McCormick Lawrence McCormick Vivian McDermott * Marry McDowell Janet McGowan Jim McGowan Claudia McGramm Kevin McGuire * Ruth McIntosh Kelly McKay Gerri McKearn * John McKee *** Lynn McKeown *** Pat McKeown Brad McKinney A. T. McLean Dean McMakin C. McQurne Margaret Mechtenberg *** Ruth Megzer Vicki Mellander Margot Merrick * C. Metz Ruth Mezger Margo Milde William Miles ** Cliff Miller Craig Miller * Dan Miller ** Dave Miller Graig Miller Karen Miller Melody Miller Stacy Miller Joe B. Milosevich *** Annette Mitchell Charles Mitchell Edward Mockford * Peggy Moga Alex Molay Chuck Moms Catherine Monday * Trine Mondhindle Irene Mondhink * Lois Montague * Louis Montague * Robert A. Montgomery *** Don Moreland Gill Moreland Alice Morin Michael Morin Dorothy Moris Linda Moross Marilyn Morris * Cindy Morrison * Lonny Morse * Betty Moss * Wade Moss Alex Mouton George Mozurkewich Elizabeth Mullen Michael Mulligan * Margaret Murley * Diane Murphy * Tim Murphy * Ron Myers Rich Myslinski James Nachel James Nardi Jim Neal * Kay Neuman Kenny Neuman Joe Newcomb B. Newman * Roger Nibert Linda Nicot * Kris Nielson Beatrice Niemerg ** Linda Nirat Carolyn Nixon Barbara Nobles Robert Nobles A.J. Novotny * Joe Nowak Randy Nyboer ** Grace Oakley * Mary Ochsenschlager Maureen O’Connell * Mary Ogilvie Clark Olson * Mildred O’ Neall Brenda Onken ** Marilyn Ostrow * Barbara Ott Edward Palincsar Joan Palincsar Calvin Palmer Dorothy Palmer Richard Palmer *** Catherine Palm-Gessner * Ron Panzer Helen Parker ==. Harry Parkhill Pauline Parkhill Sebastian Patti * Wendy Paulson Mark Payne R. Payne Richard Peiser Marie Perry Ray Pershing Peter Petersen Lynn Phelan Kathy Phelps * Margot Phelps Richard Phelps Mark Phipps Mark Pittman * Carl Poch * Judy Pollock * Jack Pomatto * Dale Pontius Angelia Prairie Chris Prairie Douglas Prairie Jason Prairie Jennifer Prairie Sandra Prairie Joe Pratt Donna Pries i. HePincens a Gréet Prncen *= Brian Pruka * John Puljung John Purcell * Pat Quintenz * Kay Radaz Jeanette Rader Alice Rakers ** Greg Rakers Rich Rakers ** Ken Ralph Marjory Rand * Robert Q. Randall *** Carol Redeker *** Reichardt Helen Reid * Nancy Reid Norman Reid Helen Reidel Susan Reinke Emilie Remus Mike Riechardt Mary Riedell Robert Rioempkum John Riordan * Mary Riordan * Sue Robert Barb Roberts Douglas Robinson *** J.C. Robinson Otto Robinson * S.K. Robinson * Charles Roderick * Marqueri Roderick * Marie Rodzwold Bill Rogers George B: Rose ** Gerry Rosenband Karin Rosenberg R.R. Rosenthal Laurel Ross Suzy Ross Annette Rossi * Al Rothenbach Jeffrey Rovner Seymour Rubin Darlene Ruefer Leo Ruefer Barbara Rutherford William Rutter Harriett Rylaarsdam * Chet Ryndak Dayle Saar Tyler Sager Scott Sams Allan Sanders Jeffrey Sanders Kiyoko Sato Ken Schaal Wayne Schenum * Lois Schick * Bob Schifo G. Schild Terry Schilling *** Beverly Schlinkman * Stephen Schmaeng C. Schmidt Don Schmidt * Sigrid Schmidt * Edward Schmitt Esther Schmitt Janet Schox Ann Schroeder Dan Schroeder Kirk Schubert * Karen Schuster David Schuur, Jr. *** David Schuur, Sr. Marvin Schwartz * Valdemar Schwarz Deborah Scott *** Tom Sebestiano John Sellers * Brad Semel ** Orris Seng Wes Serafin Mary Ann Severson Robert Severson Bruce S. Seward Darrell Shambaugh ** William Shanahan Sharon Shaw Janet Shcox Ann Sherman Mark Shibley Carol Shipp Steve Shipp Janine Shirvey Mark Shoger * Rob Shook * XVIl Ashley Shupe M. Sidney M. Sidor Bill Siebel Andy Sigler * Dale Simon Scott Simon P. Simonds Scott Simpson Ray Skow R. Sliwinski Audrey Smith Dana Smith Eleanor Smith * Fred Smith Grace Smith James O. Smith * Leslie Smith Nancy Snider * S.D. Snyder Jim Solum * Wendy Solum * Don Southand Leroy Sowl Mark Sprauer Nancy Standley Max Stark Marjory Staubus Gerry Stearns * Sid Steele * Raymond Steidl Colleen Steifel Mary Stevens * Kip Stevenson Colleen Stiefel *** John Stofan * Alan Stokie * Fred Stoop Paul Strand * Bob Stratton D. Stricker Linda Strid XVIil Todd Strole Andy Suarez Jerry Sullivan Wilda Sutherland * Wayne Svoboda Kevin Swagel Harold Swartz Michael Sweet * Robert Szafoni * Louis Tattersall Marjorie Tattersall ** Eric Tauck Susan Tauck Greg Taylor * Richard Tebbs Arnold Tebussek * Janet Tebussek * Vern Tetlaf Carol Thomas Renee Thomas * Alice Thompson Charles Thompson Linda Thompson Ralph Thornton Laurence Thorsen Susan Tillia Eunice Tjaden John E. Todt * Karen Townsend * Steve Townsend Sandy Tune * Barbara Turner ** Phil Tuttle * Edwin Unger Lorraine Unger Georgia Unzicker Lowell Unzicker Eleanora Vaester Linda Vance Glendy Vanderah W. Vanderploeg Tom Vanderpoll Isidore Venetos * E. Vercmiysse Matt Vincent Peggy Vining Luisa Visintin Eleanor Voeste * Laurel Vogt Rita Voltz Eugene Wachtel Rich Wagner * Furl Walden Joann Walker Keith Walker Peg Walsh * Peg Walshky Pat Walston * Bryon Walters Eric Walters *** Margaret Walters * R. Bryon Walters ** Terry Walters Victor Walters Bob Ward Claudia Ward Harold Ward * Jeff Ward * Michael Ward *** Milt Ward Pat Ward * Tom Ward James Ware Dick Wasson Louise A. Waters Cynthia Watkins *** D. Dee Watts Don Watts * Ken Weber * Marian Weber * Nancy Wedow Vernon Wedow Bernard Weiner Steve Weller Anna M. Welty Marie Welty * Ken Wenzel Donna West Charles Westcott Ron Westemeier Doris Westfall * Mike Weygand * Betty Wier John Wier Dorothy Wilcox Gary Wilford Mike Wilkerson Dan Williams ** David Williams *** Don Williams * Doris Williams Jan Williams Joyce Williams Pat Williams Zelma Williams * Albert Willms * Joyce Wilson Richard Wilson Tom Wilson John Wisnewski *** Tara Wisnewski Elizabeth Wodtke * Randall Woessner * Jack Wohlstadter Terrie Woodrow Helen Wuestenfeld * Pat Wyatt Lynn Yascott Nancy Ylisela Dick Young * Tim Young John Yunger *** Jan Zaton Ray Zoanetti Richard Zullo ~ Walt Zuurdeeg mrs Sntroduction << 2eer meee sive summary of information about birds that cur rently breed in the state, based primarily on data from the Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas project and the North American Breeding Bird Survey, as well as the knowledge gained over many years of experience with the state’s avifauna. As the word “atlas” implies, the book includes maps that illustrate the distribution of breeding bird species in Illinois, but it also includes information on their ranges, abundance, habitats, life histories, historical status, and recent population trends. T= Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas presents a comprehen- Atlas History The concept of the breeding bird atlas began in England in the 1960s. Atlas projects were conducted throughout western European countries in the 1970s and began in the United States in the 1970s. Several eastern states completed their atlas projects during the 1980s; some are now starting their second round. During the 1980s the number of states conducting breeding bird atlas projects grew rapidly and atlas projects have now been completed in several states. A review of atlas history can be found in Laughlin et al. (1982a). The Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas project was planned and funded by the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) with cooperative support from the Illinois Audubon Society and its chapters, the Illinois chapters of the National Audubon Society, and independent Audubon and birding organizations in the state. The field data were collected by 945 individuals during the period 1986 through 1991. Goal and Objectives The goal of the Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas project was to conduct a comprehensive and systematic statewide survey of breeding birds to document their distribution and status in the state. The objectives of the atlas project were to: accurately determine the distribution of all bird species breeding in Illinois during the period 1986— 19o 1 ¢ develop an avian database from the information collected in the field. provide additional distributional information on species listed as threatened or endangered and help identify other species of conservation and manage- ment concern. ¢ document and identify sites that provide critical habitat for rare or locally distributed species. provide a database on the distribution of breeding birds to assist in resource management decisions by environmental planners, legislators, developers, conservationists, and others. provide a documented baseline data source for biolo- gists and researchers to monitor future change. use a survey methodology that can be duplicated in the future. use the collective expertise of the professional and nonprofessional birding community in a scientific and educational endeavor, and educate the public about birds as a natural resource. , One aspect of the atlas project that deserves special mention is the value of the data as a baseline for future comparisons. The atlas data provide a robust, unique benchmark that will enable comparative studies in the same vein as the important research the Grabers conducted comparing bird populations in Illinois for the periods 1906— 1909 and 1956-1958 (Graber and Graber 1963). The atlas data will be invaluable in determining how bird populations are affected by the continually changing landscape, including urban sprawl, habitat alteration and loss, and habitat restora- tion. toms Methods semmmmsrr to allow atlas surveyors, or atlasers, to contribute to the collection of scientific data. The atlasers, both amateur and professional ornithologists, were largely volunteers. Illinois atlasers selected or were assigned atlas blocks (see Sampling Design section for discussion of blocks), identified as many breeding species as possible within the boundaries of the blocks during the atlas period, and determined the highest degree of breeding evidence for each identified species. T he Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas project was designed Standards During the course of international and national atlasing, standard techniques and procedures were developed, formalized, and adopted by the International Atlas Commit- tee and the North American Ornithological Atlas Committee (NORAC) (Laughlin et al. 1982a; Laughlin et al. 1982b; Sutcliffe et al. 1986; North American Ornithological Atlas Committee 1990). The protocol for the Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas project followed these standards. Planning and Management The Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas project was designed to be a county-by-county effort with 15 to 25 new counties starting up each year during the six-year period. The 102 counties in Illinois (Fig. 1) range from approximately 170 square miles for Putnam County to 1,174 square miles for McLean County. The start-up years for the counties are shown in Figure 2. Individuals were recruited from each county to serve as county coordinators. Their responsibilities included 1) recruiting and instructing volunteers; 2) distributing the data forms and maps for the blocks to be atlased; 3) urging the volunteers to make every effort to “confirm” as many species as possible in their atlas blocks; 4) monitoring their county’s coverage; and 5) receiving the completed data forms from the atlasers at the end of each breeding season, checking them for accuracy, and forwarding them to the project coordinator. The service time for county coordinators ranged from one year for a single county to all six years for a single county or multiple counties. County coordinators were provided small stipends to help cover their expenses. By the third year of the atlas project it was apparent that counties with larger populations and larger numbers of atlasers were achieving the project goals and objectives while other counties, particularly the less populated ones, were not being adequately surveyed despite the county-by- county phase-in system. Data collection for priority blocks in the northeastern counties was nearing completion and sampling of nonpriority blocks was starting. Therefore, supplemental methodologies were developed in order to achieve at least minimal coverage in every county. One method was to contract with individuals to atlas all priority 2 blocks in one or more counties. Between 1988 and 1991 contracts were used to obtain data from some or all priority blocks in 17 counties (Fig. 2). A second method was the “block-busting” weekend, where atlasers participated in a team effort to survey all priority blocks in an entire county on weekends (Friday night through Sunday afternoon). Block-busting weekends were scheduled on all June week- ends and the first weekend in July during the last three years of the atlas project. Data for some or all priority blocks in 37 counties (Fig. 2) were obtained through block-busting efforts. Sampling Design A systematic, statewide sampling method was established for Illinois by creating a grid system based on the U.S. Geologi- cal Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle maps. The sample unit for the Illinois atlas project, the atlas block, was based on protocol recommended by NORAC (Laughlin et al. 1982b). Atlas blocks were derived by subdividing the 7.5- minute quadrangle maps into six equal areas, each quad being divided vertically in half and horizontally in thirds (Fig. 3). The resulting blocks were generally about 10 square miles in area. This process created 6,151 blocks for the state (from the 1,072 7.5-minute quadrangles that cover all or part of Illinois). Atlas blocks were assigned identification numbers: the first three numbers (001 to 287) identify the 15-minute USGS quadrangle map; the letter (A, B, C, or D) identifies the 7.5-minute quadrangle map (four 7.5-minute maps comprise a 15-minute map); and the last number (1 to 6) identifies the block (Fig. 3). Sampling all of the blocks in the state was unrealistic from funding and logistical perspectives. Therefore the number “3” block from each 7.5-minute quadrangle was chosen to be sampled in every quad; these were called priority blocks. The goal was to sample all 1,018 priority blocks in the state (due to irregularities in the state boundary, there are fewer number “3” blocks than the total number of 7.5-minute quadrangles). The remaining blocks (numbers 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6) were called nonpriority blocks. For the purposes of field work, the boundaries of priority blocks were marked on 7.5-minute quadrangle and county highway maps. These maps were then forwarded to the county coordinators for distribution to the atlasers. Atlasers were requested to mark locations of rare, threatened, endangered or other significant species directly onto the 7.5- minute quadrangle maps and return the maps to the project coordinator at the conclusion of the project. Although sampling priority blocks was a sound design, much of the area of the state was not sampled. Thus, addi- tional sampling provided important supplemental data. After the priority blocks in a county had been surveyed, the county coordinators could approve surveys of nonpriority blocks. The sampling of nonpriority blocks was concentrated in northeastern Illinois (Lake, Cook, DuPage, and Will coun- ties). Breeding Status Categories and Evidence Criteria The four breeding status categories listed from highest to lowest level of certainty were Confirmed (CO), Probable (PR), Possible (PO), and Observed (OB) (Table 1). The Confirmed, Probable, and Possible categories provide evidence of breeding. The Observed category provides only evidence of occurrence and not of breeding. Atlasers used the Observed category to record the occurrence of migrants and nonbreeding species seen in a block during the breeding season or of wide-ranging species (e.g., vultures and herons) that may forage some distance from their nest sites. The classification of a sighting into the four breeding status categories was based on the type of breeding evidence observed. Twenty breeding evidence criteria were used (Table 1). Once a species was Confirmed in an atlas block (regardless of the year), additional evidence for that species was no longer required. The presence of a cowbird egg or young in a nest or a fledgling cowbird begging or being fed by another species was determined to be Confirmed breeding for both the cowbird and the host species. The breeding criteria and evidence codes used in the atlas followed the recommendations of NORAC (Sutcliffe et al. 1986; Illinois Department of Conservation 1986). For the atlasers, the codes were defined in the Handbook for Surveyors (IDOC 1986) and printed on the data form they used to record their observations in the field. Species of Special Consideration Records of species that were rare, listed as threatened or endangered, of special management concern, difficult to distinguish, or reported outside of their expected range in the state were required to have additional documentation from the atlasers to ensure correct identification before being included in the database. For these species (Table 2), atlasers were to provide written details about location, habitat Table 1. Breeding status categories and breeding evidence criteria used for the Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas project. The four breeding status categories (CO, PR, PO, and OB) are defined by 20 breeding evidence criteria. Codes Breeding Evidence Criteria Observed (OB) O Species (male or female) observed in a block during the breeding season, but believed not to be breeding (i.e., none of the criteria listed for the other status categories in this table were observed) Possible (PO) / Species (male or female) observed in suitable nesting habitat during its breeding season. x Singing male present in suitable nesting habitat during its breeding season. Probable (PR) M Multiple males (7 or more) singing in suitable nesting habitat during the species’ breeding season. B Pair observed in suitable habitat during its breeding season. ih Permanent territory presumed through defense (e.g., chasing of other birds; or song at the same location on at least two occasions a week or more apart). Cc Courtship behavior or copulation. N Visiting probable nest site. A Agitated behavior or anxiety calls from adult. B Nest building by wrens or excavation of holes by woodpeckers. Confirmed (CO) NB Nest building by all species except wrens and woodpeckers. PE Physiological evidence of breeding (i.e., highly vascularized, edematous incubation “brood” patch or egg in oviduct) based on bird in hand. DD Distraction display or injury feigning. UN Used nest or eggshells found. pu Recently fledged young (of altricial species) incapable of sustained flight or downy young (of precocial species) restricted to the natal area by dependence on adults or limited mobility. ON Occupied nest; adults entering or leaving nest site in circumstances indicating occupied nest (includes high nests or nest holes, the contents of which cannot be seen) or adult incubating or brooding. ES Adult carrying fecal sac. HY Adult carrying food for young, or feeding recently fledged young. NE Nest with egg(s). NY Nest with young seen or heard. preference or occurrence, breeding evidence observed, behavior, and specific dates, and to mark the location of observation on the atlas block map. Any species not listed on the field data form required the same documentation. Block Coverage A primary objective of the atlas project was to document the status of every species that occurred in every priority block and to confirm breeding for as many species as possible. Atlasers were requested to thoroughly survey all habitats in their blocks to find most of the species present. Most of the sampling effort in June was directed towards documenting species presence and in July and August the goal was to try to confirm breeding. The sampling of a block in subsequent years was intended to fill in knowledge gaps, such as expected species that were not found, species reported with breeding evidence other than Confirmed, and early nesting species (January through May). The atlas project utilized two criteria to determine if blocks were adequately sampled: that the majority of species believed to be present had been documented and the majority of those found were Confirmed as breeding. Other atlas projects found that a minimum of 15 field hours spread over several days was usually needed to detect 75% or more of the species present in a block and that several more hours were necessary to confirm breeding for the majority of those present (Laughlin et al. 1982b). Another method used by other atlas projects to deter- mine sampling adequacy was the establishment of species goals for each block (Raynor 1983). In Illinois the project coordinator estimated the expected number of species in a priority block based on the diversity of habitat types as ascertained from the 7.5-minute quadrangle maps. Generally the expected number of species ranged from 50 for intensely cultivated blocks to more than 90 for those blocks with a diversity of habitats (e.g., wetland, forest, shrub, tree lines). Data Collection and Management Atlasers were provided with field data forms (Fig. 4) which listed every species expected to be found during the project. For each sampled block, they recorded the breeding evidence codes for each species observed, the survey date, time spent in the field, names of other observers assisting, and the date each species was confirmed. Because the same field data form was used in subsequent visits to a block, atlasers were aware of which species could potentially be upgraded to a higher breeding status category. At the end of each field season, atlasers transferred new data from their field forms onto data entry forms (Fig. 5) and forwarded the completed forms to their county coordinator. The county coordinator was responsible for checking the forms for accuracy, completion, errors (e.g., wrong species codes), misinformation (e.g., improper use of codes, such as using NB rather than B for wrens or woodpeckers), or missing documentation. The data forms were forwarded to the project coordinator for further review, and then to the Max McGraw Wildlife Foundation where the data was entered into the database and additional quality-control checks were performed. Draft species distribution maps provided additional information for review by the project coordinator, Max McGraw Wildlife Foundation staff, and ornithologists at the Illinois Natural History Survey. Limitations and Biases Although the atlasing effort yielded a tremendous amount of information, it did not find every species present. Potential factors that contributed to underrepresentation in the atlas project included ¢ Insufficient effort (hours, days, or years) spent in the block (most blocks were surveyed only one or two years). ¢ Species that are uncommon or rare, habitat specialists, had localized distributions, or of sporadic occurrence. Table 2. Species of special consideration. These species, which were listed on the field data form (Fig. 4), as well as any species not listed on the form, required atlasers to provide additional data. Northern Pintail Northern Shoveler Sharp-shinned Hawk Cooper’s Hawk Hooded Merganser Red-shouldered Hawk Ruddy Duck Swainson’s Hawk Eared Grebe King Rail Double-crested Cormorant Virginia Rail American Bittern Sora Common Moorhen Sandhill Crane Upland Sandpiper Wilson’s Snipe Snowy Egret Little Blue Heron Black-crowned Night-Heron Yellow-crowned Night-Heron Black Vulture Wilson’s Phalarope Mississippi Kite Ring-billed Gull Bald Eagle Herring Gull Northern Harrier Common Tern Forster’s Tern Prairie Warbler Black Tern Black-and-white Warbler Barn Owl Worm-eating Warbler Long-eared Owl Swainson’s Warbler Short-eared Owl Ovenbird Alder Flycatcher Hooded Warbler Least Flycatcher Western Kingbird Fish Crow Bewick’s Wren Brown Creeper Veery Blue-winged Warbler Yellow-throated Warbler Summer Tanager Bachman’s Sparrow Henslow’s Sparrow Blue Grosbeak Western Meadowlark Yellow-headed Blackbird House Finch Pine Siskin Species that are not common in the more easily accessible habitats, such as along roadsides. Species requiring specialized sampling efforts, such as nocturnal and crepuscular birds (e.g., owls, night hawks, or woodcock), and secretive species (e.g., rails and some other wetland species). Early or late breeders, relative to when atlasers did their field work. Variability in the skills and abilities of atlasers. Sampling techniques required to obtain data for unsampled blocks. Many blocks sampled during blockbusting weekends were not adequately sampled. While the survey of these blocks was intensive and conducted by experienced birders, only 12—15 hours were spent in most of these blocks. Because atlasers may have been unfamiliar with the blocks and/or the rare, uncommon, or intermittently occurring species in the area, special or rare habitats may not have been sampled. Since these blocks were generally sampled in a single day in June or early July, species that bred early in the season (e.g., waterfowl, owls) or late in the season may have been missed. nes VeSUults and Discussion Atlas Coverage and Effort The Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas project was dependent on atlasers to survey their selected or assigned blocks as thoroughly as possible from 1986 through 1991. The total number of blocks sampled was 1,286; of these, 998 (78%) were priority and 288 (22%) were nonpriority blocks (Fig. 6). Of the 1,018 potential priority blocks, 98% were sampled during at least one of the six project years. Blocks that were sampled during the atlas project are listed by county in Appendix A. During the project, 945 atlasers spent 44,913 hours collecting data (31,602 hours or 71% in priority blocks and 13,311 hours or 29% in nonpriority blocks); this is equiva- lent to 22 man-years or 5 years and 2 months of consecutive time (i.e., 24 hours a day) and an average of 48 observer hours per person. Observer hours averaged 31.7 hours per priority block and 34.9 hours per block for all blocks. Vermilion, Will, and Cook counties had the most sampling hours for priority blocks in their counties. The number of observer hours per priority block is illustrated in Figure 7 and listed in Appendix B. The atlas database consists of 74,277 species records for all 1,286 blocks (a species record is an occurrence of a species in a block using the highest breeding status category recorded for that species in the block); however, consider- ably more records were actually collected. Records of a species reported at a higher breeding status category super- seded those of lower categories and only those with the highest status category for a species in each block were retained in the atlas database. Forty-six percent of the records from all blocks were Confirmed, 25.0% were Probable, 23.8% were Possible, and the remaining 5.2% were Ob- served status. Priority blocks yielded 62,430 records (84% of the total records). Of the priority block records, 45.7% were Confirmed, 25.0% were Probable, 24.5% were Possible, and 4.8% were Observed status, which was similar to the distribution of breeding status codes for all blocks. Species Information The four breeding status categories—Confirmed, Probable, Possible, and Observed—indicate levels of certainty that a species is breeding based on different types of evidence (Table 1). The term “breeding evidence,” as used in the atlas, refers to Confirmed, Probable, and Possible breeding status categories. “Observed” records were not considered evidence of breeding. A total of 216 species was recorded during the atlas project and included in the database; 208 of these were reported from priority blocks. For all blocks, breeding evidence was reported for 197 species (172 Confirmed, 15 Probable, and 10 Possible) based on the highest level of breeding status in at least one block and another 19 species 6 were reported only as Observed. For priority blocks, the atlas project documented breeding evidence for 192 species (166 Confirmed, 14 Probable, and 12 Possible) based on the highest level of breeding status in at least one block and another 16 species were reported only as Observed. The number of species recorded with breeding evidence in each priority block is illustrated in Figure 8 and listed in Appendix B. The average number of breeding species reported per block was 60 (range 3-111) and 55 (range 1- 111) in priority blocks and in all blocks, respectively. The number of species with breeding evidence per block is shown in Table 3. In 70% of the priority blocks there were 50-79 species with breeding evidence. Six blocks (which were all priority blocks) had 100 or more species with breeding evidence (Appendix B). Both the highest number of species with breeding evidence (111) and the highest number of Confirmed species (107) were recorded in the Danville Northwest priority block (149B3) in Vermilion County. This block also received one of the highest sampling efforts (247 hours). Because approximately 60% of the landscape of Illinois is cropland (Luman et al. 1996), numerous blocks were located in largely agricultural areas, and many blocks with low numbers of species were dominated by cropland. Some nonpriority blocks had low numbers of species reported because data submitted were for rare species only or species not reported from adjacent priority blocks. For counties, the number of species with breeding evidence in priority blocks reported ranged from 69 to 141 (Appendix C). Thirty-eight of the 102 counties had 100 or more species with breeding evidence in priority blocks. Cook, Will, Winnebago, Vermilion, and Lake counties had 141, 128, 127, 124, and 123 species, respectively. The two Table 3. Frequency distribution of the number of species with breeding evidence reported per block. Number Priority Blocks All Blocks of species # Blocks % Blocks # Blocks % Blocks >= 100 6 0.6 6 0.5 90-99 14 1.4 18 1.4 80-89 50 5.0 70 5.4 70-79 167 16.7 196 [32 60-69 282 28.3 310 24.1 50-59 25> 25.6 294 Ne, 40-49 134 13.4 154 12.0 30-39 66 6.6 9] Fell 20-29 23 22 43 a3 <=19 l 0.1 104 Sal Total 998 100.0 1,286 100.0 counties with 100 or more Confirmed species in priority blocks were Vermilion (117) and Will (102). Several species were found to be widespread in Illinois during the atlas project. Among the 192 species with breeding evidence in priority blocks, 60 (31%) species were reported in at least 50% of the priority blocks and of these 60 species, 22 (11%) were reported in 90% or more of the blocks (Table 4). The five most frequently reported species were the Red-winged Blackbird, American Robin, Mourning Dove, House Sparrow, and Common Grackle. The five species most frequently Confirmed in priority blocks were the House Sparrow, American Robin, Barn Swallow, Red-winged Blackbird, and European Starling (Table 5). Twenty-two of the 166 Confirmed species in priority blocks were reported as Confirmed in at least 50% of the priority blocks. Some species are more easily Confirmed than others due to factors such as overall abundance, observable breeding behavior, and habitat preference. A comparison of Tables 4 and 5 shows that many of the most frequently Confirmed species are among the most wide- spread species, and vice versa. Many species have limited distributions in the state. Nearly half (90) of the 192 species with breeding evidence in priority blocks were found in 100 (10%) or fewer priority blocks (Appendix D). Fifty species with breeding evidence were reported from 10 or fewer priority blocks. Some of the species with limited distributions have always been uncom- mon in the state, such as those at the edge of their range. Others have only recently become less common. Twenty- Table 4. The most frequently reported species with breeding evidence in priority blocks. The 22 species listed were found in 90% or more of the 998 priority blocks. Rank Species # of Priority 9% of Priority Blocks Blocks Red-winged Blackbird 993 ie) 2 American Robin 990 99.2 3 Mourning Dove 988 99.0 - House Sparrow 988 99.0 5) Common Grackle 986 98.8 6 Indigo Bunting 985 98.7 7 Barn Swallow 983 98.5 8 Northern Cardinal 973 97.5 9 European Starling 972 97.4 10 Eastern Meadowlark 971 97.3 1] American Goldfinch 966 96.8 12 Song Sparrow 960 96.2 5) Brown Thrasher 958 96.0 14 Blue Jay 957 95.9 15 Common Yellowthroat 954 95.6 16 Brown-headed Cowbird 95] 95.3 107 Killdeer 948 95.0 18 Eastern Kingbird 935 93.7 19 American Crow 927 92.9 20 Northern Flicker 920 92.2 21 Gray Catbird 906 90.8 22 Dickcissel 899 90.1 seven (38%) of the 90 species with breeding evidence in priority blocks that were found in 100 or fewer priority blocks are listed as state threatened or endangered species. (The Loggerhead Shrike was the only state threatened or endangered species with evidence of breeding in more the 100 priority blocks). The Species Accounts section of this book includes accounts for 183 species—the 172 Confirmed as breeding during the atlas project and 11 not Confirmed but known or likely to have bred in the state during the atlas project. Forty-four of the 216 species recorded by the atlas project were not Confirmed (Table 6)—11 of these were most likely breeders and have been included in the species accounts; the other 33 were considered to be either late spring migrants or summer lingerers. Six species—the Northern Shoveler, Peregrine Falcon, Wilson’s Snipe, Herring Gull, Common Tern, and Brewer’s Blackbird— were Confirmed as breeding only in nonpriority blocks. Breeding evidence was reported for the first time in the state for two species not previously known to breed in Illinois, the Golden-crowned Kinglet (Confirmed) and Black-throated Green Warbler (Possible). In addition, the Peregrine Falcon has returned as a breeding species in the state as a result of restoration efforts in the Chicago area. Table 5. The most frequently Confirmed species in priority blocks. The 22 species listed were Confirmed as breeding in at least half of the 998 priority blocks. The number of priority blocks with Confirmed status and the percent of total priority blocks are given. Priority Blocks with Rank Species Confirmed Status # % 1 House Sparrow 953593 2 American Robin 949 95 3. Barn Swallow 897 =90 4 Red-winged Blackbird 893) 7 89 5 European Starling 890 = 89 6 Common Grackle 854 86 7 Mourning Dove 133 273. 8 Northern Cardinal G7 67 9 Brown Thrasher 633 63 10. Blue Jay 598 60 11 = Killdeer 594 60 12. House Wren 59460 13. Eastern Bluebird Joan) OF 14. Red-headed Woodpecker 558 56 15 Eastern Meadowlark 558 56 16 Eastern Kingbird Soe 156 17. Song Sparrow Dots? G56 18 Horned Lark a Fal ets) 19 Chipping Sparrow 2h) wo 20 Rock Pigeon 3105 5] 21 Indigo Bunting 506 51 22 Baltimore Oriole 503 50 Table 6. Species reported but not Confirmed as breeding in any block during the atlas project. These 44 species are listed by the highest breeding status categories recorded in the atlas project. Species accounts are included in the atlas for species considered to have bred in the state during the period of the atlas project. For the Probable and Possible categories, the records listed are for breeding evidence categories (PR, PO); the records are all Observed status for the Observed category. Species Species Comments and Number of Atlas Records Account PROBABLE American Black Duck No Occasional breeding species; 4 records (1 priority block each in Anas rubripes DuPage and Lee counties; and | nonpriority block each in Cook and Will counties). Green-winged Teal No Occasional breeding species; 3 records (1 priority and | nonpriority Anas crecca block in Cook County and | nonpriority block in DuPage County). Redhead No Occasional breeding species; 2 records (1 nonpriority block each in Aythya americana Lake and Will counties). Lesser Scaup No Occasional breeding species; 2 records (1 priority and | nonpriority Aythya affinis block in Cook County). American Bittern Yes Breeds in Illinois but not Confirmed during the atlas project. This is Botaurus lentiginosus a state endangered species. Snowy Egret Yes Breeds in Illinois but not Confirmed during the atlas project. This is Egretta thula a state endangered species. Osprey Yes Breeds in Illinois but not Confirmed during the atlas project. This is Pandion haliaetus a state endangered species. Caspian Tern No Nonbreeding species; 1 record (1 priority block in DeWitt County). Sterna caspia This record likely represents an early fall migrant. Alder Flycatcher Yes No evidence of breeding in Illinois but late migrants or summering Empidonax alnorum birds suggest breeding may be attempted. Yellow-bellied Flycatcher No Nonbreeding species; | record (priority block in Winnebago County). Empidonax flaviventris This is most likely a late spring migrant. Mourning Warbler Yes Breeds in Illinois but not Confirmed during the atlas project. Oporonus philadelphia Canada Warbler Yes Breeds in Illinois but not Confirmed during the atlas project. Wilsonia pusilla Clay-colored Sparrow Les Breeds in Illinois but not Confirmed during the atlas project. Spizella pallida White-throated Sparrow No 3 records (1 priority block in Kane County and 2 nonpriority blocks Zonotrichia albicollis in Cook County). Confirmed as a breeding species in Cook County in 2001 after the atlas project ended. Purple Finch No Nonbreeding species ; 3 records (1 priority block in Shelby County Carpodacus purpureus and 2 nonpriority blocks, 1 each in Rock Island and Lee counties). These records are mostly likely late spring migrants. POSSIBLE Gadwall No Occasional breeding species; 2 records (1 priority and | nonpriority Anas strepera block in Cook County). Ring-necked Duck No Very rare breeding species; 4 records (1 priority block in Cook Aythya collaris County and 3 nonpriority blocks, 1 each in Cook, Kane and Will counties). These records are most likely lingering birds. Common Merganser No Nonbreeding species; 2 records (Cook and Will counties). Mergus merganser Red-breasted Merganser No Nonbreeding species; | record (1 nonpriority block in Will County). Mergus serrator This record is most likely an incidental summer occurrence. Common Loon No Nonbreeding species; | record (priority block in Cook County). Gavia immer This record is most likely a lingering bird. Little Blue Heron Yes Breeds in Illinois but not Confirmed during the atlas project. This is Egretta caerulea a state endangered species. Tricolored Heron* No Nonbreeding species; | record (1 priority block in Cook County). Egretta tricolor This record is an incidental summer occurrence. Table 6 (Continued). Species Species Comments and Number of Atlas Records Account Long-eared Owl No Regular but rare and hard-to-find breeding species; 2 records (1 Asio otus priority block in Wabash County and | nonpriority block in Winnebago County). Black-throated Green Warbler Yes Breeds in Illinois but not Confirmed during the atlas project. Dendroica virens Swainson’s Warbler Yes Breeds in Illinois but not Confirmed during the atlas project. This is Limnothlypis swainsonii a state endangered species. OBSERVED American Wigeon No Nonbreeding species; 2 records (1 nonpriority block in DuPage County Anas americana and | nonprioirty block in Will County. This record is most likely a lingering bird. Canvasback No Very rare breeding species; | record (nonpriority block in Kane Aythya valisineria County). This record is most likely a lingering bird. Greater Scaup No Nonbreeding species; | record (nonpriority block in Cook County). Aythya marila This record is most likely a lingering bird. Bufflehead No Nonbreeding species; | record (nonpriority block in Will County). Bucephala albeola This record is most likely a lingering bird. Brown Pelican* No Nonbreeding species; | record (priority block in Lake County). Pelecanus occidentalis This record is most likely an incidental summer occurrence. Black Vulture Yes Breeds in Illinois but not Confirmed during the atlas project. Coragyps atratus Merlin No Nonbreeding species; 2 records (1 priority block in Hancock County Falco columbarius and | nonpriority in Lee County). These records are incidental summer occurrences. Wilson’s Phalarope No Occasional breeding species; 2 records (1 priority and | nonpriority Phalaropus tricolor in Cook County). This is a state endangered species. Laughing Gull No Nonbreeding species; 2 records (1 priority in Lake County and | Larus atricilla nonpriority in Cook County). These records are incidental summer occurrences. Franklin’s Gull No Nonbreeding species; | record (priority block in Lake County). Larus pipixcan This record is an incidental summer occurrence. Little Gull* No Nonbreeding species; | record (priority block in Lake County). Larus minutus This record is an incidental summer occurrence. Least Tern No Regularly breeds on islands in the Ohio and Mississippi rivers in Sterna antillarum extreme southern Illinois; 1 record (priority block in Pope County). This species is a state and a federally endangered species. Western Kingbird No Sporadic breeding species, currently nesting in Sangamon and Tyrannus verticalis Madison counties; | record (priority block in Vermilion County). Tennessee Warbler No Nonbreeding species; 2 records (1 priority in Lake County and | Vermivora peregrina nonpriority in Cook County). These records are most likely late spring migrants. Bay-breasted Warbler No Nonbreeding species; | record (nonpriority block in Cook County). Dendroica castanea This record is most likely a late spring migrant. Blackpoll Warbler No Nonbreeding species; | record (nonpriority block in Cook County). Dendroica striata This record is most likely a late spring migrant. Fox Sparrow No Nonbreeding species; | record (nonpriority block in Cook County). Passerella iliaca This record is most likely a late spring migrant. White-crowned Sparrow No Nonbreeding species; 3 records (1 priority block in Richland County Zonotrichia leucophrys and 2 nonpriority blocks in Cook County). These records are most likely late spring migrants. Dark-eyed Junco No Nonbreeding species; | record (priority block in Champaign Junco hyemalis County). This record is most likely a late spring migrant. * Species not likely to have occurred in Illinois during the atlas project. Breeding evidence was also recorded for Lawrence’s and Brewster’s warblers, which are hybrids, and the Ringed Turtle-Dove, an introduced domesticated species that does poorly in the wild in North America (American Ornitholo- gists’ Union 1998; Sibley 2000). Because they are not recognized as valid species, their records were not included in the data summaries (i.e., not included in the total of 216 species, etc.). The Lawrence’s Warbler and Ringed Turtle- Dove were Confirmed as breeding in northeastern Illinois and the Brewster’s Warbler was noted as a Probable breeder in southern Illinois. Some species known to currently breed in Illinois were not found during the atlas project. Eight species, including five that have been Confirmed as breeding since the atlas project ended in 1991, are listed in Table 7. Three species— the Purple Gallinule, Northern Saw-whet Owl, and Blue- headed Vireo—have been known to occasionally breed in Illinois. Since the atlas project ended five additional species have been documented as breeding for the first time in Illinois: the Black-necked Stilt, Eurasian Collared-Dove, Scissor-tailed Flycatcher, Violet-green Swallow, and Painted Bunting. The White-throated Sparrow, which was reported as a probable breeder during the atlas project, was confirmed as breeding in Chicago in 2001 (Williamson 2002). Atlas project data documented changes in several species’ known ranges and populations, and the data provide robust baseline information to compare and measure future changes. Species with notable increases in breeding range and/or population in the state include ¢ Northward expansion of breeding range for the Mississippi Kite, White-eyed Vireo, Northern Mockingbird, Kentucky Warbler, Summer Tanager, and Blue Grosbeak. ¢ Southward expansion of breeding range for the Double-crested Cormorant, Bald Eagle, Tree Swal- low, Cliff Swallow, House Wren, Chestnut-sided Warbler, and Rose-breasted Grosbeak. ¢ Population increase for Henslow’s Sparrow, possibly due to an increase in available habitat created by programs such as the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP} ¢ Population expansion for the House Finch, which arrived as a breeding species just before the atlas project began and rapidly became more widespread and abundant during the six years of the project. Species with notable decreases in breeding range and/or population include ¢ The King Rail, Upland Sandpiper, Barn Owl, Logger- head Shrike, Bell’s Vireo, Bewick’s Wren, and Swainson’s Warbler. These seven species were found during the atlas project. The Swainson’s Warbler had only one atlas record and may now be extirpated from the state. ¢ The Piping Plover, Nashville Warbler, and Bachman’s Sparrow. These species bred in Illinois prior to the 1950s but are currently considered extirpated from the state. None of these species were found during the atlas project. The Piping Plover formerly bred along the Lake Michigan shoreline, the Nashville Warbler formerly bred in extreme northeastern Illinois, and Bachman’s Sparrow formerly bred throughout Illinois. Currently 34 species of birds are listed by the State of Illinois as either endangered or threatened. This total includes two federally listed endangered species (Piping Plover and Least Tern) and a federally listed threatened species (Bald Eagle). Thirty-two of the 34 species were at least Observed during the atlas project. Only the Piping Plover and the Black Rail were not reported at all. The Wilson’s Phalarope and Least Tern were reported as Ob- served only. For all blocks evidence of breeding was found for 30 of the state endangered or threatened species and 25 were Confirmed. In priority blocks, breeding evidence was found for 28 of the 34 species and 23 were Confirmed (Table 8). The frequency of breeding evidence codes for species with Confirmed, Probable, or Possible records in priority blocks is given in Appendix E. Of the 20 breeding evidence codes, the four most frequently used codes represent 56% of the records. They were fledged young (FL), a singing male Table 7. Occasional breeding species in Illinois not reported during the atlas project. Species Comment Purple Gallinule (Porphyrio martinica) Black-necked Stilt (Himantopus mexicanus) Eurasian Collared-Dove (Streptopelia decaocto) Rare nesting species at Lake Mermet in Massac County (a) First Confirmed breeding record in Illinois in Jackson County in 1994 (b) First observation (1997) and first Confirmed breeding record (1998) in Illinois in Clinton County (c) Northern Saw-whet Owl (Aegolius acadicus) Occasional breeding species in northwestern counties; fledglings found in 1982 in Cook and Will counties (a) Scissor-tailed Flycatcher (Tyrannus forficatus) Violet-green Swallow (Tachycineta thalassina) First Confirmed breeding record in Illinois in Randolph County in 2000 (d) Rare breeding species. First Confirmed evidence of nesting (hybridized with a Tree Swallow) in Winnebago County in 1994 (e) Painted Bunting (Passerina ciris) Blue-headed Vireo (Vireo solitarius) First Confirmed breeding record in Illinois in St. Clair County in 2000 (f) Occasional nesting in central and northern Illinois (a) (a) Bohlen 1989; (b) Fink 1994; (c) Kleen 1999; (d) Kleen et al. 2001; (e) Johnson and Moskoff 1995; (f) Kassebaum 2001. 10 present in suitable habitat during breeding season (X), the total number of species with breeding evidence; adult(s) carrying food for young (FY), and species observed and the number of observer hours. in suitable nesting habitat during breeding season (/). * County: Appendix C gives a summary of the data by Information about breeding evidence codes for Confirmed county for species found in priority blocks. It lists the species in priority blocks is given by groups in Appendix F. number of species with Confirmed, Probable, Pos- sible, or Observed breeding status and the number of Additional Summary Information species with breeding evidence, using the highest Summary and results information may be found in the status that occurred in the county. Appendix A is a appendices at the end of this book. These appendices listing of 7.5-minute quadrangles and atlas blocks by provide information by blocks, counties, and species and county. include the following: e Species: Appendix D gives a summary of atlas data ¢ Block: The summary of data by block in Appendix B for the species recorded during the atlas project. The includes the 7.5-minute quadrangle and the county for appendix includes the number of priority blocks with each block (blocks occurring in multiple counties Confirmed, Probable, Possible, and Observed records; were assigned to the county with the greatest area in the total number of priority blocks with Confirmed, the block) as well as the number of species with Probable, or Possible records; and the number of Confirmed, Probable, Possible, and Observed status; counties with Confirmed, Probable, or Possible records for each species for priority blocks. Table 8. Summary of atlas data for the 34 state and federally endangered and threatened species. The number of priority blocks and total blocks with breeding evidence (BE) (i.e., Confirmed, Probable, or Possible records) and the highest confirmation status for all blocks are listed. The Piping Plover and Black Rail were not found during the atlas project. Wilson’s Phalarope and Least Tern were Observed only. Priority Blocks Total Blocks #of Highest #of Highest Blocks Status Blocks Status with BE with BE State Endangered Greater Prairie-Chicken 1 CO l CO American Bittern 6 PR 12 PR Snowy Egret 1 PR 2 PR Little Blue Heron 7 PO Y PO Black-crowned Night-Heron 33 CO iil CO Yellow-crowned Night-Heron 18 CO 28 CO Osprey Z PR 5 PR Mississippi Kite 9 CO ) CO Northern Harrier 45 CO 59 CO Swainson’s Hawk 5 CO 6 CO Peregrine Falcon 0 OB 3 CO King Rail 8 CO 11 CO Black Rail 0 - 0 - Piping Plover *FE 0 - 0 - Upland Sandpiper 4] CO Dy | CO Wilson’s Phalarope 0 OB 0 OB Common Tern 0 OB 2 CO Forster’s Tern l CO 2, CO Least Tern *FE 0 OB 0 OB Black Tern 7, CO 18 CO Barn Owl 4 CO 4 CO Short-eared Owl 4 CO 5 CO Bewick’s Wren 4 CO 5 CO Swainson’s Warbler | PO | PO Henslow’s Sparrow 1] CO Ja! LO Yellow-headed Blackbird 15 CO 48 CO State Threatened Pied-billed Grebe 43 CO 93 CO Least Bittern 19 CO 319, CO Bald Eagle *FT 6 CO 6 CO Red-shouldered Hawk 45 co 63 CO Common Moorhen 1] CC® 34 CO Sandhill Crane 2 CO 1] CO Brown Creeper 15 CO py CO Loggerhead Shrike 244 CO 267 CO *FE = Federally Endangered Species *FT = Federally Threatened Species mum North American Breeding Bird Survey =EE=™ the distributional status of Illinois’ breeding birds. Knowledge of species distribution, the quality and quantity of habitat, and population size and trends are important to understanding the status of wildlife populations and in guiding effective management strategies. The North American Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) was developed to address the need to understand avian population trends, particularly those of songbirds. Developed by Chandler S. Robbins and his colleagues at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the mid-1960s, the BBS is currently coordinated by the U.S. Geological Survey’s Patuxent Wildlife Research Center and the Canadian Wildlife Service. At present the BBS program covers much of the United States and southern Canada and has expanded to include Alaska, northern Canada, and Mexico. The BBS is a primary source of population trend and distribution information for most species of North American birds and is the largest wildlife survey in the world. The BBS is a large-scale, roadside survey of birds that began in 1966 with the primary objective of estimating population change for songbirds in North America. Ran- domly located permanent routes, each 24.5 miles in length with 50 census points located at 0.5-mile intervals, are the sampling unit. During a three-minute sampling period all birds seen or heard within a 0.25-mile radius of each point are recorded. Routes are surveyed once a year during the peak of the breeding season. The numbers of routes are distributed at densities varying from | to 16 routes per degree block of latitude and longitude depending upon their geographic location. Route densities have increased over time to help improve the precision of the annual indices of abundance and trend estimates. The methodology is de- scribed in detail by Robbins et al. (1986). The BBS represents a unique attempt at measuring the breeding population of birds in North America and provides the most comprehensive information on regional avian population trends. There are, however, some limitations and biases associated with the BBS data and analyses. These problems have been discussed elsewhere (Bystrak 1981; Droege 1990; Peterjohn et al. 1995) but are mentioned here to inform the user of some of the potential problems that exist (U.S. Geological Survey 2002). Some of the problems and limitations involve the following: | he primary goal of the atlas project was to document ¢ Variation in sampling frequency on a route (some routes are surveyed every year and others less fre- quently). ¢ Variation in the number of routes over time and geographic area. ¢ Variation in observer ability. ¢ Species with very localized distribution. * Species with highly variable numbers detected from year to year. ¢ Species with low relative abundance. ¢ Species with small sample size (found on few routes or in few years). Species that specialize in habitats that are not adequately surveyed by BBS routes. ¢ Survey data biased towards roadside habitat and birds observed from roadways. Variation in results depending on analytical technique used to calculate trend estimate. Some species or groups of species are not adequately surveyed by the BBS. Populations of many wetlands species, nocturnal species, colonial nesting species, waterfowl, birds of prey, upland game birds, secretive or inconspicuous species, early or late nesters, and species that inhabit the forest interior are not well monitored by the BBS. The route-regression method is used by BBS researchers to analyze the data and produce estimates of population trends and annual indices of abundance. This method helps mitigate some of the problems associated with the data. Further details on route-regression analysis and trend estimates can be found in Geissler and Sauer (1990), Link and Sauer (1994), and Sauer et. al. (2001). Terminology relating to the BBS data used in the atlas is briefly explained below. Some of the concepts are complex, and the reader is referred to the BBS website (www.mp2-pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/) and the many references listed therein for further information. Trend is an estimate of population change over time ex- pressed as percent change per year. To calculate trend estimates, the BBS uses the route-regression method in which trends are estimated for individual routes and regional trends are estimated as weighted averages of individual route trends. They are weighted to account for variability in the counts on the route, such as missing counts from years the route was not surveyed and observer changes. In general, positive trend estimates imply the population is increasing while negative estimates imply the population is decreasing, but the measures of reliability discussed below must be taken into account when interpreting the results. Probability (P) is a measure to indicate whether the trend estimate is statistically significant. Probability values represent the percentage of times similar analyses will be different from the value shown. P values range from 0.00 to 1.00. For the atlas a P value of 0.05 (5%) was used as the threshold for significance. Trend estimates with P < 0.05 were considered statistically significant and those with P > 0.05 were considered not statistically significant. The terms significant and nonsignificant are relative to the critical value of P < 0.05. Thresholds other than 0.05 are also commonly used. The P value is one measure of the reliability of the analysis results. Additional information, such as the 95% confidence intervals, sample size, relative abundance, and the credibility index, need to be considered when interpreting BBS results. Sample size (N) is the number of survey routes used in the analysis. 95% Confidence Intervals (95% CI) are used as the limits where any value of the trend estimate would fall in any subsequent sample that was analyzed, which means that in any subsequent sample the estimate will lie within the maximum and minimum range in 95 out of 100 times. The CI provides information in addition to the P value to assess the reliability of the trend estimate. The width of the confi- dence interval generally indicates how precise the estimate is; relatively narrow intervals imply high precision. Relative Abundance (RA) is a measure of the mean number of birds recorded for a route. It is expressed as average birds per route. Credibility Index (CR) is an attribute assigned by the BBS researchers to their data to indicate potential problems with the trend estimate. The BBS data must be used with caution because of potential problems when estimating population change. Factors such as small sample size, low relative abundances on routes, relative abundance estimates which are highly variable from year to year, imprecise trends, and missing data need to be taken into account when interpreting BBS data. To identify data with potential problems, three credibility groups were established by BBS and they caution the user that results, even those classified in the highest category (CR 1), may not be valid (Sauer et al. 2001). This information has been incorporated into the atlas using the following system: * Credibility Index | identifies data with at least 14 samples in the long term, of moderate precision, and of moderate abundance on routes (one or more birds per route). * Credibility Index 2 includes data with a deficiency. The deficiencies include low abundance (less than 1.0 birds/route), small sample size (less than 14 routes for the long term), imprecise results (a 3%/year change would not be detected over the long term), or inconsistency in trends over time (e.g., the subinterval time-period trends are significantly different from each other based on a Z-test). * Credibility Index 3 includes data with a major deficiency. These include very low abundance (less than 0.1 birds/route), small sample size (less than 5 routes for the long term, or less than 3 routes for the two subinterval time periods), or imprecise results (a 5%/year change would not be detected over the long term). Annual Indices of Abundance are used to assess patterns in the data in the context of the trend estimates. Annual indices of abundance, which are depicted on the graphs included in the species accounts, are statistical values and do not represent the actual number of birds. They are calculated during the route-regression analysis. Using the regional trend estimate and a regional average count, a line is drawn that depicts the predicted trend in counts over time. Annual indices are defined in BBS as deviations from the regional predicted trend. Because the data analysis and interpretation can be complicated, BBS scientists recommend that users become familiar with the information explaining the data and the limitations the data might have. The BBS website states that the data is provided “as is,” that errors may exist, and includes a data liability disclaimer. It is important for the reader to understand the data, the analytical results, and species’ biology when interpreting BBS information. Information about the BBS and the trend data included in the atlas were obtained from the BBS website at www.mp2-pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/ (Sauer et al. 2001) and from the scientists at the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center. The discussion of the BBS included in the atlas is intended to provide general information about the program. More detailed information can be found on the BBS website and from other sources. The BBS in Illinois and Use of BBS Data in the Atlas BBS data included in the atlas is for the period 1966-2000. In Illinois, routes are generally surveyed in June. Sixty-four routes (4 per degree block) were sampled beginning in 1966 and the number was increased to 81 (5 per degree block) in 1993 (Fig. 9). Data for the upper Midwest is reported to give a regional perspective on population trends for species included in the atlas. Information about population trends based on the BBS are summarized in the species accounts. The results of the BBS analysis are also graphically represented in the species accounts; the graphs show the trend line and annual indices of abundance for a species for Illinois and for the upper Midwest. Summary tables of the BBS data by species are included as Appendix G for Illinois and Appendix H for the upper Midwest (which is USFWS Region 3—Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, lowa, and Missouri—in the BBS data) (Fig. 9). Not every species in a given region or time period is detected during the BBS survey in numbers adequate for trend estimation; conse- quently, not all species with accounts in the atlas have BBS data. If BBS data were available for a species, they were reported in the atlas. This includes species for which the BBS may not be adequate and/or the reliability of the estimates is low, and therefore the user must use care when interpreting and using the data. The species accounts in the atlas include a brief discussion of population trends in Illinois and the upper Midwest based on the BBS data. In the accounts, the following terminology, abbreviations, and symbols are used: Statistically significant, P value < 0.05 Significant Not significant or Statistically not significant, nonsignificant P value = 0.05 IL Illinois UM Upper Midwest region Low relative abundance Relative abundance < 0.1 Small sample size N< 14 Sands greater than, less than, greater than or equal to, and less than or equal to, respectively Trends in Avian Populations in Illinois: A Discussion of the Breeding Bird Survey Data from 1966 to 2000 for Illinois The data collected for the BBS in Illinois for the period 1966-2000 provide valuable and unique information about trends, or changes over time, in populations of bird species that breed in the state. Of the 183 species detected or considered likely to be breeding in the state during the atlas project, the BBS reported trend estimates for 133 (73%) species. BBS data for the 133 species is summarized in Table 9. During the period 1966-2000, 17% (22 species) had significantly negative trend estimates and 20% (26 species) had significantly positive trend estimates (Table 9). The remaining 85 species (64%) had nonsignificant trend estimates. The BBS limits its summary of results to species detected on 14 or more routes surveywide, which eliminates Species with perhaps too small a sample size to adequately evaluate trends. Of the 100 species found on 14 or more routes in Illinois, 20% (20 species) had significantly negative trend estimates and 25% (25 species) had significantly positive trend estimates from 1966 to 2000 (Tables 9 and 10). The trend estimates were nonsignificant for the remain- ing 55 species (55%). BBS data for the 100 species found on 14 or more routes is summarized in Table 10. Using the credibility index (CR) to summarize the data is another way to assess the reliability of overall trends. Credibility indices for the 133 species with BBS trends were distributed as follows: 26% (34 species) had a CR of 1, 41% (55 species) had a CR of 2, and 33% (44 species) had a CR 14 of 3. For species with significantly negative trend estimates, 8% (10 species) of the total number of species (133) had a CR of 1, 8% (10 species) had a CR of 2, and 2% (2 species) had a CR of 3. For species with significantly positive trend estimates, 8% (10 species) of the total number of species (133) had a CR of 1, 8% (11 species) had a CR of 2, and 4% (5 species) had a CR of 3. BBS trend estimates were not reported for 50 of the 183 species with accounts in the atlas. This group includes species that are rare, localized, nocturnal, or associated with habitats that were poorly sampled by the BBS routes. The discussion in this section includes species with reported BBS trend estimates for Illinois regardless of their credibility indices. Interpretation of the BBS data can be complex, and readers should understand the limitations and biases of the data when interpreting the BBS data presented in the atlas. Breeding Guilds Species groupings by habitat are increasingly being used to identify groups of species needing management and conser- vation consideration. A summary of population trends by breeding guilds, that is, groups of species that use similar habitat for breeding, is presented in Tables 9 and 10. The 133 species with BBS trend estimates are classified into five primary breeding habitat categories—woodland, grassland, successional/shrub, urban, and wetland—based on the classification used by the BBS (Peterjohn and Sauer 1993). The “other” category consists of species that are difficult to categorize, including generalists that fit equally well in multiple categories and specialists that do not fit well into one of these other categories. The following summary refers to trends for 1966—2000 and is limited to the 100 species recorded on 14 or more routes in Illinois (Tables 9 and 10). The percentage of the total number of species (100) in each breeding guild is as follows: 28% woodland, 10% grassland, 19% successional/ scrub, 13% urban, 8% wetland, and 22% other. ¢ Woodland. Twenty-eight species are included in this group. Eleven, or approximately one-third, of the species in this group had negative trend estimates, one of which was significantly negative, for the period 1966—2000. Of the 17 species with positive trend estimates, 6 species (21% of the species in the woodland group) had significantly positive trend estimates from 1966 to 2000. ¢ Grassland. Of the 10 grassland species, 9 had negative trend estimates including 6 that had significantly negative estimates for 1966-2000. One of the nine species with negative trend estimates is the Ring-necked Pheasant, which is a non-native species introduced into Illinois in the early 1900s. One species had a positive trend estimate and that was not significant. Grassland-dependent birds are in serious decline in the state. Species that were once historically abundant in Illinois, such as the Greater Prairie-Chicken, Northern Harrier, Short-eared Owl, and Upland Sandpiper, Table 9. Summary of North American Breeding Bird Survey trend information for Illinois for 1966-2000. The table includes the 133 species that have both a species account in the atlas and BBS trend estimates. Species are grouped into primary breeding guilds and two trend categories—those with negative and those with positive trend estimates. Significant and nonsignificant are defined as P < 0.05 and P > 0.05, respectively. Species names are followed by the BBS trend estimate (% change/year), the probability value (P), and credibility index in parentheses, and the migration status (n = neotropical migrant, s = short distance migrant, and r = permanent resident). Species observed on less than 14 routes are indicated by [ ] and listed at the end of the category. The reader should refer to the information on data limitations and interpretation in the text and the individual species accounts. The source of the data is Sauer et al. 2001. Breeding Habitat Negative Trend Estimate Positive Trend Estimate Woodland Significant Significant Yellow-billed Cuckoo (-2.9, <0.01, 2) n Wild Turkey (26.1, <0.01, 3) r [American Redstart(-8.1, 0.03, 3)] n Pileated Woodpecker (7.1, <0.01, 2) r Nonsignificant Red-bellied Woodpecker (1.7, <0.01, 2) r Black-billed Cuckoo (-3.6, 0.32, 2) n Warbling Vireo (2.5, 0.01, 1) n Whip-poor-will (-9.6, 0.08, 3) n Tufted Titmouse (2.0, <0.01, 1) r Downy Woodpecker (0.0, 0.99, 1) r White-breasted Nuthatch (4.1, <0.01, 1) r Eastern Wood-Pewee (0.0, 0.97, 1) n Nonsignificant ; Acadian Flycatcher (-2.1, 0.20, 2) n Barred Owl (0.3, 0.86, 3) . Great Crested Flycatcher (-0.5, 0.34, 1) n Ruby-throated Hummingbird (4.7, 0.11, 2) n Red-eyed Vireo (-0.1, 0.93, 2) n Hairy Woodpecker (0.6, 0.56, 2) r Carolina Chickadee (-0.8, 0.48, 1) r Yellow-throated Vireo (2.2, 0.15, 2) n Wood Thrush (-1.3, 0.29, 2) n Black-capped Chickadee (2.0, 0.18, 1) r Scarlet Tanager (-2.5, 0.40, 2) n Blue-gray Gnatcatcher (1.6, 0.43, 2) n Red-shouldered Hawk (-0.6, 0.88, 3)] s Northern Parula (2.7, 0.31, 2) n Eastern Screech-Owl (-3.0, 0.78, 3)] r Prothonotary Warbler (0.3, 0.79, 2) n Chuck-will’s-widow (-16.5, 0.12, 3)] n Kentucky Warbler (0.6, 0.73, 2) n Least Flycatcher (-1.0, 0.85, 3)] n Summer Tanager (3.3, 0.18, 2) n Cerulean Warbler (-12.6, 0.35, 3)] n Rose-breasted Grosbeak (2.9, 0.08, 2) n Ovenbird (-16.5, 0.16, 3)] n [Worm-eating Warbler (4.6, 0.66, 3)] n Grassland Significant Significant Horned Lark (-1.0, 0.01, 1) s None Savannah Sparrow (-6.0, 0.01, 2) s Nonsignificant Grasshopper Sparrow (-7.0, <0.01, 1) s Sedge Wren (2.3, 0.67, 3) s Dickcissel (-3.5, <0.01, 2) n [Northern Harrier (3.4, 0.70, 3)] s Bobolink (-9.3, <0.01, 1) n [Upland Sandpiper (8.3, 0.15, 3)] n Eastern Meadowlark (-2.3, 0.01, 2) s Nonsignificant Ring-necked Pheasant (-2.0, 0.34, 2) r Vesper Sparrow (-0.6, 0.19, 1) s Western Meadowlark (-2.3, 0.59, 2) s Successional/Scrub Significant Significant Northern Bobwhite (-1.9, <0.01, 2) r Carolina Wren (5.1, <0.01, 2) r Brown Thrasher (-0.9, 0.01, 1) s House Wren (1.6, 0.02, 1) n Yellow-breasted Chat (-3.4, <0.01, 1) n Yellow Warbler (6.3, <0.01, 2) n Field Sparrow (-3.0, <0.01, 1) s [Blue-winged Warbler (42.2, <0.01, 3)] n Indigo Bunting (-1.0, <0.01, 2) n Nonsignificant Nonsignificant Gray Catbird (0.7, 0.12, 2) n Willow Flycatcher (-1.0, 0.39, 2) n Song Sparrow (0.1, 0.82, 2) s White-eyed Vireo (-1.8, 0.23, 2) n Northern Cardinal (0.6, 0.18, 1) r Bell’s Vireo (-1.3, 0.66, 2) n Blue Grosbeak (1.7, 0.39, 2) n Common Yellowthroat (-0.6, 0.16, 1) n Eastern Towhee (-1.2, 0.33, 2) s Lark Sparrow (-6.9, 0.06, 2) s American Goldfinch (-0.5, 0.56, 2) r [American Woodcock (-2.7, 0.82, 3)] s [Bewick’s Wren (-13.9, 0.17, 3)] s [Prairie Warbler (-6.6, 0.50, 3)] n 15 Table 9 (Continued). Breeding Habitat Negative Trend Estimate Positive Trend Estimate Urban Significant Chimney Swift (-2.5, <0.01, 2) n Blue Jay (-1.0, 0.04, 1) s Purple Martin (-3.3, <0.01, 1) n Northern Mockingbird (-2.6, <0.01, 2) r House Sparrow (-2.6, <0.01, 2) r Nonsignificant Rock Pigeon (-1.0, 0.14, 2) r European Starling (0.0, 0.96, 1) r Common Grackle (-0.4, 0.54, 1) s Wetland Significant [Swamp Sparrow (-4.9, <0.01, 3)] s Nonsignificant Red-winged Blackbird (-0.3, 0.62, 1) s [Blue-winged Teal (-5.9, 0.08, 3)] s [Yellow-crowned Night-Heron (-3.7, 0.32, 3)] n [Marsh Wren (-4.0, 0.05, 3)] n Other Significant Red-headed Woodpecker (-2.8, <0.01, 2) s Northern Flicker (-2.6, <0.01, 1) s Eastern Kingbird (-2.2, <0.01, 1) n Nonsignificant Common Nighthawk (-9.9, 0.10, 3) n Loggerhead Shrike (-4.5, 0.10, 2) s [Gray Partridge (-7.8, 0.42, 3)] r [Black Vulture (-15.5, 0.74, 3)] r 16 Significant American Robin (2.9, <0.01, 1) s Chipping Sparrow (8.0, <0.01, 1) n House Finch (23.0, <0.01, 3) r Nonsignificant Mourning Dove (0.5, 0.37, 2) s Eurasian Tree Sparrow (6.7, 0.18, 2) r Significant Mallard (4.9, 0.02, 1) s Great Blue Heron (13.5, <0.01, 2) s Great Egret (13.9, 0.03, 3) s Canada Goose (28.8, <0.01, 3) r Belted Kingfisher (5.9, <0.01, 2) s Nonsignificant Wood Duck (5.1, 0.05, 2) s Green Heron (1.5, 0.22, 2) n [Pied-billed Grebe (6.3, 0.60, 3)] s [Double-crested Cormorant (49.4, 0.15, 3)]s [Little Blue Heron (0.4, 0.96, 3)] s [Cattle Egret (8.5, 0.14, 3)] s [Black-crowned Night-Heron (12.3, 0.20, 3)] s [Spotted Sandpiper (5.4, 0.70, 3)] n [Ring-billed Gull (36.4, 0.21, 3)] s [Herring Gull (3.0, 0.33, 3)] s Significant Red-tailed Hawk (11.1, <0.01, 2) s American Kestrel (7.6, OLO TiS Killdeer (8.1, <0.01, 1) s Eastern Phoebe (4.3, <0.01, 2) s American Crow (1.7, 0.03, 1) r N. Rough-winged Swallow (4.5, <0.01, 2) n Eastern Bluebird (3.8, <0.01, 2) s Cedar Waxwing (10.3, <0.01, 1) s Nonsignificant Turkey Vulture (25.7, 0.07, 3) s Great Horned Ow] (3.5, 0.07, 2) r Tree Swallow (5.2, 0.32, 3)s Bank Swallow (0.5, 0.85, 1) n Cliff Swallow (28.3, 0.11, 3) n Barn Swallow (0.7, 0.17, 2) n Brown-headed Cowbird (1.1, 0.05, 1) s Orchard Oriole (0.1, 0.87, 1) n Baltimore Oriole (0.8, 0.19, 2) n [Cooper’s Hawk (0.3, 0.91, 3)] s [Fish Crow (10.1, 0.59, 3)] s [ Yellow-throated Warbler (2.5, 0.63, 3)] n [Pine Warbler (6.9, 0.30, 3)] s [Louisiana Waterthrush (24.2, 0.07, 3)] n have dramatically declined in response to the changes in the landscape (Herkert et al. 1993). In recent years the popula- tions of some species, such as the Grasshopper Sparrow and Bobolink, that are currently considered fairly common in Illinois are suffering substantial declines (Herkert et al. 1993). ¢ Successional/scrub. Of the 19 species in this group, approximately two-thirds of the species (12 species) had negative trend estimates, 5 (26%) of which were signifi- cantly negative from 1966 to 2000. Of the seven species with positive trend estimates, three (16%) had significant trend estimates. ¢ Urban. The urban breeding guild is composed of 13 species. Of the eight species with negative trends, five (38% of the species in the urban group) had significantly negative trend estimates from 1966 to 2000. Of the five species with positive trend estimates, three (23%) had significant positive trend estimates from 1966 to 2000. Five of the species in the urban group are not native to Illinois. ¢ Wetland. Of this group of eight species, five species had significantly positive trend estimates for 1966-2000. The BBS does not adequately survey most wetlands species; most species in this group were found in low numbers and on few routes. Migration Status A summary of population trends by migration class is presented in Table 10. Species were classified in one of three groups: Neotropical migrants, short-distance migrants, and permanent residents. Some species were difficult to classify; for example, the Canada Goose can be both a permanent resident and a short-distance migrant in Illinois. The sum- mary table and the following discussion refer to trends from 1966 to 2000 and are limited to the 100 species recorded on 14 or more routes. Of the 100 species included in this summary, 42 (42%) are classified as Neotropical migrants, 34 (34%) are short- distance migrants, and 24 (24%) are permanent residents. ¢ Neotropical Migrants. This long-distance migrant group includes 42 species that winter primarily in the American tropics. Twenty-one species, or half of the species in this group, have negative trend estimates for 1966-2000, eight of which were significantly negative. Of the 21 species with positive trend estimates, the estimates were significant for five species. ¢ Short-distance Migrants. Of the 34 species in this group, approximately half (16 species) had negative trend estimates, 9 of which were significantly negative. Among the 18 species with positive trend estimates, 11 had significantly positive trend estimates for the period 1966-2000. ¢ Permanent Residents. Twenty-four species are included in this group. Of the nine species with negative trend estimates, three were significantly negative. Positive trends were estimated for 15 species, 9 of which were significant. Table 10. Summary of North American Breeding Bird Survey trend information by breeding guilds and migration groups for Illinois based on data for 1966-2000. The information in the table is limited to species encountered on 14 or more routes. Significance is defined as P < 0.05. Negative Trend Estimates Total # of Species # of Species with Significant Trends Breeding Guild Woodland Grassland Successional/scrub Urban Wetland Other Migration Class Neotropical migrant Short-distance migrant Resident Total # of Species Positive Trend Estimates Total # of Species # of Species with Significant Trends # of Species with Significant Trends 17 , fPhysical Environment of Jilinois EEE million acres) and extends about 380 miles from north to south and 210 miles from east to west at its widest point. Three rivers—the Mississippi on the west, the Ohio to the south, and the Wabash to the southeast—form much of the state boundary (Fig. 10). Because of diverse geologic history, climate, soils, and topography, a variety of habitats exist in the state, including forests, savannas, grasslands, wetlands, streams, lakes, and ponds. Most of the state is relatively flat as a result of glacial advances and retreats that scoured the landscape and deposited materials. The areas with the greatest topographic relief occur mainly in the unglaciated northwestern and southern parts of the state and along the major rivers. Glacial activity created many unique wetlands, glacial moraines, and natural lakes in the northeastern part of the state. Fourteen Natural Divisions are recognized in Illinois, based on differences in topography, glacial history, bedrock, soils, and distribution of plants and animals (Schwegman et al. 1973) (Fig. 11). Ninety-three distinct natural community types occur within the natural divisions, many of which exist today as small relics or in a degraded condition (White 1978). Before Euro-American settlement, the area that became Illinois contained a mosaic of natural habitat (Fig. 12). In less than two centuries, the vast grasslands, forests, and wetlands have been transformed piece by piece to crop fields and urbanized areas. Illinois now ranks 49th among the states in amount of intact natural land (Newman et al. 2003). The Public Land Survey maps created for the U.S. General Land Office (GLO) from 1804 to 1856 provide the best available estimates of the extent of certain land cover types prior to large-scale settlement of Illinois (Table 11). In the early to mid-1800s, 54% of the state was mapped as prairie (Suloway et al. 2002). The rich soils of the prairies, along with the development of a transportation system to take the grain and other products to market, contributed to their rapid conversion to farmland in a relatively short period of time, roughly from 1840 to 1900. Only 2,352 acres (0.01% of the original prairie) of high-quality native prairie remained by 1978 (White 1978). In the early to mid-1800s, forest occupied about 41% of the state according to the Public Land Survey. Currently forest covers about 13% of the state (11% upland forest and 2% forested wetland, Table 12). Iverson et al. (1989) estimated that 19% of the original forests that existed in the state in 1820 remain, with most being converted to agriculture. Based on hydric soils estimates, which are a better source than the Public Land Survey maps for approximating the extent of presettlement wetlands, about 23% of the surface area of the state was covered by wetlands in the early [ ne covers approximately 56,000 square miles (36 18 1800s (Havera and Suloway 1994). As a result of human modification of the land, dramatic declines in wetlands have occurred; it is conservatively estimated that 90% of the state’s wetlands have been destroyed. According to the National Wetlands Inventory, wetlands occupied 3.5% of the surface area of the state by the 1980s (Suloway and Hubbell 1994). At the time the atlas project was conducted, the domi- nant land cover was cropland (primarily corn and soybeans with some small grains), which covered approximately 60% of the land area (Luman et al. 1996) (Table 12, Fig. 13). The remaining major land cover types in the 1990s were rural grassland at 17%, forest at 11%, urban at 6% (Fig. 15), wetland at 3% (Fig. 16), and open water at 2% (Fig. 10). Illinois has a population of about 12 million people. Urban land continues to grow at a rapid pace. During the period 1960-1990, the population in northeastern Illinois (Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, and Will counties) grew by 14% while its urbanized area expanded 66% (Campaign for Sensible Growth 1999). Not only has the quantity of available habitat declined but so has the quality. Fragmentation, invasion of non-native plant species, siltation, pollution, the presence of humans, and inadequate management are some of the factors that degrade habitats. Fragmentation of larger tracts into smaller ones creates islands of habitat. The increase in the proportion of edge to interior area creates opportunities for nest parasit- ism (e.g., Brown-headed Cowbirds in forest edge) and nest predation, and favors species that can successfully utilize edge habitat. Wetland communities have declined in quality and productivity due to modification of the natural hydro- logical regimes, increased silt deposition, non-native species invasion (e.g., purple loosestrife and common reed), and excessive nutrient and chemical runoff from agricultural and Table 11. Land cover of Illinois in the early 1800s. The data are based on a digital version of Public Land Survey maps of the U.S. General Land Office (Suloway et al. 2002). Land Cover Type Acreage % of Area Prairie 19,463,578 54.0 Forest 14,686,388 40.7 Water 768,023 Dal Bottomland 394,213 iit! Wet prairie 223,468 0.6 Swamp 218,448 0.6 Cultural 109,318 0.3 Marsh 64,792 0.2 Topographic/geographic 55,064 0.2 Barrens 41,575 0.1 Slough 24,243 <0.1 Other wetland 11,934 <0.1 Total 36,061,052 100.0 urban areas. Based on the National Wetlands Inventory data, the average size of a wetland complex is 5.6 acres and 93% of wetland complexes are less than 10 acres. Lack of disturbance factors, such as fire or timber harvest, has limited creation and maintenance of early successional habitats that many species require. Forest communities that have changed from open to closed canopy provide fewer habitats for savanna-dependent species. Agricultural practices and policies have had major impacts on the avian fauna of Illinois. The initial conversion of the land to agricultural use that coincided with Euro- American settlement dramatically reduced the amount of forest, grassland, and wetlands in Illinois by the late 1800s. Table 12. Land cover of Illinois in the 1990s. The data are based Prior to the mid-1900s, farming operations tended to be a mosaic of grain fields, hay, and pastures with remnant grasslands between fields and in areas less suitable for agriculture. In the mid-1900s farming practices began changing to monoculture crop production (mainly corn and soybeans), with increased pesticide and fertilizer use, and roadside-to-roadside row crop production, which eliminated fencerows and windbreaks. Agricultural conservation practices applied to cropping, mowing, or grazing, and conversion of cropland to grassland or forest, (e.g., the Conservation Reserve Program) provide new habitat and may have positive impacts on the populations of some species. on classification of satellite imagery (Luman et al. 1996). Land Cover Type Acreage Cropland and other Agricultural Land 27,928,797 Row Crop Small Grains Grassland (pasture, right-of-ways, hay) Orchard and Nurseries Forest and Woodland Deciduous, Close Canopy Deciduous, Open Canopy Conifer (undifferentiated pine) Urban High and Medium Density Low Density (residential mixed with open space) Transportation Urban Grassland Wetland Shallow Marsh/Wet Meadow Deep Marsh Swamp Forested Open Water, Shallow Open Water, deep (lakes, streams) Other Land Barren and Exposed (quarries) Total 19,584,247 2,026,268 6,302,371 [S911 4,088,623 3:59),056 421,013 GPBNTE 2,087,396 891,311 251,180 314,866 630,038 1,170,550 140,664 34,855 11,726 808,987 174,318 770,183 16,178 36,061,727 % of Area 77.45 54.31 5.62 17.48 0.04 11.34 O07 LIL oe 0.20 ahi) 2.47 0.70 0.87 IS 3.24 0:39 0.10 0.03 2.24 0.48 2.14 0.04 100.00 20 0 aoa - er —— STEPHENSON | WINNEBAGO McHENRY er CARROLL | OGLE aioe Paar ae WHITESIDE [7 >, KENDALL HENRY | BUREAU GRUNDY ROCK ISLAND KNOX WARREN STARK IROQUOIS PEORIA WOODFORD McDONOUGH VERMILION CHAMPAIGN ee - ign a - ae FINGHAM CLAY RICHLAND WAYNE ieee ee EDWARDS RANDOLPH | PERRY AMILTON FRANKLIN SALINE WILLIAMSON JOHNSON eeaite | L | ALEXANDER 91° 90° 89° 88° Figure 1. Counties in Illinois. Degrees of latitude and longitude are indicated. Data Collection AN cmnERERCY Ave ANY Y ANY in X * of Start-up Counties 20 Zs ZS 15 is 1991 Contract for entire county Contract for part of county Block-busting for entire county Block-busting for part of county Figure 2. Start-up year, contracts, and block-busting efforts by county. 21 \ Ess STEPHENSG WINNEBAGO McHENRY LAKE 18 16 15 14 13 12 "1 10 re) 8 7 2 Bon Ges Ka Ek AROLL OGLE {8 i i 21 22 | 23] 24 [7257 2p] 27 7 28 | 29 K3o DE B | COOK bh . . a R DU PAG Identification System 40 } rt £ | sa] ss | [s2 ESIDE 42, LEE for Blocks — . j KENDALL WILL EF. 46 47 | 48 52 1 53 55 aS fi RY | BUREAU Bese [= ROGK ISLAND GRUNDY oF 69 68 67 ds 64 63 62 61 *? 59 58 57 | 56 MERCES | 9 maall same |_|] KAN KAKEE x Seems 73 75 V7 z 9 30—~|—8 32— 34 85 | T|Warre [ LIVINGSTON hed a MARSHALL | PEORIA y E sae 100f] 3 99 97 95 | 94] 93 91 : 37 | 86 a ( WOoDFO | McLEAN FULTON 101 @ @ O41} 105 | 106 07 fe 102 sof oan | oa sf 174 | 115 | 116 Al C i FORD pe. TAZEWELL i VERMILION 131 ks 129 127, 125 | 124H] 123 | 122 | 121 119 ie 117 MPAIGN aw. B&B B ADAMS va pS oer 2 ah Ve 134 135. axa 9 vom , 142 43 144 146 147 148 149 ‘ ih MENARE snohn J ee | Ei bis PIATT | 164 | fies TET-|—Te0-] 159 157 | 155 | 154 SZ oe et UE kd MORGA SANGA GLAS aR ENE a fea fOULTRIE} | 168 ays 171 \ 173] 174 | 175 G@ | 177 | 178°} 179 fj 180 | 181 S es COLES = = 2 19 Ey PSs prt CHRIS : CLARK g 193 191 |] 190 a9 agil 187 | 186 SST st] 183 5 MONTGOME fELBY CUMBERLAND I = cl ' i soe | FAYET#E g 198 200 {201 | 202 | 203 | 204 | 205] 296 7 209 JERSEY JA adi 2 Bae! G BOND Au | : CRAWFORD 1 3 par 218 | 217 | 216 | - Ld feo: f dF drion RICHLAND | LAWRENCE Vinton TY ie 225] 226 3 228 | 3 230 : 3 va 2244 st. cLaIR ee . me ANY, = O Y le? — FFERSON i 237 248 24 246 14245 242 1|241 | 240 =I\o38 WASHINGTON ed Ea eS } a = = esl HAMILTON! WAITE 249 RANDOLPH PERRY hi 251 | 292] 253 5 255 || 256 fi 258 259 RANKLIN : wy. : 268 ae —— 15-minute quadrangle C2 KSON | i . b 265 637 6 do , ee are ca bas —— 7,5—minute quadrange (labeled =y A, B, C, and D) 269 \-270~)—27 27-2~ 4~h—\275 , y* UNION T OHNSO! HARDIN —— Sampling block (labeled 1 to 6) e ie 276 ae 2 3 qa tl278 Y 277 Priority block 282 asf asd| pale ALEXANDER : ee re gies a Figure 3. The system for identifying atlas blocks based on USGS quadrangle maps. A block is identified by a code consisting of the 3—digit number for the 15-minute quadrangle (statewide map), the letter code for the 7.5—minute quadrangle (A, B, C, and D on inset map ), and the 1—digit number for the block (1 to 6 on inset map ). For example, the code for the priority block for the lower left 7.5—minute quadrangle on the inset map is 228C3. 22 Date Date B/ POIPR of CO j i j = re sry eae a Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas Project Shrike, Loggerhead Hmom Savannah a 1986 - Starling, European BeBe Grasshopper EI ; ABS Vireo, White-eyed MEP Hens low's * Ea Bell's i ee ee ee | Song a | Yellow-throated GoeElwl Swamp a Warbling Riess Bobolink || Red-eyed ae a |e | Blackbird, Red-winged Eq Warbler, Blue-winged * OIE Meadowlark, Eastern Parula, Northern ome ie ean [at Western Warbler, Yellow er alae | Blackbird, Yellow-head Yellow-throated * conf [ee |e | Grackle, Common Pine Bhim Cowbird, Brown-headed Prairie » | a eee. | Oriole, Orchard Cerulean rt ae ae te | Northern Black-and-white ee Finch, House * Redstart, American Bina Siskin, Pine * pes S| Warbler, Prothonotary Swe Goldfinch, American peed, ae ee eee Y.02 tH Oc OB Observed 0 Species (male or female) observed during the breeding season. PO Possible / Species (male or female) observed in suitable nesting habitat during its breeding season. x Singing male present in suitable nesting habitat during its breeding season. ©) ta bese] = oa Ea ial J Breeding Criteria Codes Projected No. of Species mm Lae i & ™ * ars | In PR Probable m HS M Multiple males (7 or more) singing in suitable nesting habitat during the species breeding season. Worm-eating * Sparrow, House isd] nel] Sad) P Pair in suitable habitat. Srainwontn * Girne tanctoee Ena m T Bird or pair on territory (including singing male ri 74 ——<—— present at the same location on at least two occasions Ovenbir ae 4 week or more apart). Waterthrush, Louteiena olen Courtship behavior or copulation. Warbler, Kentuck Yellowthroat, Common Warbler, Hooded * c N Visiting probable nest-site. aa a ae oe | A Agitated behavior or anxiety calls from adult. B Nest building by wrens or excavation of holes by El woodpeckers. feet sali ou breasted * written details required except for well-known, CO Confirmed Tanager, Summer previously established breeding localities. NB Nest“ building by all-except wrens and woodpeckers. Scarlet DATE | HOURS | LOCATION / OBSERVERS PE Physiological evidence of breeding based on bird in the hand. DD Distraction Display or injury feigning. UN Used nest or eggshells found (caution required). FL Recently fledged young (not capable of long flight). ON Adults entering or leaving nest site in circumstances indicating occupied nest. Adult carrying fecal sac. Adult carrying food for young, or feeding recently fledged young. Nest with egg(s). Cardinal, Northern Grosbeak, Rose-breasted Blue sl Bunting, Indigo Dickcissel * Towhee, Rufous-sided Ra AG iis ae uw +} Nest with young seen or hear. Field at aie Vesper al ee Primary County Date Date OBIPOIPRICO] of co OB| PO of CO OB CO] of co Grebe, Pied-billed me Rail, King * Woodpecker, Pileated Eared * fa Virginia * Wood-Pewee, Eastern Cormorant, Double-cr ++ Sora : * Flycatcher, Acadian Bittern, American & Moorhen, Common * Alder * Least H+ Coot, American Willow Heron, Great Blue ES Crane, Sandhill * Least * Egret, Great Killdeer Phoebe, Eastern Sno’ Sandpiper, Spotted Flycatcher, Grt Crested Heron, Little Blue Upland Kingbird, Western * * Eastern Egret, Cattle Heron, Green-backed Night-Heron, Black-cr Yellow-crowned Swan, Mute Goose, Canada Duck, Wood Mallard Pintail, Northern Teal, Blue-winged Shoveler, Northern Merganser, Hooded Duck, Rudd Vulture, Black Turke Kite, Mississippi Eagle, Bald Harrier, Northern Hawk, Sharp-shinned Cooper's Red-shouldered Broad-winged Swainson's Red-tailed Kestrel, American Partridge, Gray Pheasant, Ring-necked Turkey, Wild Bobwhite, Northern #1) MP] le | ele Pele Snipe, Common Woodcock, American Phalarope, Wilson's Gull, Ring-billed Herring Tern, Common Forster's Black Dove, Rock Mourning Cuckoo, Black-billed Yellow-billed Barn-Owl, Common Screech-Owl, Eastern Owl, Great Horned Barred Long-eared Short-eared Nighthawk, Common Chuck-will's-widow Whip-poor-will Swift, Chimney Hummingbird, Ruby-thr Kingfisher, Belted Woodpecker, Red-headed Red-bellied Downy Hair Flicker, Northern +/+] H+] +] Ht] aie cle tela eel elias B (al O Lark, Horned Martin, Purple Swallow, Tree Northern Rough-winged Bank Clift Barn Jay, Blue Crow, American Fish bed Chickadee, Black-capped Carolina Titmouse, Tufted Nuthatch, White-breasted Creeper, Brown Wren, Carolina Bewick's House Sedge Marsh Gnatcatcher, Blue-gra Bluebird, Eastern Veer Thrush, Wood Robin, American Catbird, Gra Mockingbird, Northern Thrasher, Brown Figure 4. Field data form. Front and back sides of the form are shown here at half of the actual size. i) 1 5 7 BLOCK[ | | [ | JYEAR 19[ [| MAP NAME Primary County (USGS 7 1/2’ Quadrangle Name) - 1. Transfer data from field data sheets to this form. 2. Please use dark pencil when filling out this form. 3. Before submitting this form to the County Coordinator, sum the num- ber of OB, PO, PR, and CO species and enter at bottom of form. 4. Fill in the time spent in the block on the back of this form. (_] Check box if this is an update of a report from a previous year 12013) (21S 2 ele lees OB PO R 8 ILLINOIS BREEDING BIRD ATLAS PROJECT (if checked, please use this form S$ oi fl2.13 12 1 PR NAME 8 _ | * written details (Verification Report) required. (County coordinator must submit approval, in writing, for all * species not documented) RETURN THIS DATA FORM TO YOUR COUNTY COORDINATOR BY AUGUST 15 PO = POSSIBLE PR = PROBABLE CO = CONFIRMED (Reverse side) PRINCIPLE OBSERVER Name Address Phone. Zip [_ ]Check box if new address for new and upgraded information only) i 8: w 13} 12 13 PR 12 137 12 3 OBSERVED POSSIBLE [_] Approved by County Coordinator [_] Key Punched Etat Pst Hawk, Broad-winged _ | BWHA | 3 Screech-Owl, Eastem Siler: 3 2a |S | Swainson’s Ss *{SWHA | [1 | [27 | 3f [| GHOW HHH 2+ a} CE A RS or ee ee ae BAOW 2 LIiMIOEaes [Kestrel, American [AMKE | [1 | [27 [| 3] [| +[(LEOW {7 [1] 2 [ais 25 | ae Sf [Pantridge,Gray ss |GRPA | [1 | [27 | 3f [| *[SEOW | | = 2 = 3 fi | [2] | 3] |] [Pheasant, Ring-necked [RNPH Ltt te at CONT | {i | 2 3 at [zt | 3f [| | Turkey, wild WITU Liz Ea CWWI Ht -t54t ay ay [2] 7] 3t | | [ Bobwhite, Northem DACRE SIeska WPWI 1S [ee] eet it 121 13] _[_| |Rail, King *[KIRA {27 | 3] |_| | Swift, Chimney CHsSW |_| a Gel 3 ics Ga ie Bee Virginia *|VIRA | [2] | 3f | | [Hummingbird Ruby-thr [RTHU fe: 2 ma Heron, Green-backed [cons 2 ee eS ora *| SORA | race BEKI it | | 3] Night-Heron, Blk-cr 24+ 3h. fs Moorhen, Common __*{COMO | _ | | pew t it fet Yellow-crowned = AE Coot, American ZAMCO! time i | 2) RBWO | 2a ssi ae Swan, Mute [2{ | 3{ | | |Crane, Sandhill : pack {ft ft 3 | ae | ppowe tt at in | [27 | 3f [| [Kildeer TRELLIS HAWO 3 Duck, Wood Ht a 3 +] Sandpiper, Spotied [sPsA_[ [i [| [27 { 3f | | | Flicker, Northem /(NOFL a] 3/1825) les Mallard Mile Ji Upland VIUPSAT TE [A fa}? os ire S| i Pwo 7 fit [27 73y_ [| Pintail, Northern “ | 3{ | | | Snipe, Common *[CosN [fi [ [27 | 37 [| 27 [3] J | Teal, Blue-winged [2] [ 3{ [| | | Woodcock, American [AMWO] [i [ [2] [ 3f [| 2 tt Shoveler, Northen fi | [2] | 3{ [| |Phalarope,Wilson’s *[WIPH | [i [ [2] [3] | 1 [3] | Merganser, Hooded E23 Ht Gull, Ring-billed _*{RBGU | [1 | [2] | 3) | | _ 7 Es i) Duck, Rudd RUDU |__| [| |_Herring “juecu ffi {tat | 3} 1 1] 2 + JG BLVU t—}2 tf 3} Tern, Common : Se 42 SD Cole TUVU | 3] |__| |_Forster’s *|FOTE H Sel 2: et 33 | fa | | tt 3} Black *| BLTE ist fo | | a | 2 2{ | 3] [| |Dove, Rock RODO fe [i [| 2 fetes Lee | [27 [3 2 3] [| | Mourning Len oA 3 ome 3] [| | Cuckoo, Black-billed (1a | 2 | = 3] af [2] [37 | | | _Yellow-billea lyBcU [ [1 | [2] | 3{ | | |Swallow, Tree Hews ttt tat 4 a] [2{ [3] [ J] [Bam-Owl,Common *[cBowy [1 [ [2] | 37 [ | Northem Rough-winged | NRWS 3 aa OB=OBSERVED NO. OF NO. OF NO. OF NO. OF PROBABLE CONFIRMED TOTAL BH) (Eb ar) ao RETURN THIS DATA FORM TO YOUR COUNTY COORDINATOR BY AUGUST 15 1 5 u/ Lock [TTL ear 19] ] (_] Copied 137 12 13} 1 12 i i 8 12 1 3 ome | col [vam | | os | rol m| cof uae | on | 10 Swallow, Bank ee Warbler, Black&white */BAWW] [1] [2] | 3] | Cliff eRe ae Redstart,American [AMRE} [1] [2] | 3{ | a Pes a ee Bam 424 RE Warbler, Prothonotary [POWA} [1[ [2] | 3[ | Goldfinch, American 2 3 2 Worm-eating *|WwewA; [if [2] | 3y | Sparrow, House ae 3 lr] Crow, American ee Swainson’s *lswwA] Jif 127 1 3]_| ISIlIcs Fish ates [al Ovenbird *[OVEN Hae) ae El 2 SBS Waterthrush, Louisiana |[LOWA [1 | ea - BM Esri Carolina 2 Ea Warbler, Kentuck IKEWA} [1] [2] | 3] | PS Titmouse, Tufted | ematie2. LIE Yellowthroat, Common [COYE} [1] [2] | 3[ | aaEe i Hy 343 | Warbler, Hooded *[HOWA} [1] [2] | 3] | || [2{ [3] | | {Chat Yellow-breasted [YBCHy [1] [2] | 3{ | Pest ae ta Hh Eat Tanager, Summer *[SUTA [_ [1] | 2] [ 37 | a | 2 EIca Scarlet scrA | [if [2] [3] | ca js) Caza Cardinal, Northem [NOCAG [if [2] [ 3f | = iz BIS Grosbeak, Rose-breasted|RBGR [1 [| 2 | am ca eee [os Blue Stu: ae aT Nia | Gnatcatcher, Blue-gray YN a 2 |e | Bunting, Indigo INBU L+H HMMS | 4 Bluebird, Eastem tf ta fo sf Dickcissei DICK ie ae at] Miao PELs eae |e Towhee, Rufous-sided ini D 3 eal 44 2 | Sparrow, Bachman’s * HH *) +3 Hf 2 S 2 BE cd, Gi Fate Bee ee ee egies foetal Mockingbird, Northem H~ 2 13; [0] | | Vesper aaa | VESPA | ae A00 Fi [ea Thrasher, Brown [1 | 2 DMD) |e Ses Eee Ae) Waxwing, Cedar ay et et Savannah SASP Dew EIB ALI Grasshopper GRSP teeter (eats HEHE ES Hee eee 12 | g SOSP Bio Bell’s e: | es | 2 a 3 | | | | ES warn ee | SWSPN) ae 3 Yellow-throated Haha Bobolink BOBO H+ 2 3 eet Blackbird, Red-winged |RWBL ie 3 2 [Meadowlark, Ease |EAME| Jt] 2{ 1 31 cL fea 2 Sa | | ae | | Western eae || WEME | cane [21 2 | ee | es Pa ees Blackbird, Yellow-hd_*| YHBL fet Peat Paice Grackle, Common COGR 2 3 EVES BHCO)) ae (710 e162) ee es || S| ee — ea Ea | 3 | Northem NOOR] | 1 | 2 3 PT eT] [Binet Hoos fv TT Ta Figure 5. Data entry form. Front and back sides of the form are shown here at half of the actual size. 24 Sampled Blocks SPS SS eeeeceese a edee0e | | Benen eee oxy ia e Se e & bo | @ B e ™ Priority block ® Nonpriority block Figure 6. Blocks that were sampled for the Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas Project. 25 Number of Observer Hours Per Priority Block B |\@ B B te o ie a a @ @ @ 6 @ - 8 J sec a is) a & &@ B A et) =| Le Oo Bel B 8 6 @ a B ce Oo @ Number of Hours <10 10-19 g al EJ Figure 7. Number of observer hours per sampled priority block. BB |B BB | i om | Number of Species with Breeding Evidence Per Priority Block i au 1 & ae he Ble BO —™ & B Bevo B|e s Bf @OeBe | Bes | B | 8 B 18 @ @/a a 8 © @ 8 @|B . a 2 BB |e 5 a @ 8 He 8 88 B 0 0 A a 8a 8 B | 18 : @ B 5D B OB @ BOG O\)@ @ in 8 a = Dw B a\f o DB 0 O | Oo a 5 Oo fa B B & @ [| Bi @ B B # of Species a a Oo oO a a a 8 EB 8 B 3 —49 DUD Oo 0 B B [] J 5) @ @ Figure 8. Number of species with breeding evidence per sampled priority block. Breeding Bird Survey Figure 9. Breeding Bird Survey routes in Illinois and the states in the upper Midwest region. The BBS is a roadside survey with data collected at 0.5 mile intervals along a 24.5—mile long route. 28 Major Streams and Lakes Figure 10. Major streams and lakes in Illinois. 29 Natural Divisions esi Wisconsin Driftless io Rock River Hill Country Upper Mississippi/Ilinois River Bottomlands _| Illinois/Mississippi River Sand Areas Western Forest Prairie fe Middle Mississippi Border —_ Southern Till Plain a Wabash Border ES Ozarks Lower Mississippi River Bottomlands Shawnee Hills Figure 11. Natural Divisions of Illinois. Fourteen natural regions, or divisions, were delineated according to topography, glacial history, bedrock, soils, and distribution of plants and animals (Schwegman et al. 1973). 30 Land Cover in the Early 1800s Figure 12. Land cover of Illinois in the early 1800s. The source of information is the "Land Cover in the Early 1800s" database, which was derived by digitizing the U.S. General Land Office maps created from maps and notes of surveyors conducting the Public Land Survey. 31 Land Cover in the 1990s Figure 13. Land cover of Illinois in the 1990s. The source of information is the Land Cover of Illinois database, which was derived from Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) satellite imagery acquired from 1991 to 1995. a2 Forest Figure 14. Forested areas in Illinois in the 1990s. The source of information is the Land Cover of Illinois database, which was derived from Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) satellite imagery acquired from 1991 to 1995. 33 Urban Land _», Galesburg * Pontiac v Normal »-. * Macothb ~~ Bloomington Paris _Charle$ton Figure 15. Urban areas in Illinois in the 1990s. The source of information is the Land Cover of Illinois database, which was derived from Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) satellite imagery acquired from 1991 to 1995. 34 Wetlands i Forested Wetlands ees] Nonforested Wetlands Figure 16. Wetlands in Illinois in the 1980s. The source of information is the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory, which is derived from aerial photography acquired from 1980 to 1987. 35 tf Guide to Species Accounts EEE Four-letter Alpha Code derived from the common name as established by Klimkiewicz and Robbins (1978) and adopted in the Bird Banding Manual (U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the Canadian Wildlife Service 1991); the code used here is the most current code as provided through Memorandums to Bird Banders, 1992 through 20071. Rangewide Distribu- tion describes breeding, migration, and wintering range. Current endangered or threatened species status in Illinois (initial list was enacted on 31 Dec 1977). Habitat and nesting requirements, breeding range, identification marks, plumage character- istics, behavior, young, song and call notes, food habits, limiting factors, conservation needs, and/or rangewide trends. 36 Common and scientific names (American Ornithologists’ Union 1998; Banks et al. 2002; Banks et al. 2003). Photo credit Moye fe(=laal-t-(emelalal (=) Joe Milosevich Code: LOSH Rangewide Distribution: south-central Canada, south through most of the U.S. and Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: rare migrant and uncommon to rare summer and winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: threatened Breeding Habitat: open fields with scattered trees, open woodland, and shrubland; thorny trees. Nest: a bulky cup of twigs, forbs, and bark strips woven together and lined with finer materials, in tree. Eggs: 5-6, grayish buff, marked with gray, brown, or black near large end. Incubation: 16-17 days. Fledging: from 17 to 21 days. The breeding range of the Loggerhead Shrike includes south- central Canada, much of the U.S. except the northeastern and northwestern regions, and Mexico. Shrikes inhabit open country with short vegetation interspersed with hedgerows, scatterggettees, and bushes, where they are often seen pefching on branches or wires along roadsides, waiting for prey. Loggerhead Shrikes eat large insects, small mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians. Hedges and trees that have slender, sharp-pointed thorns, such as Osage orange and honey locust, are used for impaling and caching prey; hence its nickname “butcher bird”. As hedgerows have disap- peared, shrikes have increasing used barbed wire fences for the same purpose. They often utilize Osage orange, honey locusts, red cedars, and rose for nesting because they offer concealment and protection for their nests. Loggerhead Shrike populations have declined throughout North America 214 Lanius ludovicianus in recent decades (Yosef 1996). Loss of grassy pastures and hedgerows due to changing agricultural practices and development in the latter half of the 1900s have contributed to the decline (Graber et al. 1973). Increased use of pesti- cides such as DDT has been suggested as negatively impact- ing the population but the shrike population has continued to decline even after these pesticides were banned (Yosef 1996). Illinois History In early accounts the Logg efter uke was described as “‘a more or less common species” (Ridgway | a common summer resident (Cory 1909). In the 1950s it was still a fairly common species in the Chicago region (Ford 1956). Graber et al. (1973) reported that the population had steadily declined in the northern and central portions of Illinois between 1907 and 1957, and by 1973 the entire northern and central population had basically disappeared. The loss of hedgerows and pastures was thought to be the primary reason for its decline at that time. As a result of a dramatic population decline especially between the 1950s and 1970s, the Loggerhead Shrike is listed as a threatened species in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends For 1966-2000, the trend estimate for the population in Illinois is -4.5% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.10). The upper Midwest population of the Loggerhead Shrike declined from 1966 to 2000 at an annual rate of -8.4% (significant, P < 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Loggerhead Shrikes ed statewide (they were reported in priority blocks in 80 coun t were concentrated in There is now a fairly large population at the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie in Will County, which was not reported during the atlas project. Although the northern and central Illinois populations were nearly eliminated by the 1970s, atlas data suggest that local and widely scattered populations are occurring in those parts of the state. Frequency The Loggerhead Shrike was reported from 244 (24.4%) priority blocks and 23 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 125 (12.5%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observations of fledged young (59 FL records) and adults feeding young (29 FY records). Breeding was relatively easy to confirm. The number of blocks in which the species was reported and Confirmed, breeding evidence for Confirmed records, factors that may have affected finding the species, and the potential of breeding in more than the blocks in which it was Confirmed. The discussion is limited to CO, PR, PO records unless otherwise noted. History and trends in Illinois. (Note that even the early historical accounts occurred after large-scale settlement of the state.) Current trends in Illinois and the upper Midwest based on Breeding Bird Survey data, if available for the species. Data are from Appendices G and H. Distribution as documented by the atlas project. The discussion is limited to breeding evidence (i.e., CO, PR, PO records) in priority blocks unless otherwise noted. Note: Reference to frequency (e.g., “species xX was one of the most frequently reported species in priority blocks”) means number of priority blocks, not abundance within blocks. tHttZ~» «fm Guide to Species Accounts === Percentages of breeding status category for sampled priority blocks (left) and for only the priority blocks in which this species was reported (right). Numbers and percentages of atlas blocks (priority and all blocks) in which each breeding status category was recorded. The map shows the blocks in which breeding was Con- firmed, Probable, or Possible for this species. Blocks on the state boundary are shown as whole blocks for better visibility but only the portion in Illinois was sampled. Bffeeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 125 12.5 51.2 139 10.8 Probable 42 42 17.2 48 Su) Possible «ME ded, 31.6 80 6.2 Totals 244 24.4 100.0 267 20.8 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) Map symbols for Confirmed, Probable blocks (gray = no records for this species) this species and Possible breeding —_ evidence in priority and nonpriority Priority Nonpriority blocks. Confirmed & e Probable © @ Possible Breeding Bird Survey Breeding See) Trends trends for Illinois from : — 1966 through 2000 (when available). The line indicates the predicted trend in counts over time. with records for SS SS SS i) Count Breeding Bird Survey trends for the upper Midwest from 1966 through 2000 (when available). The line indicates the predicted trend in counts over time. ————s Year 0 - + - + - 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest é} + 2 SSS aS! See gaan é 1 Pre Sa eee 0 + = = + + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Loggerhead Shrike 37 'Or-Tat-lef- melelet-- Branta canadensis Annalee Fjellberg Orit: (Sm Oy. CLO) Rangewide Distribution: Europe, Asia, nearly all of \foyuteWatensale:MirenWalehy em-liemiedisusm@rlirlermeliiie into Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: common to abundant migrant, abundant winter resident in south, and common summer resident, with increasing numbers northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: freshwater marshes with emergent vegetation and islands in lakes and ponds. Nest: dry grass, forbs, sticks, aquatic vegetation, and feathers, on ground or elevated platform over water. Eggs: 4-7, white, unmarked (but often nest-stained). Incubation: 25—30 days. Fledging: from 43 to 70 days. The Canada Goose is the most widely distributed goose in North America. It breeds throughout most of Canada and in the U.S. generally north of the southern tier of states. It is found in a variety of habitats, including tundra, prairie, wetlands, farm ponds, reservoirs, parks, and residential areas. Canada Geese form life-long pair bonds. They nest on islands and margins of lakes, ponds, and rivers. Populations have recovered from critically low levels in the mid-1900s caused by loss of wetlands and excessive harvest. They are currently an abundant species, perhaps more numerous now than at any other time in history due to successful restoration programs and the adaptability of the species (Havera 1999). Illinois History During the late 1800s, Canada Geese still bred in Illinois but the population was already in decline and nesting geese were rare by 1900 (Ridgway 1895; Nelson 1876; Havera 1999). 38 The species was a doubtful breeder in the state throughout the first half of the twentieth century (Gault 1922; Smith and Parmalee 1955). Until about 1970, most birds observed in Illinois were the migrants traveling between their Canadian breeding and southern Illinois wintering grounds. The Giant Canada Goose (B. c. maxima), a subspecies thought extinct in 1950, was rediscovered in Minnesota and Canada in 1962 (Hanson 1965) and has been successfully reestablished in its native habitat in the Midwest. The Giant Canada Goose was reintroduced into Illinois in 1969 and has readily adapted to man-made and atypical wetland habitats. After excellent production years, more releases, and natural dispersal, the Canada Goose now breeds statewide and is one of the most abundant nesting waterfowl species in Illinois (Havera Beata We Breeding Bird Survey Trends Waterfowl populations are not usually adequately sampled by the BBS; however, the Canada Goose may be an excep- tion. The trend estimate for Illinois is 28.8% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for 1966-2000. Trend estimates for the upper Midwest region show increasing populations for 1966-2000 and the two subintervals: 18.0% per year for 1966-2000, 21.3% per year for 1966-1979, and 13.4% per year for 1980—2000 (all significant with P < 0.01). Since BBS data are obtained in June and nearly all eggs have hatched by mid-May, goslings that hatched in March and April, which appear full-grown in June, may have inflated the trend estimates. The breeding population in the state and region is growing but perhaps not at the rates suggested by the BBS trend estimates. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project, Canada Geese were found through- out the state, especially in the northeast. They occurred only sporadically in the southern third of the state. Since the atlas project, their range and abundance have continued to expand and they are more common and widespread than the atlas data indicate. During the atlas project, they were reported in priority blocks in 78 counties. Frequency Canada Geese were reported from 290 (29.1%) priority atlas blocks and 142 nonpriority blocks. This species was Con- firmed as breeding in 212 (21.2%) of the priority blocks. Because of their size and behavior and the fact that goslings could readily be observed walking, swimming, or feeding with the adults, it was easy to confirm breeding for this species. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** “No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 212 21.2 73.1 329 25.6 Probable 40 4.0 13.8 51 40 Possible 38. 3.8 13.1 52 40 Totals 290 =. 29.1 100.0 432 336 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & e Probable Possible Cl O Breeding Bird Survey Trends % of priority blocks with records for Illinois 72 63+ 54+ 45+ e B 367 oO 27+ 18+ 9 ue a 0 | f | + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year ‘Bl Upper Midwest bo 723 63+ 45+ es ra . A | : ‘oo 1S) on ee 27+ ae alt 18+ ae . ea 9+ be 0 + ‘ + + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year (OF-TF-[oF- Mm Cfefex-y-) ah Mute Swan Cygnus olor Eric Walters Code: MUSW Rangewide Distribution: native of Eurasia; introduced populations occur in southeastern Canada; east coast and northwestern U.S.; and the Great Lakes region. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon to fairly common introduced, permanent resident; irregular migrant. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: lakes, ponds, and marshes with emergent vegetation; especially near golf courses, commercial complexes, and residential developments. Nest: a large, elliptical assemblage of aquatic vegetation and feathers, on the ground. Eggs: 4-8, light gray to bluish green, unmarked. Incubation: 36—38 days. Fledging: from 115 to 155 days. Swans have long been valued for their elegance and purity. Because of their large size, pure white color, conspicuous behavior, and association with human development, Mute Swans are difficult to miss. Although not native to North America, they are now permanent residents. They were introduced in North America from the mid-1800s through the early 1900s. North American breeding populations are currently concentrated along the Atlantic coast, in the Great Lakes region, and in the northwestern U.S. They are adapt- 40 able and inhabit a variety of aquatic areas, including lakes, ponds, and slow-moving rivers. Swans are considered to be beneficial for their consumption of large quantities of filamentous algae and troublesome aquatic plant life. Due to their aggressive nature, however, a large population can displace some native species, e.g., waterfowl and wetland species, from nesting and wintering sites. Illinois History The first documented record of Mute Swans in the wild in Illinois was a release in Fulton County in 1971 by private citizens (Bohlen 1989). More releases in the state followed. Mute Swans are normally considered nonmigratory, but they do move around and some migration may now occur. The introduced population in Illinois is productive and regularly enhanced with escapees, nonpinioned young, and those that emigrate from other states. Breeding Bird Survey Trends A BBS trend estimate is not available for Illinois because of the small population size and localized breeding distribution of this species. In the upper Midwest the BBS trend estimate is 5.4% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.33) for 1966—2000 but the sample size is small. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 3. Distribution The Mute Swan was reported in priority blocks in eight counties. However, its population is growing and expanding without additional releases. Its presence in Illinois is prima- rily the result of introductions intended to enhance the beauty of the landscape. These swans are also released on small ponds and lakes to discourage Canada Geese from establish- ing territories. Mute Swans are most prevalent in man-made ponds, lakes, and marshes and are especially associated with commercial and residential developments. Many birds remain year round while others are captured in the fall and released in the following spring. Frequency The Mute Swan was reported from 12 (1.2%) priority blocks and 20 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 5 (0.5%) of the priority blocks; the breeding evidence for all five records was the presence of cygnets. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 5) 0.5 41.7 14 ihe! Probable 2 0.2 16.7 6 0.5 Possible 5 0.5 41.7 12 0.9 Pig Totals 12 1a, 100.0 52 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& 2 Probable ie Possible CO - Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 3 ~ 2 4 = = + io} Oo 4 5 | 4 e : — . ° ee peetee, 1" s aa? 0+ + + + + te 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year 4] Dennis Oehmke Code: WODU Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada, south into WY (heteron 115 Bi (0) Abundance: common migrant and summer resident; uncommon winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: wooded swamps, sloughs, ponds, marshes, and flooded forests. Nest: wood chips and down-lined tree cavity or nest box; occasionally far from water. Eggs: 10—15, creamy white, unmarked. Incubation: 28—37 days. Fledging: from 56 to 70 days. This brightly colored duck is a common riparian species in North America. The breeding range includes southern Canada and the eastern half, the northwest, and west coast of the U.S. Wood Ducks inhabit wooded areas with streams, ponds, and marshes. Although still dependent on natural cavities for nesting (sycamore trees are a favorite), Wood Ducks readily accept man-made nest boxes. Nest sites are usually near or over water. Soon after a nest site has been selected, the female becomes secretive and is difficult to observe. The Wood Duck was believed to be nearly extir- pated rangewide by the early 1900s due to unregulated and spring hunting and habitat loss (Bohlen 1989; Bellrose and Holm 1994). After the Federal Migratory Bird Act of 1918 was enacted and hunting pressure stopped, the Wood Duck population rebounded, increasing until the mid-1980s (Hepp 42 Wood Duck Aix sponsa and Bellrose 1995). By the 1940s the population was sufficiently large enough to allow a controlled hunting season. Although the Mississippi Valley population experi- enced another temporary decline in the 1950s, modern wildlife management practices, adequate habitat, and hunting regulations during the last four decades have been respon- sible for its current substantial population level. The species is currently doing well throughout its range (Hepp and Bellrose 1995). The Wood Duck is second only to the Mallard in the number of birds harvested in the Atlantic and Mississippi flyways (Hepp and Bellrose 1995). Illinois History The Wood Duck, one of two cavity-nesting ducks that occur in Illinois, is currently the most abundant nesting waterfowl species in the state (Havera 1999). There were probably large numbers of this species through the late 1800s but with unregulated hunting and loss of bottomland habitat, the Illinois population had declined dramatically by the early 1900s (Havera 1999). In 1942 the population in Illinois had recovered sufficiently and the hunting season was reopened. Protection from excessive hunting has helped the recovery, but it may never return to pre-1900 levels due to loss of bottomland forest and swamps (Havera 1999). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimates are 5.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.05) in Illinois and 4.2% per year (significant, P = 0.01) for the upper Midwest for 1966—2000. However, this species is not adequately sampled by the BBS (Sauer and Droege 1990; Bellrose and Holm 1994). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Atlas data indicate that the Wood Duck breeding population was distributed throughout the state. It was reported in priority blocks in 98 counties and Confirmed as breeding in 88 of them. Gaps in distribution tend to coincide with the highly agricultural and least-forested areas of the state. Frequency The Wood Duck was reported from 476 (47.7%) priority blocks and 133 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 324 (32.5%) of the priority blocks, which is about two-thirds of the priority blocks in which it was found. Fledged young, mostly the presence of a female with her ducklings, was the most frequently reported evidence of breeding (290 FL records). Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 324 825 68.1 429 33.4 Probable 76 7.6 16.0 93 G2, Possible 76 7.6 16.0 87 6.8 Totals 476 47.7 100.0 609 47.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & ® Probable © Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois + + + + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 0 - +—__—__—-++ + — 4 + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 [ ate a Wood Duck 43 Robert Randall OCT: (HAY FA BF Rangewide Distribution: Asia, Europe, Australia, North America from Alaska and northern Canada south into Mexico, including all of the U.S. 115 FO) fe Abundance: abundant migrant and winter resident and fairly common summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: shallow ponds, lakes, and marshes with emergent vegetation, grassy areas, and flooded fields. Nest: hollow of cattails, reeds, or grasses; concealed by vegetation and lined with down; on ground (but occasion- ally on open nest platforms). Eggs: 7-10, greenish or grayish buff to off-white, un- marked. Incubation: 26—30 days. Fledging: from 42 to 60 days. The Mallard is the most abundant and widely distributed duck in North America, where the breeding range includes nearly all of Canada and most of the U.S. except the far south. Although the Mallard is the most heavily hunted duck in North America, its population has remained fairly steady (Drilling et al. 2002). Annual aerial surveys indicate the breeding population of Mallards in the midwestern U.S. and the Canadian prairies in 2000 was nearly 9.5 million birds (USFWS 2002). The male is easily identified by its distinc- tive metallic-green head. They utilize nearly any type of habitat with water—from large reservoirs, power cooling 44 WEL FT ge | Anas platyrhynchos lakes, and natural marshes to small ponds and ditches. Mallards have adapted to the presence of humans; they are frequently found in man-made settings and may breed in parks and cemeteries as well as more natural habitats. Mallards prefer to nest on the ground in vegetation near water. They are opportunistic and generalist feeders that consume a variety of plant species (seeds and vegetative parts) and, to a lesser degree, animal matter (Havera 1999). Illinois History Mallards are the most common dabbling duck in Illinois and are most abundant during the fall and winter months when large flocks often concentrate at state and federal refuges. In the mid-to-late 1800s this species was considered a common and abundant summer resident in the northern part of the state and also nested along the Illinois River (Kennicott 1855; Nelson1876; Havera 1999). In recent decades the breeding population in the state has increased considerably and it now breeds in every county, with the greatest concen- trations in the northern and central portions of the state (Bohlen 1989; Havera 1999). Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS data indicate that the Mallard population in Illinois has increased at an annual rate of 4.9% (significant, P = 0.02) from 1966 to 2000. Upper Midwest populations increased during 1966-2000 and both subintervals; the trend estimate is 2.2% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1, Distribution The Mallard was reported throughout the state during the atlas project. It was reported in priority blocks in 95 counties and Confirmed as breeding in 79 of them. Mallards occurred with the greatest frequency in the northern part of the state and less frequently in the southern portion of the state where the population is smaller. Frequency The Mallard was reported in 527 (52.8%) priority blocks and 164 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 297 (29.8%) of the priority blocks. The observation of broods or small young was the most commonly reported evidence of breeding in priority blocks (266 FL records). Nesting was probably attempted in most other blocks where the species was observed. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 297 29.8 56.4 429 33.4 Probable 140 14.0 26.6 164 12.8 Possible 90 9.0 A 98 7.6 Totals | 52.8 100.0 691 S31 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority @ Confirmed Probable & Possible C O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Count 0+ + + t + t t { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 87 6 + = Se Count 0 + + + +- ~ + . aS 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 So WEVET ge | 45 Blue-winged Teal Vir Tome | Lyexe) 6 Dennis Oehmke Code: BWTE Rangewide Distribution: all of North America, from Alaska to northwestern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant, uncommon summer resident, very rare winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: marshes, sloughs, lakes, streams, flooded weedy fields and sedge meadows. Nest: grasses or cattails, lined with finer materials and down; concealed in dense cover on ground. Eggs: 8—11, creamy- to olive-white, unmarked. Incubation: 23—27days. Fledging: from 35 to 44 days. The Blue-winged Teal is a small, fast-flying dabbling duck that can be surprisingly tame; a flock in a small puddle next to the roadside often allows a close approach. It is a common breeding species in the north-central U.S. and central Canada but also breeds throughout much of Canada and the northern half of the U.S. Nesting usually occurs later than for other ducks due to a late spring migration. Blue-winged Teal prefer open marshlike areas that include a wide diversity of aquatic plants and opportunistically utilize transient lakes and flooded fields. They typically nest on the ground in vegeta- tion near water, including marshes and ponds. Breeding populations can fluctuate considerably in response to dry 46 years (Rohwer et al. 2002). Management practices that would benefit this species include creation of vegetated buffers around wetlands and open water. Illinois History The status of the Blue-winged Teal population in Illinois has remained much the same since the nineteenth century. The species has apparently always been a common spring and fall migrant (arriving later in spring and departing earlier in fall than the other waterfowl species) and a scarce summer and winter resident, depending on the weather (Ridgway 1895). Downstate breeding is sporadic because of the intermittent availability of appropriate habitat. There were breeding records from 66 counties during the period from 1930 to 1996 (Havera 1999). Yetter (1992) estimated the northeastern Illinois population density at 1.04 breeding pairs per square mile (0.40/km7?). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for the Blue-winged Teal population in Illinois is —5.9% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.08) from 1966 to 2000; sample size and relative abundance for this species are low. Populations in the upper Midwest are estimated to have declined at an annual rate of -4.0% (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution The Blue-winged Teal was most frequently reported in the northeastern counties and at scattered locations in decreasing frequency southward during the atlas project. It may breed in intermittent wetlands in suitable years. Frequency The Blue-winged Teal was reported in 88 (8.8%) priority blocks and 58 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 35 (3.5%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observation of broods (33 FL records). Because female Blue-winged Teal separate from the males in the spring and summer to stay close to their nests and broods, records of a pair together would most likely indicate that successful nesting did not occur. A male seen alone late in the season (i.e., the Possible breeding category) is frequently part of a breeding pair and may be as reliable an indicator of breeding as observing a pair together. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. Blocks with records % Sampled blocks Confirmed 35 3.5 39.8 59 4.6 Probable 32 3.2 36.4 56 44 Possible 21 21 23.9 ail 2.4 Totals 88 8.8 100.0 146 $11.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed #& & Probable fea e - Possible iz O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 4) 1.57 r= | 61 | O 0.5 ee — ° 0 + + + + + Year 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Blue-winged Teal 47 I Coyadatsieameyvave)’.=1 (=) Anas clypeata Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery OFT: (ae Oe) sf Rangewide Distribution: Asia, Europe, much of North America from Alaska south to northern South America. 115 FCO) fe Abundance: common migrant, uncommon winter resident, rare summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: shallow, freshwater marshes and flooded wetlands with emergent vegetation. Nest: concealed depression on ground filled with dry grasses and lined with down; in short meadow grass or emergent vegetation. Eggs: 6—14, olive-buff to green-gray, unmarked. Incubation: 22—25 days. Fledging: from 38 to 66 days. The Northern Shoveler is a common holarctic duck that breeds in much of western Canada, Alaska, northwestern and north-central U.S., and locally in eastern North America. The male and female can be readily distinguished from other duck species by their prominent spatula-shaped bills. When droughts occur in the Shoveler’s primary breeding range, which is the prairie pothole region of the north-central U.S. and Canada, and the marshes and seasonal wetlands on which it depends dry up, these birds become opportunistic nesters and breed wherever suitable nesting habitat and food 48 are available. Nesting and other summer occurrences at the fringes of or outside the normal range are possibly drought- displaced birds. Nests are usually placed in open meadows or dense grassy cover up to 200 feet from the water’s edge (Bellrose 1976). The Shoveler’s diet consists of more animals (e.g., aquatic insects, gastropods, and crustaceans) than that of other dabbling ducks, especially in the spring (Ankney and Afton 1988), but they are mainly herbivores. Illinois History The Northern Shoveler is a common migrant in IIlinois, resting and feeding in suitable shallow wetlands during its passages north in the spring and south in the fall. Illinois, which is at the southern edge of the breeding range, has apparently never been a major breeding area for the Northern Shoveler. Most breeding records published prior to the atlas project were in northeastern Illinois, particularly Cook County (at least three accounts between 1890 and 1968) and Goose Lake Prairie State Park in Grundy County (1973) (Nelson 1876; Havera 1999). Another three broods occurred in Fulton County in 1973 (Bohlen 1989). Shovelers are often present and move around the state during the summer months, but evidence of nesting is usually not detected. Breeding Bird Survey Trends There was insufficient BBS data to estimate a trend for the Northern Shoveler population in Illinois. The upper Midwest trend for 1966-2000 is estimated at 0.9% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.52). Credibility Index: IL= none and UM = 3. Distribution The Northern Shoveler was a rare and sporadic breeding species in Illinois during the atlas project. It is expected to occasionally breed in the state, especially in the northeastern counties. The record in Peoria County was farther south than expected. Frequency The Northern Shoveler was reported from | (0.1%) priority block and 4 nonpriority blocks. It was reported as a Probable breeder in a priority block in Peoria County and was Con- firmed in one block, a nonpriority block in DuPage County. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 0 0.0 0.0 | 0.1 Probable | 0.1 100.0 | 0.1 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 3 0.2 Totals ] 0.1 100.0 5 0.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed a Probable ie e) Possible O Northern Shoveler 49 WN Co)adatslaam ealaltcil Anas acuta Kanae Hirabayashi Code: NOPI Rangewide Distribution: northern Asia and Europe, most of North America, from northern Canada and Alaska south into Central America. 11) BO) te Abundance: locally common to uncommon migrant, uncommon winter resident, rare summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: marshes and seasonally flooded wetlands. Nest: dry grasses and leaves lined with finer materials and feathers; on ground, concealed in short vegetation away from the water. Eggs: 6-9, olive green to olive buff, unmarked. Incubation: 22—25 days. Fledging: from 36 to 57 days. The Northern Pintail is circumpolar in distribution and abundant in North America, where it breeds primarily in the northern Great Plains; its breeding range also includes nearly all of Canada and Alaska. Northern Pintails nest on the ground in open upland near water, and forage in lakes, ponds, and marshes. Loss of marshes and seasonal wetlands 50 in its primary breeding area caused a serious decline in population. From 1955 to 1991 there was an estimated 54% decline in the North American breeding population (Jackson et al. 1996). Periods of long-term drought have also caused dramatic declines in populations, but are usually followed by a recovery (Austin and Miller 1995). Illinois History Illinois has never been a major breeding area for the North- ern Pintail. It occurs in the state primarily as a migrant, resting and feeding as it passes through on its way north in the spring and south in the fall. The majority of published breeding records prior to the atlas project were in northern Illinois, primarily Cook County (at least six accounts between 1875 and 1978), Goose Lake Prairie State Park in Grundy County (1973 and 1974), and Whiteside County (1959) (Bohlen 1989). The atlas record in Shelby County is the southernmost confirmed breeding location ever reported in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Northern Pintail is rare in Illinois and BBS data are not adequate to estimate trends. The upper Midwest trend estimate for 1966-2000 is —11.9% per year (nonsignificant, PS OT2): Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 3. Distribution The Northern Pintail was rarely reported in the atlas project. This species occasionally occurs during the breeding season in Illinois, especially in the northeastern counties. The record in Shelby County was 125 miles farther south than previ- ously recorded. The three Possible records in Will County are relatively close to previously successful sites. Since the atlas project, breeding has been reported in the Illinois River valley. Frequency The Northern Pintail was found in 4 (0.4%) priority blocks and 3 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in only | block, a priority block in Shelby County. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 1 0.1 25.0 ] 0.1 Probable Zz 0.2 50.0 2 0.2 Possible l 0.1 25.0 4 0.3 Totals 4 0.4 100.0 7 0.5 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) eal % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed #& # Probable @ Possible O Northern Pintail 51 Lophodytes cucullatus Hooded Merganser Dennis Oehmke Oris (eae s COVED Rangewide Distribution: southern half of Canada south irom (opalere ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant, uncommon winter and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: woods near lakes, ponds, swamps, and marshes. Nest: tree cavity or nest box lined with grasses, leaves, and down. Eggs: 10—12, white, unmarked (often nest-stained). Incubation: 32—33 days. Fledging: about 71 days. While Hooded Mergansers generally breed in the forests of the northeastern U.S. and southeastern and southwestern Canada, it is most common in the upper Great Lakes region. The Hooded Merganser, like the Wood Duck, nests in tree cavities and also accepts boxes intended for Wood Ducks as nest sites. However, because it is a diving duck, its habitat requirements and feeding habits are considerably different from those of the Wood Duck. A variety of wooded areas with nearby water, such as cypress and tupelo swamps, beaver ponds, lakes, and tree-lined streams, provide suitable habitat. A major limitation for the Hooded Merganser is the quality and clarity of water, which must provide an adequate, visible supply of small fish, amphibians, and insects (Bellrose 1976). Historically, populations declined because 32 of overhunting and loss of forests; current populations appear stable (Dugger et al. 1994). Efforts to protect and restore wooded wetland areas through a variety of public and private efforts are necessary to enhance the breeding potential for this species. Illinois History According to historical accounts, the Hooded Merganser was widely but sparingly distributed as a breeding species in the state. The earliest breeding records were reported from Union County in 1875 (Nelson 1877). It was reported in eight counties throughout the state from 1861 to 1929 and 36 counties from 1930 to 1996 (Havera 1999). Based on a mail survey conducted in 1990, it nested in 14 (9%) of 151 public sites (Havera 1999). Nesting currently occurs in counties bordering the Mississippi, Illinois, Sangamon, and Ohio rivers (Havera 1999), Breeding Bird Survey Trends Waterfowl species are not adequately sampled by the BBS and the Hooded Merganser, though an increasingly common breeder in Illinois, is seldom reported as breeding because of its habitat and secretive nature. There are insufficient BBS data to estimate trends for this species in Illinois or the region. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = none. Distribution Breeding evidence for the Hooded Merganser is difficult to find and the atlas data is not indicative of its true distribution or abundance. It was reported in priority blocks in 11 counties. Since the atlas project, one or more broods have been documented at various locations throughout the state every year, including some encountered during the Spring Bird Count in early May (Kleen unpub.). Frequency Hooded Mergansers were reported from 14 (1.4%) priority blocks and 9 nonpriority blocks. Even though it was Con- firmed as a breeding species in just 7 of the priority blocks, breeding probably occurred statewide where bottomland forest and suitable nest cavities exist. Breeding evidence for all the Confirmed priority block records was the observation of broods accompanying adult females. Because of the difficulty in locating nest cavities, the other blocks where breeding was recorded but not Confirmed may have been nesting localities as well. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 7 0.7 50.0 14 1d Probable 2 0.2 14.3 a) 0.2 Possible 5 0.5 35.7 6 Totals 14 1.4 100.0 2A * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) a % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | Priority Nonpriority | Confirmed & ® _ Probable | Possible L] O Hooded Merganser nX Ruddy Duck Oxyura jamaicensis Joe Milosevich Code: RUDU Rangewide Distribution: western and southern Canada, south through most of the U.S. into Central America. 115 Fie) Abundance: common migrant; uncommon winter resident, occasional summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: densely vegetated freshwater marshes; occasionally, sewage lagoons. Nest: bulky and basketlike in emergent vegetation lined sparsely with finer materials, normally with concealing canopy and anchored to the vegetation. Eggs: 6-8, creamy white, unmarked (nest-stained). Incubation: 23—26 days. Fledging: from 42 to 48 days. This species breeds primarily in the prairie pothole region of North America but can be found breeding elsewhere in the western half of the U.S., southwestern and south-central Canada, and in Mexico. Male Ruddy Ducks are rust-colored, stiff-tailed ducks with white cheeks and blue bills. They have a habit of cocking their tails up—a behavioral trait that helps identify the species. Although Ruddy Ducks are divers, they are primarily vegetarians and feed on seeds, leaves, and tubers of sedges and pondweeds, and therefore require clear water to see their underwater food sources. They build floating nests in marshes and ponds with margins of emer- 54 gent vegetation. Ruddy Duck populations are stable or increasing throughout most of the breeding range in North America (Brua 2002). This species is highly dependent on wetlands in the prairie pothole region. Illinois History Like most other ducks, Ruddies occur in Illinois primarily as spring and fall transients using lakes for feeding and resting during their long migrations. According to historical ac- counts, the Ruddy Duck has been a somewhat regular breeding species in northeastern Illinois and an opportunis- tic, irregular breeding species in the rest of the state when suitable habitat was available at the appropriate time. The earliest record of breeding in Illinois was a brood observed near Waukegan in Lake County in 1875 (Nelson 1876). Since 1930, Ruddy Ducks have been recorded as nesting in nine counties scattered throughout the state (Havera 1999). Breeding Bird Survey Trends There is insufficient BBS data to estimate population trends for the Ruddy Duck in Illinois. The data for 1966—2000 indicate a decline in the upper Midwest population of — 9.4% per year (significant, P = 0.03), though the sample size is low. Waterfowl] populations are not adequately sampled by the BBS. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 3. Distribution The Ruddy Duck was a rare breeding species during the atlas project. It was recorded in priority blocks in six counties. This species was sporadic in occurrence and has a wider distribution than the atlas data indicate. A number of broods have been documented at several locations in northeastern Illinois prior to and after the atlas project. Frequency The Ruddy Duck was reported from 6 (0.6%) priority blocks and 13 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 2 of the priority blocks, 1 each in Cook and Mason counties. The presence of single individuals or summering groups are more likely to be associated with nesting than the presence of territorial pairs (i.e., the 4 Probable records) and, therefore, it would be appropriate to consider the Possible records as potential nesting sites. Breeding Evidence __ Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 2 0.2 33.3 8 0.6 Probable l 0.1 16.7 4 0.3 Possible 3 0.3 50.0 7 05 Totals 6 0.6 100.0 19 15 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ _ Probable Ea o) _ Possible f= O Breeding Bird Survey Trends | Upper Midwest 3: | 2+ _& 1S , 1d e , | GH a%ee ae | a Ss eo oe ees } 0 + + + ——+ +t + + { 1966 197] 1976 =1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 Year Ruddy Duck 55 Te: \Vil ad: latalele (= Perdix perdix Joe Milosevich Code: GRPA Rangewide Distribution: native of Europe and Asia; Tbalaneretecercre ms relcom (ondeWavenculercerieemecetinmiimyeltivacun Canada and northern U.S. ILLINOIS Abundance: formerly uncommon, now rare permanent resident in northern counties. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: grasslands and cultivated flatlands with hedgerows and edges. Nest: a scrape lined with leaves, straw and grass, on ground. Eggs: 15-17, olive or dull white, unmarked. Incubation: 23-25 days. Fledging: from 13 to 15 days. The Gray Partridge, also known as the Hungarian Partridge, is anonmigratory game species that was introduced into North America in the early 1900s. Populations in North America are found in the northern U.S. and southern Canada, but are concentrated in the central prairie region. This grassland species has adapted to intensive agricultural areas where it inhabits cultivated fields, fencerows, and edges. It nests on the ground in grassy areas and hayfields. Gray Partridges mainly eat seeds; however, insects are an impor- tant food source for chicks. 56 Illinois History Farris (1970) reported that more than 12,000 Gray Partridges were released in Illinois between 1906 and 1927. Over the years the birds spread in a westerly and southerly direction with the greatest numbers occurring in Lee and DeKalb counties. Farris also thought that Gray Partridge numbers would always be low because summers in Illinois are too hot and wet for this species. Gray Partridge were reported occasionally on [Illinois Department of Natural Resources game bird surveys before 1998 but on only a few survey routes (<3) and in small numbers (<40). The Gray Partridge has never been easy to find in Illinois and during the last 10 years it has become even more difficult. The Spring Bird Count in 2000 reported only two birds and in 2001 only one bird, all in DeKalb County (Kleen 2000b, 2001b). Changing land uses and cropping systems may be more responsible for the rarity and decline of this species than the summer climate that Farris (1970) suggests. Breeding Bird Survey Trends This rare species is uncommonly encountered and in such low numbers that the trend estimate is not considered reliable for Illinois. A trend of —7.8% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.42) was estimated for the state for 1966—2000. For the upper Midwest, the population trend is estimated at 0.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.95) between 1966 and 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, the Gray Partridge was found in priority blocks in 19 counties, all in the northwestern part of the state. Individuals were reported as far south as Peoria and Knox counties. Since the atlas project, there have been few records of this species anywhere in Illinois. Frequency : The Gray Partridge was reported from 65 (6.5%) priority blocks and 10 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 32 (3.2%) of the priority blocks and likely occurred in the majority of other blocks in which it was reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 32 3.2 49.2 36 2.8 Probable 21 oul 32.3 24 1.9 Possible 12 ile) 18.5 15 12 Totals 65 6.5 100.0 75 5.8 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & & _ Probable ® Possible a4 O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest in) | | 0 + + - + + + t ‘ 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Gray Partridge 57 Ring-necked Pheasant Phasianus colchicus Code: RNPH Rangewide Distribution: native of Asia; introduced elsewhere including North America: extreme southern Canada south through northern half of the U.S., uneven distribution in southwestern U.S. 115 Bile) he Abundance: fairly common permanent resident in north and central; mostly absent south of about Effingham County. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open country, cultivated and grassland areas. Nest: a scrape sometimes lined with leaves and grass, on eauelunnvee Eggs: 10-12, brownish olive (occasionally pale blue), unmarked. Incubation: 23—25 days. Fledging: about 12 days. The Ring-necked Pheasant is native to Asia but now has a worldwide distribution because of introductions by humans. They were successfully introduced in North America in the 1880s and are presently found primarily in southern Canada and the northern and western U.S. This species is a nonmigratory game bird that is better adapted to an intensive agricultural setting than most of our native gallinaceous species (e.g., the Greater Prairie-Chicken and the Northern Bobwhite). Ring-necked Pheasants nest on the ground in dense vegetation. Large hayfields, pastures, and fallow fields are preferred nesting habitats, but they also utilize strips of 58 vegetation along fencerows, ditches, and roadways. Loss of habitat due to farming practices, which changed from small diversified farms to clean monocultures during the latter part of the 1900s, has negatively impacted the pheasant popula- tion. The destruction and decline in nesting and wintering cover are serious threats to the population (Jackson et al. 1996). Managing roadsides for pheasant habitat and restora- tion and creation of grasslands are important conservation measures for this species. Illinois History Ring-necked Pheasants were first introduced into Illinois around 1890. The pheasant population grew and expanded during the early 1900s and peaked in the early 1960s. Since then, the population has slowly and steadily declined because of intensive farming practices, which reduced habitat, and severe winters, especially those in the late 1970s. By the early 1980s the population was only a fraction of what it had been three decades earlier. Detailed information about the natural history, population, and distribution of this species in Illinois can be found in Warner (1981). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate is —2.0% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.34) for the pheasant in Illinois for 1966-2000. BBS data from the upper Midwest indicate that the regional population has declined at an annual rate of —2.2% (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. Illinois Department of Natural Resources call-count surveys indicate similar trends for the state. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 1. Distribution The Ring-necked Pheasant occurred in the northern two- thirds of Illinois during the atlas project. Although there have been numerous attempts to introduce pheasants in southern Illinois, the species has been unable to sustain a population there and the southern records are probably the result of releases by sportsman groups. Frequency Ring-necked Pheasants were reported in 556 (55.7%) priority blocks and 121 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 276 (27.7%) of the priority blocks, with the observation of broods the most commonly used evidence criterion (252 FL records). Because crowing males regularly announce their presence, pheasants were relatively easy to detect. The atlas results may be somewhat misleading since some records may be of released game-farm birds that were not likely to survive to the following year. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 276 277 49.6 337 26.2 Probable 116 11.6 20.9 149 11.6 Possible 164 16.4 29.5 191 14.9 Totals 556 Dov 100.0 677 = 52.6 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) 8 | io eke ae Eee % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for mS for this species) this species a Oj B Priority Nonpriority a8 Confirmed @ = Probable | © go Possible [| O on fe Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 + + : ' + , + { 1966 =1971 1976 =-1981 1986 =1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 247 21+ 18+ + 0 + + + ' + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 7 Year Ring-necked Pheasant 59 Ruffed Grouse Bonasa umbellus Pat Brown Code: RUGR Rangewide Distribution: Alaska, much of Canada, and the northern U.S. ILLINOIS Abundance: (formerly) very rare permanent resident in northern and southern Illinois. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous and deciduous-coniferous forests with dense understory. Nest: a scrape lined with preened feathers, on ground at base of tree or log. Eggs: 9-12, buff, lightly spotted with browns. Incubation: 23-24 days. Fledging: from 10 to 12 days. Ruffed Grouse are nonmigratory game birds that are found in the deciduous and coniferous forests of North America. Their breeding range is generally most of Canada and the northern U.S. They are known for their courtship behavior and cryptic coloration. This woodland species inhabits deciduous or mixed deciduous-coniferous forests, especially young forests with brushy, dense undergrowth. Courtship drumming generally occurs during March and April. The drumming sound is made by the male as he stands on a log and fans the air with increasingly rapid wingbeats. Ruffed Grouse nest on the forest floor, usually at the base of a tree, stump, or boulder. Some populations experience cyclic fluctuations, perhaps generated by predator-prey relationships (Rusch et 60 al. 2000). Historically, the conversion of forest to other land uses, fragmentation of remaining woodlands, lack of early successional habitat, grazing, and market hunting have contributed to the decline of this species in parts of its range (Rusch et al. 2000). Illinois History Illinois is at the southern limit of the Ruffed Grouse’s breeding range. During the late 1800s it was found “through- out the State in wooded districts, becoming more rare southward” (Ridgway 1895). Although it was recorded as common in the early 1900s (Cory 1909), that description was probably more appropriate for Wisconsin than Illinois. The Ruffed Grouse was apparently extirpated from the state in the early 1900s. During the latter part of the twentieth century, four attempts were made to reintroduce the species into the state. Birds from Indiana were released in Pope County (1953-58 and 1967), Alexander County (1972), Union County (1982), and Jo Daviess and Stephenson counties (1990) (Douglas Dufford, pers. comm.). Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS routes do not adequately sample the remnant population that exists in Illinois. The surveys, which are mostly con- ducted in June, would not detect Ruffed Grouse, whose peak drumming period is March and April. In the upper Midwest the trend estimate for 1966-2000 is 1.4% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.48). Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution In Illinois the Ruffed Grouse was formerly a rare breeding species in forested areas, and later limited to disjunct populations in the extreme south and northwest. The birds found in Union County during the atlas project were a result of the flock released in the county in the 1980s. Ruffed Grouse may still be present in Jo Daviess and extreme southern Illinois counties, but they were not detected during the atlas project. Even though drumming Ruffed Grouse can be heard in early spring for quite some distance, their presence at other times of the year is difficult to detect. Frequency The Ruffed Grouse was reported from a single priority block in Union County, where it was Confirmed as breeding. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 1 0.1 100.0 l 0.1 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals l 0.1 100.0 l 0.1 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & Probable @ Possible ] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest Count + 0.5+ . e . gt Pow —s DT a Fat PLE eB ke O + n + 4 + t + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Ruffed Grouse 61 Greater Prairie-Chicken Tympanuchus cupido sin] Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery OCT: (i C2 oa OF s | Rangewide Distribution: upper Great Plains with a subspecies in southeastern Texas. ILLINOIS Abundance: rare and local permanent resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: open tallgrass prairies, grasslands. Nest: a scrape or shallow depression lined with leaves, feathers and grass, on ground. Eggs: 10-12, olive buff, sometimes spotted with fine brown specks. Incubation: 23—24 days. Fledging: weak flights at 2 weeks and strong flights at 3 weeks. The Greater Prairie-Chicken was at one time widely distrib- uted throughout the native prairies of central North America. As native prairie habitat was converted to cropland, Prairie- Chicken numbers declined precipitously and its current distribution is localized; this species 1s extirpated or nearly extirpated from 15 states and provinces (Shroeder and Robb 1993). The Greater Prairie-Chicken is known for its breeding behavior; males gather in early spring to boom and strut to attract females in courtship areas called leks. Greater Prairie- Chickens historically inhabited prairies interspersed with oak woodlands and currently occur in grasslands with medium to tall vegetation. Larger grasslands offer more protection from predation (Schroeder and Robb 1993). They nest on the ground in depressions lined with feathers, grass, and leaves. For the species to survive, suitable habitat must be acquired, preserved, and appropriately managed (Simpson and Esker 1997); 62 Illinois History Prairies once covered about half of Illinois (Suloway et al. 2002) and supported an abundance of Greater Prairie- Chickens. For a period in the mid-1800s, the Greater Prairie- Chicken was one of the most abundant species in Illinois. They were so common that Ridgway (1895) thought it superfluous to discuss them further. Prairie-Chickens benefited from the clearing of the forests, reaching peak numbers about 1860 (Bohlen 1989; Westemeier and Edwards 1987; Dinsmore 1994). With the loss of prairies the popula- tion declined so drastically between 1860 and 1900 that by 1900 they were considered to be on the brink of extinction (Ridgway 1915). Continued loss, reduction in quality, and fragmentation of grassland habitat and isolation of local populations have negatively impacted this species up to the present time. Because of the very small population and the lack of nesting habitat, the Greater Prairie-Chicken is listed as an endangered species in Illinois. The remaining popula- tion in Illinois, a small remnant of what it used to be, now survives on intensely managed preserves in the south-central part of the state. In the early 1990s, birds from similar midwestern populations were introduced into the Illinois population to improve hatchability of clutches and sustain the Illinois population (Bouzat et al. 1998). In 2000, the Illinois population consisted of 107 booming males and a similar number of females on 15 leks in three counties (S. Simpson, pers. comm.). The efforts of the Illinois Natural History Survey, Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Prairie Chicken Society, Illinois Audubon Society, and The Nature Conservancy have prevented this species from being extirpated from the state. Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS data are insufficient to estimate trends for the Greater Prairie-Chicken population in Illinois. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest for 1966—2000 is —5.7% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.29). Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 3. Distribution The Greater Prairie-Chicken population is limited to three small areas in southwestern Jasper County, northeastern Marion County, and southeastern Effingham County. Periodically, isolated flocks of five or fewer chickens have occurred at sites in adjacent counties but most do not persist longer than a few years. Frequency The single atlas record for the Greater Prairie-Chicken was from a priority block located in Jasper County, where it was Confirmed as breeding. Breeding Evidence e Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed l 0.1 100.0 | 0.1 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 1 0.1 100.0 1 0.1 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ Probable a @ Possible CJ O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest oie 2 + 5 5 | 19 | 5 ' NOR a ee 0 + + + . + + + =| 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 ay : | Year Greater Prairie-Chicken 63 Wild Turkey Michael Jeffords Code: WITU Rangewide Distribution: most of the U.S. south of Canada and into Mexico, spotty in western U.S. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon permanent resident, more common in south but increasing in central and north. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open areas at edge of deciduous or coniferous woods. Nest: a scrape or shallow depression lined with dead leaves and grass, on ground. Eggs: 10-12, buff to white, marked with dull brown. Incubation: 27-28 days. Fledging: from 6 to 10 days. The Wild Turkey is native to North America and breeds from southern Canada to central Mexico, including much of the U.S. east of the Rockies. It is a large nonmigratory gamebird that often occurs in large flocks, especially in the winter, and wanders over a fairly large home range. Destruction and alteration of habitat and uncontrolled hunting reduced the Wild Turkey population in the eastern U.S. so that it occu- pied only a small fraction of its original range by 1948 (Jackson et al. 1996). Reintroductions and better manage- ment methods have led to the restoration of this species in many states, including Illinois. Turkeys mostly utilize heavily wooded areas, but are also found in woodland openings, forest edge, and margins of farm fields. They forage for nuts, seeds, grass, and insects and are most common in forests with oaks or other nut-bearing trees as well as in corn and soybean fields. In spring, the male turkey gobbles and struts with tail fanned. Nests are placed on the 64 f=) (=F Told Me F-1][e) of- Ze) ground in forests with grassy openings and open fields nearby. Illinois History Although once an abundant species, the Wild Turkey was all but extirpated in Illinois by 1900 (Ridgway 1895; Cory 1909). Loss and fragmentation of forested habitat and year- round hunting were the primary reasons for the drastic declines in population. For several decades there were no Wild Turkeys in Illinois. Between 1954 and 1958, thousands of game-farm birds were released but the reintroduction effort failed. In 1959, 65 wild-trapped birds from Missis- sippi, Arkansas, and West Virginia were released in southern Illinois and similar releases continued until 1967. This effort was successful in reestablishing the species in the state (Calhoun and Garver 1974). As the southern population flourished, birds from this population were trapped and released upstate. Wild Turkeys are now present statewide. The reestablishment of the Wild Turkey population in Illinois is a result of modern wildlife management techniques and the turkey’s ability to adapt to smaller and fragmented forest habitat. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The BBS trend estimate for 1966-2000 for Illinois is 26.1% (significant, P < 0.01) and 18.0% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the upper Midwest region. Because the turkey’s peak breeding period is March through early May, the BBS program may not adequately sample this species. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution Restoration efforts in southern Illinois followed by releases in forested locations throughout the state have established Wild Turkeys in practically every forested area of the state. Greatest concentrations are still near the release sites but the population continues to expand along wooded river corri- dors. Wild Turkeys are currently more widespread in Illinois than atlas records indicate. They were reported in priority blocks in half the counties in the state during the atlas project. Frequency Wild Turkeys were reported from 142 (14.2%) priority blocks and 17 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 58 (5.8%) of the priority blocks. Three-fourths of the Confirmed records in priority blocks resulted from the observation of poults. Since turkeys are permanent residents, it is likely that most of the Probable and Possible breeding records represent breeding birds as well. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 58 5.8 40.8 69 5.4 Probable 21 Del 14.8 23 1.8 Possible 63 6.3 44.4 67 ayy? Totals 142 14.2 100.0 LSo 124 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & & Probable @ Possible ial Oo Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois + + + + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest z 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 . Year Wild Turkey 65 IN Coyadat=ieam =se)elaalicc Colinus virginianus Joe Milosevich Code: NOBO Rangewide Distribution: eastern half of the U.S., NY Cpa Tere) 115 File) Abundance: fairly common permanent resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: tall grasslands, brushy fields, open woodlands, and hedgerows. Nest: a scrape or shallow depression lined with grass, on ground, concealed by woven arch of vegetation. Eggs: 10-16, white to creamy (occasionally buff), unmarked. Incubation: 23—24 days. Fledging: about 6 to 7 days. The Northern Bobwhite, an important gamebird in North America, is a widely distributed breeding species throughout the eastern half of the U.S. and eastern Mexico. The whistled “bob-white” or “ah-bob-white” of the male is a familiar sound in spring and summer to those who spend time in the country. The species occurs in open and semi-open habitats with early successional brushy areas, open grasslands, and woody edges its preferred habitat. The Northern Bobwhite, often called quail, is a permanent, nonmigratory resident. It nests on the ground in fairly open habitat with dense cover nearby. Except during the nesting season, bobwhites feed and roost in coveys that may include as many as 20 birds. In most of the U.S. the population of this species is declining significantly and is highly fragmented because of loss or degradation of habitat in part due to current farming and forestry practices (Brennan 1999). Winter survival also affects population size. Population declines occur during cold winters with extensive snow cover, and even more so 66 when such winters occur back-to-back (Roseberry and Klimstra 1984). Illinois History In the late 1800s the Northern Bobwhite was a common resident throughout Illinois (Ridgway 1895; Cory 1909). During the early to mid-1900s, it was still common, more so in the southern portion of the state (Graber and Graber 1963). From 1955 to 1969 the species was most common in the southern and western portions of the state (Preno and Labisky 1971). During the 1950s and 1960s there were at least three major fluctuations in the bobwhite population with highs following the lows two to four years later. The current population is still declining due to changing land use, reduction in the diversity of agricultural crops, cropping methods, and loss of both quantity and quality of its pre- ferred habitat. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Bobwhite may be better sampled by the BBS than other upland gamebird species because of their slightly later and persistent calling behavior. The Illinois and upper Midwest populations have declined during 1966—2000 and the two subintervals. The trend estimates for 1966—2000 indicate decreases of —1.9% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for Illinois and —2.6% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the upper Midwest. The severe declines that occurred after the winters of 1976 to 1979 are reflected on the BBS graphs. Trends derived from Illinois Department of Natural Re- sources call-count survey are in agreement with BBS estimates. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Northern Bobwhite was widely distributed throughout the southern and western portions of Illinois during the atlas project. It had not yet returned to its former abundance and distribution in the eastern and northern portions of the state following the severe winters of the late 1970s. Bobwhites were found in priority blocks in 99 of the 102 counties in the state. Frequency The Northern Bobwhite was reported from 745 (74.6%) priority blocks and 27 nonpriority blocks. This species was Confirmed as breeding in 203 (20.3%) of the priority blocks, with the observation of young birds accounting for 88% of these records (179 FL records). The bobwhite was readily detected because of the male’s frequent, easily identified call. Because the species is nonmigratory, the bobwhite likely bred in most of the blocks in which it was found. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Seamed 203 20.3 ps fs 214 16.6 Probable 392 39.3 52.6 401 312 Possible 150 15.0 20.1 157 12.2 Totals 745 74.6 100.0 772 ~—~60.0 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) as % of 998 sampled priority —_ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority | Confirmed #& & _ Probable 4 @ | Possible LJ O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois + 1966 1971 1976 * 1981 - 7 + { 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 0 + a 1966 5 1971 a 1976 + 1981 + 1986 Year + 1991 + 1996 2000 Northern Bobwhite 67 -Pied-billed Grebe adele | 141411] 0) 0k efefe | [o7-) of Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: PBGR Rangewide Distribution: central Canada, south through all of the U.S. to southern Brazil. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and an uncommon summer and winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: threatened. Breeding Habitat: vegetated lakes, ponds, sluggish streams, and marshes. Nest: inconspicuous, shallow, floating platform placed in marsh vegetation or anchored to dead logs or trees. Eggs: 5-7, bluish white and chalky, often nest-stained (buff or brown). Incubation: 23 days. Fledging: not specifically known. The Pied-billed Grebe is widely distributed throughout the Americas. It breeds from northern Canada to southern South America, including most of the U.S. It is a common inhabit- ant of marshes, lakes, and rivers. This secretive species occurs as a breeding species in calm bodies of water that support marsh or other well-vegetated habitat. Adult birds are most visible when swimming in open water; upon detection, they submerge, swim a considerable distance underwater, and then reappear near a vegetated edge where they are less conspicuous. The Pied-billed Grebe feeds on fish, crustaceans, frogs, and insects, usually by diving. Although they are most often detected as solitary breeders, 68 several nesting pairs may utilize highly suitable wetlands. In some years, after heavy spring rains, these birds opportunisti- cally nest in flooded areas not normally available to them. The nest is a floating platform usually placed in emergent vegetation. Young are precocial and soon after hatching leave the nest to follow the adults or ride on their backs through the emergent vegetation. Illinois History The Pied-billed Grebe was formerly a common, widespread breeding species throughout the state, occurring along the borders of reedy sloughs, marshes, and rivers (Nelson 1876; Ridgway 1895; Cory 1909). In 1989 the Pied-billed Grebe was declared an endangered species in Illinois because of the widespread loss and deterioration of its wetland habitat. In 1994 its status was changed to threatened. Local populations remain vulnerable with the continued loss of marshes and wetlands. Breeding Bird Survey Trends This wetland species is not adequately sampled in Illinois by the BBS and has a small sample size and a low relative abundance. For Illinois the trend estimate over the long term (1966-2000) is 6.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.60). The long-term trend estimate for the upper Midwest is —2.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.17). The trend estimates for the two subinterval time periods are 14.1% per year (significant, P =0.00) during 1966-1979 and -6.7% per year (significant, P = 0.03) during 1980-2000 in the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, Pied-billed Grebes occurred most frequently in the wetlands in the northeastern part of the state and at scattered locations elsewhere. This species was reported in priority blocks in 22 counties during the atlas project. They are opportunistic breeders and may occur where permanent or temporary conditions provide adequate nesting habitat. Frequency Pied-billed Grebes were reported from 43 (4.3%) of the 998 priority blocks and 50 of the 288 nonpriority blocks. This species was Confirmed as breeding in 27 (2.7%) of the priority blocks. The Probable and Possible sightings may be potential breeding sites. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 27 2 | 62.8 58 4.5 Probable 8 0.8 18.6 14 13 Possible 8 0.8 18.6 21 1.6 Totals 43 4.3 100.0 93 Ned * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& e Probable © Possible fiat O Pied-billed Grebe 69 DY) 0] eo) (=trelg-\-)(=10 Ove) dante) e-lal' Phalacrocorax auritus Joe Milosevich Code: DCCO Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada, south through much of the U.S. to Mexico and Cuba. ILLINOIS Abundance: a common migrant, fairly common but local summer resident, and uncommon winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: lakes, rivers, and swamps with an abundance of dead snags in open water or large trees on isolated and protected islands. Prefer to nest in colonies (loose or dense) sometimes with herons. Nest: a rough platform of sticks lined with grasses or leaves placed in the crotch of a tree or in a man-made Seat (el ttiven Eggs: 3-4, light blue or bluish white, unmarked. Incubation: 25—29 days. Fledging: from 35 to 42 days. Double-crested Cormorants, common inhabitants of sea- coasts and inland waters, are large, primitive-looking aquatic birds. They are colonial breeders that breed in North America primarily along the seacoasts, in the north-central U.S., south-central Canada, and the Great Lakes region. Lakes, ponds, impoundments, slow-moving rivers, and coastlines are common breeding habitats. They may nest on the ground or in trees or artificial structures. Cormorants dive for fish and aquatic invertebrates. For most of the twentieth century, the interior population in North American was declining due to persecution and disturbance of colonies, but recently their numbers have increased (Jackson et al. 1996). As a result of the population increases, cormorants are perceived to be 70 causing economic impacts to sport and commercial fish stock and the aquaculture industry in some parts of their range (Tobin 1999). Illinois History Double-crested Cormorants were primarily migrants and occasional winter residents, according to early accounts. Existing colonies were not only small, but few in number and occurred along the major river systems (Ridgway 1895; Herkert 1992). Cormorants experienced severe population declines in the 1950s and 1960s because of environmental contaminants (Anderson and Hickey 1972; Hatch and Weseloh 1999). By 1975, the remaining colony in Illinois consisted of a handful of nests in two dead snags in the Mississippi River in Carroll County (Kleen 1976a). In response to the extremely low population level, the cormo- rant was listed as an endangered species in Illinois in 1977. The population had recovered and the number and distribu- tion of colonies had increased sufficiently for the species to be removed from the list in 1999. In 1991 there were six known active colonies (Herkert 1992). In 2000, there were approximately 1,150 nesting pairs in 8 known Illinois colonies (Kleen 2001a). Locations of known colonies with Double-crested Cormorants in 2000 are shown in Appendix K. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Double-crested Cormorant, as with other colonial nesting wetland species, is not adequately sampled by the BBS and the reliability of the trend estimates is low. The BBS trend estimate is 49.4% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.15) for Illinois from 1966 to 2000; sample size and relative abundance are low. In the upper Midwest, the trend estimate for 1966-2000 is 24.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.23). Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 3. Distribution During the atlas project, Double-crested Cormorants were found in northeastern Illinois, along the Illinois River, and to a lesser extent along the Mississippi River. It is expected that new colonies will appear in undisturbed sections of larger lakes and in isolated portions of other lakes, rivers, and sloughs as far south as the Ohio River. Frequency The Double-crested Cormorant was reported from 15 (1.5%) priority blocks and 7 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in one of the priority blocks near Peoria; that colony is no longer in existence. It was also Confirmed in 3 nonpriority blocks. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks “No. % Sampled : -_ _ Blocks with records : blocks 7 Confirmed | 0.1 6.7 4 0.3 Probable 2 0.2 13.3 i; 0.2 Possible 12 lee 80.0 16 Totals 15 TR) 100.0 22 998 priority blocks ** ],286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) y f % of priority blocks with records for this species % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) | Priority Nonpriority | Confirmed & 6 _ Probable a | Possible dd O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Count iS} lon — — . ° 3 ee Q +-~-~-~~ o° 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1996 Year 1986 199] 2000 Upper Midwest in) . Ss —~ 6 * 0 jpoa-0-e-¢-0-e-e-e-g Oo — =. + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 Year 2000 | DYoy 0] 0) (=e ¢=1-} (-10 mM Ove) at ile) a=] 4) § 71 Robert Randall Code: AMBI Rangewide Distribution: southern half of Canada, south through much of the U.S. to Guatemala and Cuba. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant, rare and local summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: marshy areas and wet prairies with dense herbaceous cover, especially cattails. Nest: Platform of sticks, grass, and sedge, on ground or over water/mud in tall vegetation. Eggs: 4—5, buff to olive brown, unmarked. Incubation: 24—28 days. Fledging: not specifically known. The American Bittern is a secretive and solitary species; even when known to be present in a wetland it is very difficult to detect. It breeds in freshwater wetlands in North America, generally in the northern half of the U.S. and the southern half of Canada. It prefers wetlands with tall emergent wetland vegetation with an abundance of vegeta- tion-to-water edge (Gibbs et al. 1992b). The American Bittern forages for insects, amphibians, crayfish, and small fish by remaining motionless. When observed in roadside ditches or along the edges of lakes, it looks out of place when it assumes its cryptic, reedlike pose in such open American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosus situations. During the breeding season, males call with a loud, booming sound. The American Bittern population has seriously declined due to loss of wetland habitat. Manage- ment needs include preservation of large (> 25 acres) shallow wetlands with dense emergent vegetation (Herkert 1992: Gibbs et al. 1992b). Illinois History The American Bittern was once considered a common nesting species in the wet prairies and marshes of Illinois; it occurred most frequently in the northern counties (Nelson 1876; Cory 1909; Ford 1956). With the loss and degradation of its critical breeding and feeding habitats during the 1900s, the population had been nearly extirpated from the state. Because of its tenuous status as a breeding species and the loss and degradation of its required habitat, the American Bittern is listed as an endangered species in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends This species is a rare habitat specialist with a low relative abundance and 1s not adequately sampled by the BBS. BBS data are not adequate to estimate a trend for Illinois. In the upper Midwest, BBS data indicate a decline in the popula- tion for the period 1966-2000 of —5.8% per year (significant, P <0.01) as well as for both subinterval time periods [-4.3% per year (P = 0.02) for 1966-1979 and -5.8% per year (P < 0.01) for 1980-2000]. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution The American Bittern was a scarce and/or difficult species to find; there were priority block records in only five counties. Although potential nesting may occur in suitable habitat anywhere in the state, the species most likely occurs with greatest frequency in the northern counties. The paucity of atlas observations should not be construed to mean that the species is not present at those sites where suitable habitat exists. Currently, one of the most consistent Illinois nesting sites is the Prairie Ridge State Natural Area in Jasper County, which was not sampled during the atlas project. Frequency The American Bittern was reported from six (0.6%) priority blocks and six nonpriority blocks. Although a known breeder in Illinois, it was not Confirmed in any block during the atlas project. However, the sites where this species was reported as Probable or Possible should be considered potential breeding sites. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled — Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Probable l 0.1 16.7 2 0.2 Possible > 0.5 83.3 10 0.8 Totals 6 0.6 100.0 12 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ & | Probable Possible ie O Breeding Bird Survey Trends = Upper Midwest Lt rs; oly | O p—_@ e = . Te ae 0.5+ ie BS . Vie \ Gorn eae . I fe A Ars 0 + n } i i A ' 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year American Bittern qm Least Bittern Ixobrychus exilis Todd Fink / Daybreak Imagery Code: LEBI Rangewide Distribution: eastern half of the U.S. and a disjunct breeding population in Oregon and California, south through Central America and the West Indies. BHO) Abundance: uncommon migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: threatened. Breeding Habitat: shallow freshwater lakes and marshes with tall and dense emergent vegetation, especially cattails. Nest: a platform of sticks and emergent vegetation, in dense vegetation over water. Eggs: 4—5, bluish to greenish white, unmarked. Incubation: 19-20 days. Fledging: about 25 days. The smallest member of the heron family, the Least Bittern is a secretive and solitary stalker associated with marshes having tall, dense emergent vegetation. Few species are more adept at avoiding detection. These birds spend the majority of their time climbing through and around dense vegetation over water as they stalk small fish, insects, amphibians, and reptiles. During the breeding season, males produce a dovelike cooing to advertise their presence (Gibbs et al. 74 1992a) and a low barking sound, often at night. In some marshes the Least Bittern occurs in loose colonies. It appears to be sensitive to habitat changes and a colony may abandon a wetland and move to areas with more favorable habitat, often on an annual basis (Gibbs et al. 1992a; Graber et al. 1978). In North America the breeding range of the Least Bittern is generally in the eastern half of the U.S. south to Central America. Loss and degradation of shallow water wetlands habitat has been the greatest threat for this species (Gibbs et al. 1992a). Management considerations for the Least Bittern include preservation and protection of rela- tively large shallow wetlands interspersed with patches of emergent vegetation (Hands et al. 1989; Herkert 1992). Illinois History The Least Bittern was once a common to very common breeding species in freshwater lakes and marshes throughout the state (Kennicott 1855; Nelson 1876; Ridgway 1895). Like the populations of most wetland-dependent species, the Least Bittern population plummeted during the 1900s because of the loss and deterioration of wetland habitats. Now only rarely encountered, the Least Bittern was declared an endangered species in 1989; its status was changed to threatened in 1999. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Because the Least Bittern is rare and secretive, it is not adequately sampled by the BBS. Data were not adequate in Illinois to estimate trends. In the upper Midwest, the trend estimate 1s -4.9% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.36) for 1966-2000; however, sample size and relative abundance are low. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 3. Distribution Atlas data indicate that the Least Bittern has a spotty distribution as a breeding species in Illinois. At present it is most regularly encountered in wetlands in northeastern Illinois, the [Illinois River valley, Kidd Lake Marsh (Monroe County), and Mermet Lake Conservation Area (Massac County). Frequency The Least Bittern was reported from 19 (1.9%) priority blocks and 16 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 4 (0.4%) of the priority blocks. Sites with Probable and Possible records and areas with extensive cattail marshes should be considered potential breeding sites. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks* AI Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 4 0.4 Mtl 8 0.6 Probable 6 0.6 31.6 9 0.7 Possible 9 0.9 47.4 18 1.4 Totals 19 1.9 100.0 BS eit * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ & Probable ey Possible fa O Least Bittern iis. Great Blue Heron WVieel-F-Wal-gele Et Eric Walters Code: GBHE Rangewide Distribution: southern half of Canada, south through all of the U.S. to the northern coast of South America and the West Indies. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident, fairly common winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: tree-covered islands in lakes and rivers and undisturbed bottomland forests or large woodlots near bodies of water. Nest: a bulky stick platform lined with twigs and leaves, in the tallest (usually deciduous) tree, almost always in a colony. Eggs: 3-5, light bluish green, unmarked. Incubation: 28 days. Fledging: from 56 to 60 days. The Great Blue Heron, referred to as the blue crane by some, is one of the largest and most widespread wading birds in North America. The breeding range in North America includes the southern half of Canada, most of the U.S., and parts of Mexico. Great Blues are colonial nesters. Colonies, which range in size from a few nests to several hundred, are typically situated high in tall trees of riparian corridors, swamps, or on islands, and are conspicuous enough to be readily detected by aerial surveys. They also occur in forest habitats a considerable distance from water. The sites are selected based on the types and height of nest trees available, with sycamore and cottonwood being favored, and the 76 availability of dependable and undisturbed feeding sites. They forage by wading for fish, amphibians, reptiles, and invertebrates. Illinois History The Great Blue Heron has been a common and widespread breeding species in IIlinois since the earliest accounts (Ridgway 1895; Cory 1909; Bohlen 1989). Graber et al. (1978) suggested a population decline in the 1960s and early 1970s because, of the 90 colonies once reported in Illinois, only 34 had been active since 1973 and 10 of these were deserted by 1977. Data acquired since 1983, when the annual colonial waterbird survey for Illinois was initiated, indicate that the population has recovered and is at a relatively high level. In 2000 there were approximately 12,000 nesting pairs in 117 colonies (Kleen 2001a). Known locations of Great Blue Heron colonies in 2000 are shown in Appendix K. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Since the Great Blue Heron is both widespread and common, it is one of the few colonial species with sufficient BBS data to calculate reasonably reliable trend estimates. In Illinois the BBS trend estimate indicates an annual increase in popula- tion of 13.5% (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. For the two subinterval periods, the state population declined at an annual rate of —20.8% (significant, P = 0.01) during 1966-1979 but recovered during 1980-2000 at an annual rate of 11.1% (significant, P < 0.01). Perhaps this is a result of a recovery from the effects of DDT in the environment in the 1950s through the 1970s (Blus et ai. 1980; Anderson and Hickey 1972). The population in the upper Midwest has increased at an annual rate of 4.2% (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project, Great Blue Herons were reported throughout the state, with priority block records in three- fourths of the counties. Although most colonies are generally associated with major rivers, Great Blue Herons are found in every county in the breeding season because they forage over a wide area. Frequency Great Blue Herons were reported from 221 (22.1%) priority blocks and 50 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 10 (1.0%) of the priority blocks, or less than 5% of the blocks in which they were reported. Since Great Blue Herons forage several miles from their nesting colonies, they were often seen in priority blocks where actual nesting did not occur. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 10 1.0 4.5 26 Probable l 0.1 0.5 l Possible 210 21.0 95.0 244 2.0 0.1 19.0 Totals 221 P| 100.0 271 4 | * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species pg GC Confirmed e Probable 4 ) Possible a O Priority Nonpriority Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 107 ei 6+ a {o} 1S) 44 2 a 0 + + + + + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 107 T Sc Ze 53 | ° Oo 4+ 2 ee 0+ t t + 4 1966 Year 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Great Blue Heron id Great Egret Veo [-¥- 1) oF) Joe Milosevich Code: GREG Rangewide Distribution: worldwide; scattered populations from the U.S. south to southern Chile. 115 Bi [e) Abundance: common to fairly common migrant and summer resident along the major rivers, less common and post-breeding wanderer elsewhere. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: floodplain forests and swamps. Nest: a frail platform of sticks and twigs sometimes lined with fine materials. Always in a colony, most often with Great Blue Herons. Eggs: 3, pale blue or greenish blue, unmarked. Incubation: 23—26 days. Fledging: from 42 to 49 days. The Great Egret is a beautiful all-white heron with a global distribution. In North America it breeds primarily in the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific coast states, the central U.S., and along the coasts of Mexico and Central America. The population was decimated in the late 1800s and early 1900s by plume hunters but recovered when protection laws were enacted in the early 1900s. It normally returns to the same nesting site year after year and nests in colonies with other species, especially Great Blue Herons as well as Black- crowned Night-Herons, Snowy Egrets, Little Blue Herons, and Cattle Egrets. Great Egrets usually nest near the tops of tall trees. In its breeding range, colonies are found in floodplain forests and swamps, near lakes, and on islands. Great Egrets feed in marshes, streams, rivers, lakes, ponds, 78 and ditches, especially on fish but also invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, and birds. Illinois History The Great Egret was considered abundant in the 1800s (Barnes 1926) with nesting reported as far north as Kankakee. Plume hunters decimated the population in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Great Egrets reappeared in Illinois in the late 1920s and became re-established as a breeding species by the late 1930s. The population expanded through the 1960s. A major population decline occurred during the mid-1970s (Graber et al. 1978). The species may now be nesting in record numbers compared to the popula- tions in the 1800s (Kleen 2001a). In 2000, there were approximately 2,275 nesting pairs in 21 active colonies in Illinois (Kleen 2001a). Locations of known colonies of Great Egrets in 2000 are shown in Appendix K. The Great Egret was listed as an endangered species in 1977 but was delisted in 1999 because of its recent recovery. Breeding Bird Survey Trends For the period of 1966-2000 the trend estimates for the Great Egret population are 13.9% per year (significant, P = 0.03) in Illinois and 12.5% per year (significant, P < 0.01) in the upper Midwest. For the state and the region, negative trend estimates for 1966-1979 were followed by positive ones for 1980-2000, perhaps reflecting a recovery from the effects of DDT in the environment. BBS data is generally not adequate for determining reliable population trends for colonial species. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution Great Egrets were reported from several sites along the Illinois and Mississippi rivers and in northeastern Illinois during the atlas project, Nesting colonies were usually within a mile of the observation locations. Although not reported by the atlas project, large colonies existed in southern Illinois as well. Two of the larger colonies in northeastern Illinois occur on artificial islands in man-made lakes. Frequency Great Egrets were reported from 38 (3.8%) priority blocks and 23 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 2 (0.2%) of the priority blocks. Great Egrets, like other herons, often feed several miles from their nesting colonies and were often seen in priority blocks where actual nesting did not occur. Breeding Evidence ____ Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 2 0.2 ys] 6 0.5 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible 36 3.6 94.7 5 4.3 Totals 38 3.8 100.0 61 4.7 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed e Probable a Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Ze 2 5 i) O 1 0 + + + + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 3-7 } gh 5g 2 + Oo 1 + ee Q + ; + + + + A 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Great Egret 79 Joe Milosevich Code: SNEG Rangewide Distribution: scattered populations in much of the U.S. south through central South America. ABW) KS Abundance: a rare migrant and very local summer resident (in the Madison/St. Clair County area, where it is becoming more common); post-breeding wanderer. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: lowland thickets in company with other colonial herons. Nest: a frail, flimsy platform of small sticks lined with finer twigs or rushes. Eggs: 3-5, light bluish green, unmarked. Incubation: 20-24 days. Fledging: about 30 days. The Snowy Egret is known for its beautiful white breeding plumage. In North America it breeds along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the U.S., Mexico, and Central America, and at scattered wetlands inland. It is a colonial species that generally nests in multispecies colonies, and is found in Illinois as an associate member of a large colony that includes Little Blue Herons, Great Egrets, Cattle Egrets, and Black-crowned Night-Herons. Snowy Egrets in the Midwest breed in bottomland forests and swamps. They forage for fish, invertebrates, amphibians, and reptiles in marshes, streams, rivers, lakes, and ponds. Plume hunters decimated 80 Snowy Egret Egretta thula the population until laws were established in the early 1900s to protect this species. Snowy Egret populations recovered but widespread population declines in the late 1900s indicate that this species is still being impacted by environmental changes, such as loss and degradation of wetland habitat (Parsons and Master 2000). Illinois History Once very scarce, Snowy Egret numbers as a migrant and breeding species in Illinois, though still small, are currently increasing. The breeding population of Snowy Egrets in Illinois was probably never very large since the state is at the northern edge of its breeding range. Like other herons and egrets, this species was greatly reduced in numbers during the plume-trade era of the late 1800s and early 1900s and was soon extirpated from the state. Evidence of its return was first detected in the mid-1930s and it was reestablished as a nesting species at the end of the 1960s. Since the Snowy Egret’s nesting population is tenuous (low numbers of nesting pairs and confined primarily to a single nesting site), it is listed as an endangered species in Illinois. The number of nesting pairs had increased to nearly 50 in 2001 (Kleen 2002b); however, the species is still limited to a single nesting site. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois is at the northern edge of the Snowy Egret’s breeding range. It occurs in such low numbers that the data are not adequate to reliably estimate population trends for the state or the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = none. Distribution In recent years, the only known consistent nesting site for the Snowy Egret has been in or near the American Bottoms in St. Clair and Madison counties. However, sporadic nesting has probably occurred at least twice in the last 15 years in transient colonies along with other herons in western Alexander County. The range of the Snowy Egret has expanded in Illinois since the atlas project ended, and it is possible that it may become a regular nesting species at the Lake Calumet colony or other multispecies colonies. Frequency The only priority block with evidence of breeding for the Snowy Egret was in the Lake Calumet area in Cook County, where it was classified as a Probable breeder. It was also reported in one nonpriority block. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Probable l 0.1 100.0 l 0.1 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0.1 Totals 0.1 100.0 2 0.2 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed #& & Probable ig Possible Snowy Egret 81 Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: LBHE Rangewide Distribution: eastern U.S. to central South America. AHO) Abundance: uncommon migrant and local breeder (mostly in south); post-breeding wanderer. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: lowland thickets in company with other colonial species. Nest: a small, flimsy platform of small sticks and twigs sometimes lined with finer materials. Eggs: 3-5, light bluish green, unmarked. Incubation: 20—23 days. Fledging: from 42 to 49 days. The Little Blue Heron is widely distributed in the Americas. In North American it breeds primarily in the southeast U.S., along the coasts of Mexico, and on the Caribbean islands. It is a colonial nesting species and shares colony sites with other herons and egrets. Little Blue Herons forage in marshes, streams, rivers, lakes, ponds, and ditches, feeding on small fish, amphibians, and invertebrates. Illinois History The Little Blue Heron may have only recently initiated nesting in the state, since Illinois is at the northern edge of its Little Blue Heron Egretta caerulea breeding range. Although there are many early records of post-breeding wanderers [1.e., “not uncommon in late summer in southern Illinois” (Cory 1909)], there is a paucity of other historical information. Presently, loose migratory flocks of Little Blue Herons can be seen in southern Illinois in early May as they head north towards their upriver nesting site. Since the nesting population is limited primarily to a single location, albeit the site has increased to 750+ nesting pairs (Kleen 2002b), the Little Blue Heron is listed as an endangered species in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends This wetland species has a localized breeding distribution in the state and is not adequately sampled by the BBS. The trend estimates for 1966-2000 are 0.4% per year (nonsignifi- cant, P = 0.96) for Illinois and -1.9% per year (nonsignifi- cant, P = 0.71) for the upper Midwest. Sample sizes are small for both the state and the region. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 3. Distribution In Illinois Little Blue Herons nest in colonies with Great Egrets, Cattle Egrets, Snowy Egrets, and Black-crowned Night-Herons. In recent years, the only consistent nesting site for Little Blue Herons has been in or near the American Bottoms in St. Clair and Madison counties. The colony consists of at least five heron species and has changed locations at least five times since the late 1960s. It has been at its current site since the mid-1980s. Sporadic nesting of birds from a transient Missouri colony has occurred at least twice in the past 15 years in flooded woodlots in western Alexander County. From 1999 to 2001, two nesting pairs have also been present in southeastern Cook County (Kleen 2000a, 2001c, 2002b). It is possible that since the Little Blue Heron’s range is expanding, it may become a regular nesting species at other multispecies colonies in Illinois. Frequency Little Blue Herons were reported from seven priority blocks and no nonpriority blocks. All records were observations of the species in suitable nesting habitat (i.e., Possible breed- ing). During the atlas project, the Little Blue Heron nested in only one known colony in the state, but the site was not in a sampled atlas block. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks* AI Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible 7 0.7 100.0 7 0.5 Totals 7 0.7 100.0 7 0.5 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority __% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | Priority Nonpriority | Confirmed & @ _ Probable @ | Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest ) | | 1.54 € 214 r ne) a Ts bd 0.5+ A é Ta pa ar OQ + + 4 + + + + { 1966 =1971 1976 =198]1 1986 =199]1 1996 2000 : Year Little Blue Heron 83 Joe Milosevich Code: CAEG Rangewide Distribution: worldwide; southern Canada through much of the U.S., to southern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common to fairly common migrant and local breeder in isolated or multi-species colonies. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: undisturbed woodlots near pastures, fields, wetlands, and airfields; often associated with livestock. Nest: small, fragile platform of sticks and twigs, also reeds when easily available. Eggs: 3-5, light bluish white or bluish green, unmarked. Incubation: 22—26 days. Fledging: about 30 days. The range of the Cattle Egret has expanded from its origins in Africa to nearly worldwide. In North America, nesting was first reported in the 1950s and it is now widespread, and the population is still expanding; its primary breeding range includes the eastern and central U.S., Mexico, and Central America. Unlike other heron and egret species, it is associ- ated with drier, more open habitat, especially pastures. Cattle Egrets feed in flocks, mainly on insects stirred up by grazing cattle or plows and mowers. They nest in multi-species colonies. In North America colonies are found in woodlands, swamps, wooded islands, and coastal islands (Telfair 1994). Nests in Illinois are typically found in small woodlots or willow thickets and range from about 4 to 20 feet above ground. 84 Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis Illinois History The first Cattle Egret in Illinois was reported in southeastern Cook County in August of 1952. The species was next reported in Madison County in 1962 at what turned out to be the date and site for the first nesting record for the state. Since then, the number of Cattle Egrets nesting in that colony has increased dramatically with about 100 nesting pairs in 1983 and more than 1,000 in 2001 (Kleen 2002b). In Illinois this species continues to increase in numbers, especially in the spring when it may appear anywhere in the State. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for 1966-2000 in Illinois is 8.5% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.14). On a regional scale, the upper Midwest trend estimate for 1966—2000 is 7.9% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.05). The BBS does not adequately sample many colonial species and sample size is low for this localized breeding species in the state and region. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 3. Distribution Cattle Egrets were reported in atlas blocks near the Illinois River, northeastern IIlinois, and in the St. Clair/Madison County area—the feeding area of the only major colony in the state. Since the atlas project, four known attempts to establish new colonies have failed. In 1993 new sites in Union and Carroll counties, each containing several hundred nests, were destroyed by the Mississippi River flood. In 1996 new sites in Lawrence and Wabash counties containing 50 and 100 nests, respectively, successfully fledged young but were abandoned in subsequent years. Cattle Egrets were also part of the multi-species colony that appeared twice in western Alexander County in the 1980s and 1990s. Even though Cattle Egrets Have attempted nesting, with and without success, at various locations in the state, it appears that their expansion as a nesting species has been slow and the best chance of success is when they are part of large, multi-species colonies. Frequency Cattle Egrets were reported from 12 (1.2%) priority blocks and 4 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in | priority block (Fulton County) and 2 nonpriority blocks (Peoria and Will counties). Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 1 0.1 8.3 3 0.2 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible 11 tet 91.7 13 1.0 Totals 12 12 100.0 16 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed a Probable e ) Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Count 0 + + + + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest Count 0+ + + + + + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 ' Year Cattle Egret 85 Green Heron Butorides virescens Joe Milosevich Code: GRHE Rangewide Distribution: eastern half of the U.S.; Pacific states and southwestern U.S., south to northern South America and the Caribbean Islands. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: wooded margins of ponds, swamps, and other water. Nest: a frail, flimsy platform of intertwined sticks and twigs, in a small tree in or close to water. Eggs: 2-5, light green or bluish green, unmarked. Incubation: 21-25 days. Fledging: about 34-35 days. The small, stocky Green Heron is a common species in wetland thickets in much of North America where its breeding range includes the eastern half of the U.S., the west coast states, Mexico, and Central America. It is found near any body of water, but is especially associated with small, willow-lined ponds and second-growth trees near shallow water. It usually nests in isolation, though on occasion it does nest in colonies, usually with 20 or fewer nests, with other Green Herons or with other species. For nesting, Green Herons prefer dense or brushy thickets in or close to water. Nests are difficult to detect and the adults are secretive when 86 on or in the vicinity of their nests, thereby assuring a better chance for survival of their young. Green Herons feed day or night on fish, amphibians, and invertebrates in shallow waters of streams, ditches, lakes, ponds, and wetlands. Historical numbers and trends are not well known, although the extensive loss of wetland habitat has undoubtedly affected the population. Illinois History Green Herons were probably much more common a century ago, prior to the large-scale loss of wetlands, than they are now. At the end of the nineteenth century, a population decline may have occurred (Barnes 1890). Graber et al. (1978) estimated another 80% decline during the 49-year span between surveys conducted during 1907-1909 and 1956-1958. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Because Green Herons are secretive, solitary nesters and hard to detect, the BBS does not adequately sample this species. The available data indicate the trend for 1966-2000 for Illinois to be 1.5% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.22). In the upper Midwest the trend between 1966 and 2000 is estimated at —0.5% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.36). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Atlas data indicate that the Green Heron was widespread during the project. Breeding evidence was reported in priority blocks in 99 counties and it probably nests in all counties. Frequency The Green Heron was reported from 510 (51.1%) priority blocks and 127 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 77 (7.7%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observation of fledged young. Because Green Herons can be readily detected by visual observation as they fly overhead or by their unique squawk, they were reported from a fairly high number of blocks, although the confirmation rate (Confirmed in 15% of the 510 priority blocks in which they were reported) was relatively low. It is likely that Green Herons nested in the majority of blocks in which they were reported. Breeding Evidence “Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** “No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled a Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 77 dea 15.1 114 8.9 Probable —-143 14.3 28.0 185 14.4 Possible 290 29.1 56.9 338 26.3 Totals 510 mW 100.0 637 = 49.5 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) \ ea % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& e Probable o) Possible CJ O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Year + + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Illinois 2 Nee tS a1} oO 0.54 _+* eee ote et Wend 0 0 + + + t t + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest ihe 1.5+ S alt Oo osha Oa ee pays eng egy O+ —+ + 4 eA a Ei OC Green Heron ao) @ 87 SJ Flot Crelce)ial-vomitelaicual-igelal Nycticorax nycticorax Eric Walters Code: BCNH Rangewide Distribution: Eurasia, Africa, North America from the northern states south throughout most of the U.S., south through central South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and uncommon (very local) summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: highly variable; can be trees (no particular species) over water or some distance from water, or in marshy vegetation. Nest: in trees, a fragile platform of interwoven sticks and twigs; in marshes, twigs and stalks of marsh grasses. Eggs: 3—5, light bluish to greenish blue, unmarked. Incubation: 24—26 days. Fledging: from 42 to 49 days. The Black-crowned Night-Heron is found nearly worldwide. This species 1s widespread and generally common in its range in North America, which is generally most of the U.S. (except the Appalachian and northern Rocky mountain regions), south-central Canada, and the coasts of Mexico. It inhabits wetlands and open water, such as ponds and lakes, even near urban areas. It is dependent on isolated and protected locations in or near a high-quality and dependable food source. Black-crowned Night-Herons are mostly active from dusk to dawn, foraging in shallow water for a variety of foods (insects and other invertebrates, amphibians, and fish). They nest in colonies that may or may not include other species of herons and egrets; both types occur in Illinois. They nest in dense vegetation near or over water. Nests are 88 usually screened by living vegetation (Burger 1978) and, unlike those of the larger herons, cannot be detected from the air. It is very difficult to determine and compare the annual size and success of the colonies without disturbing them. Illinois History During the nineteenth century, Black-crowned Night-Herons were a common summer resident in wetlands throughout the state (Nelson 1876; Cory 1909). A serious population decline was first reported near the turn of the century (Widmann 1907) and the species experienced even further declines during the first half of the twentieth century (Graber et al. 1978). The declines were attributed to the ongoing destruc- tion and degradation of breeding and foraging sites, increas- ing human disturbance, and the use of persistent chemicals (e.g., DDT). Since the breeding population was and contin- ues to be extremely vulnerable, the Black-crowned Night- Heron is listed as an endangered species in Illinois. In 2001, about 840 nesting pairs nested in 6 colonies (Kleen 2002b). Known locations of Black-crowned Night-Heron colonies in 2000 are shown in Appendix K. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Sample size and relative abundance are low for this secretive and very localized species. The trend estimates are 12.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.20) for Illinois and 2.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.25) for the upper Midwest for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution Black-crowned Night-Herons were found in northeastern Illinois, along the Illinois and Mississippi rivers and at East St. Louis during the atlas project. Based on data from 2001, the most notable colonies occur in northern St. Clair County (about 450 pair), Will County (Lake Renwick, about 39 pair), Cook County (Lake Calumet, about 300 pair), and Lake County (Johns Manville site, 46 pair) (Kleen 2002b). Until recently, Black-crowned Night-Herons occurred in decent numbers at Baker’s Lake (Cook County) and at two Illinois River sites south of Peoria. Frequency The Black-crowned Night-Heron was reported from 33 (3.3%) priority blocks and 38 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 3 (0.3%) of the priority blocks, and regularly observed in blocks adjacent to the breeding colonies. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * _All Blocks ** % Blocks No. % Sampled No. % Sampled : Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 3 0.3 9.1 11 0.9 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible 30 3.0 90.9 60 4.7 Totals 33 33 100.0 ia! 55 + 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) Che % of priority blocks with records for this species % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & ® | Probable ® ' Possible O O Black-crowned Night-Heron 89 Yellow-crowned Night-Heron Nyctanassa violacea Eric Walters Code: YCNH Rangewide Distribution: eastern U.S., south along coasts of Mexico and northern South America, and the Caribbean Islands. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant and rare, localized summer resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: marshes and swamps. Nest: substantial platform of sticks and twigs sometimes lined with rootlets, in trees. Eggs: 4—5, light bluish green, unmarked. Incubation: 21—25 days. Fledging: not specifically known. The Yellow-crowned Night-Heron is found in forested wetlands and swamps, especially in coastal areas. It breeds primarily in the southeast, south-central, and Atlantic coastal areas of the U.S., and along the coasts of Mexico and Central America. Although it can be observed in suitable habitat during daylight hours, it is more likely to be encountered from dusk to dawn. This species is more secretive and less gregarious than Black-crowned Night-Herons. The Yellow- crowned and Black-crowned Night-Herons rarely feed together because they have distinctly different diets: the Yellow-crowned feeds primarily on crayfish and frogs while the Black-crowned feeds mainly on fish. 90 Illinois History In the late 1800s and early 1900s the Yellow-crowned Night- Heron was considered a summer resident in suitable locali- ties in the southern third of the state (Ridgway 1895); however, it is not certain whether actual breeding took place (Cory 1909). It is still a scarce nesting species. Nesting birds are known to associate with colonies of other heron species; however, in Illinois they tend to nest as isolated pairs or in small colonies with other Yellow-crowned Night-Herons. Since the population is relatively small and dependent on threatened habitats for nesting and foraging, the Yellow- crowned Night-Heron is currently listed as an endangered species in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Because this wetland species is hard to detect and sample sizes and relative abundances are low for the state and the region, BBS data are not adequate for reliably estimating trends. Population trends for 1966—2000 for both Illinois and the upper Midwest are estimated at —3.7% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.32 for both). Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 3. Distribution In Illinois Yellow-crowned Night-Herons are most common in the cypress and tupelo swamps, old oxbows of the Mississippi and Ohio rivers, and backwaters of the Cache and Big Muddy rivers. During the atlas project, Yellow- crowned Night-Herons were reported at isolated sites in the northeast, along the Illinois and Mississippi rivers, and in the southern swamps. This species is known to occur in more locations than reported in the atlas project, especially in southern Illinois. Yellow-crowned Night-Herons also occur irregularly up the Mississippi and Illinois River systems and regularly as far north as Lake County. A few pairs nest in and around Lake Calumet in Cook County every year. Frequency Yellow-crowned Night-Herons were reported from 18 (1.8%) priority blocks and 10 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 5 (0.5%) of the priority blocks. Because of the difficulty in finding nests, it is possible that nesting occurred in a number of other blocks where the species was reported, as well as in suitable habitats where it was not recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 5 0.5 27.8 7 0.5 Probable 2 0.2 11.1 if 0.2 Possible 1] 1.1 61.1 19 Totals 18 1.8 100.0 28 * 998 priority blocks ** | _286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ 8 Probable a a) Possible re O Yellow-crowned Night-Heron 9] Black Vulture Coragyps atratus oS m7 ame Todd Fink / Daybreak Imagery {OTs (8 3 AYA GI Rangewide Distribution: southeastern U.S. (south of a line from New York to western Texas) to southern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon permanent resident in the southern three tiers of counties. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: agricultural areas, other open and semi-open areas and swamps; most often found in association with hills and bluffs. Nest: on the bare ground in sheltered crevices and caves along cliff lines, hollow logs in forests, or the floor of overgrown, abandoned buildings. Eggs: 2, grayish green to bluish white, often marked with brown or lavender. Incubation: 37—48 days. Fledging: from 80 to 94 days. Black Vultures are a familiar sight in the southern and eastern U.S. and their range has generally been expanding since the 1940s. Their breeding range currently includes the southeastern U.S. to southern South America. Of the two vulture species found in Illinois, Black Vultures are more gregarious, tend to feed earlier in the day and on larger carrion closer to roost sites, and remain longer while feeding than Turkey Vultures (Coleman and Fraser 1987). The two species coexist at both their summer and winter roosting sites, which include forests, high-tension towers, and roofs of abandoned buildings. Although most often seen individually or in small groups, groups of up to 100 birds are known to occur. They forage for carcasses in open habitats and usually roost and breed in dense woods. They feed almost exclu- sively on carrion, especially large mammals. Black Vultures lay their eggs on the ground in shallow caves, in hollow trees, or in abandoned buildings. Nest sites may be used for many years if not disturbed. Illinois History In the late 1800s and early 1900s the Black Vulture was described as an uncommon bird (Ridgway 1889) and “not uncommon” in southern Illinois (Cory 1909). There is little historical information for this species in Illinois other than these accounts. It was not encountered during surveys of 1907-1909 and only rarely during surveys of 1956-1958 (Graber and Graber 1963). It is possible that the current breeding population in the state is larger now than it was a hundred years ago. Black Vultures are year-round residents in southern Illinois. The theory that the population is larger in summer than in winter and that some birds come to Illinois only in the summer months has not been substanti- ated. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Since Illinois is at the northern edge of the Black Vulture’s breeding range, sample sizes and relative abundances are small for both Illinois and the upper Midwest. For 1966— 2000 the trend is estimated at —-15.5% per year (nonsignifi- cant, P = 0.74) in Illinois. The trend estimate for 1966—2000 is 5.2% per year (significant, P = 0.03) in the upper Midwest. In the southeastern states, where the center of the Black Vulture range in the U.S. occurs, the population trend estimate is 2.1% annually (nonsignificant, P = 0.05) for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 3. Distribution The Black Vulture’s range in Illinois consists of the three southernmost tiers of counties. These vultures are not common and are localized even in the areas where they are found. They occur primarily in agricultural and other open habitats associated with the hills and bluffs of the region. Frequency There were no records of breeding evidence for the Black Vulture, but there were 14 (1.4%) priority blocks with Observed records. Most observations during the atlas project were of soaring birds. Because this species has a very large feeding range, the atlas data is of limited value in providing a reliable record of specific breeding locations. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 0 0.0 0 0.0 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& 8 Probable Possible CT O Black Vulture a4 Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: TUVU Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada, south through much of the U.S., to southern South America. 115 File) he PeWalibicie-li(ecemeeysevenceyeuseertca wcvelar-lececs (evercti hyereyenveeteye summer resident, decreasing northward; occasional winter resident in south. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: agricultural and other open areas near bottomland hardwood forests and thickets. Nest: on the ground in dark recesses (caves, rocks, and brush piles), hollow logs and, occasionally, overgrown abandoned buildings. Eggs: 2, white, occasionally marked with brown. Incubation: 38—41 days. Fledging: from 66 to 88 days. The Turkey Vulture is the most widely distributed of the New World vultures. It breeds from southern Canada to southern South America. In eastern North America Turkey Vultures, or buzzards, are commonly seen soaring over open or semi-open areas, especially farmland and pastures which it uses for foraging, and near forests, bluffs, and ravines which are used for roosting and nesting. The species was named for its bare, red head, which resembles that of a Wild Turkey. Turkey Vultures are easily recognized by their dark appearance, unique soaring or tilting, and wing position in flight (a shallow “V”’). This species is almost exclusively a scavenger that feeds on carrion. Turkey Vultures are gener- ally solitary foragers but can roost in large groups. They roost and nest in forests. Nests are placed on the ground in 94 Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura dark cavities, such as under boulders, in hollow trees, and in abandoned buildings. Turkey Vultures can be distinguished from Black Vultures by their tendency to feed on smaller carcasses and in smaller groups (Coleman and Fraser 1987). Illinois History During the late 1800s, the Turkey Vulture was a very abundant bird in the southern half of the state but in extreme northern Illinois “it appears to be more or less rare” (Ridgway 1889). During 1907—1909 censuses, Turkey Vultures were very common in southern Illinois, fairly common in central Illinois, and virtually absent in northern Illinois. By the time the Grabers conducted their 1956-1958 censuses, the southern population had declined considerably, the central population had increased moderately, and a northern population was still nonexistent (Graber and Graber 1963). Within the last 50 years, a moderate population of Turkey Vultures has taken up summer residency in the northern portion of the state and even expanded northward into other Great Lakes states (Robbins et al. 1986). Although they are present in IIlinois primarily from February through November, a few remain through the colder months during milder winters, especially in east-central and southern Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The population trend is estimated to be 25.7% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.07) in Ilinois from 1966 to 2000 with a significant positive trend estimate for 1980-2000 (26.3%, P = (0.03). For the upper Midwest the trend estimates are 7.4% per year (significant, P = 0.01) for 1966—2000 and 7.5% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for 1980-2000. The causes for the increase in population are poorly understood. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project, the Turkey Vulture was reported with breeding evidence in priority blocks in 17 counties scattered throughout the state. Its breeding distribution may be limited to the availability of suitable, undisturbed nesting sites. Observed records (i.e., seen but without evidence of breeding) were reported in priority blocks in 97 of the state’s 102 counties. Frequency Evidence of breeding for the Turkey Vulture was reported from 29 (2.8%) priority blocks and Confirmed as breeding in 25 of those blocks. It was also reported from 3 nonpriority blocks. A large number of observations of soaring birds (514 priority blocks with Observed records) are not considered to be evidence of breeding because they could not be directly associated with a particular nesting site or priority block. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks Blocks with records No. % Sampled blocks Confirmed 25 2.5 86.2 28 oe Probable 4 0.4 13.8 4 0.3 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 29 2.9 100.0 22 fi * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed r Probable Possible [] Oo Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 + 1966 =1971 1976 =-:1981 Year + + 1986 1991 + 4 1996 2000 Upper Midwest 0 4 + t — —-+— 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 Year + 199] + 1996 2000 Turkey Vulture 95 Pandion haliaetus a LOT: (ONY dt Rangewide Distribution: cosmopolitan, including Alaska to eastern Canada, south to Chile and the West Indies. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant, occasional summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: along the edges of rivers and lakes. Nest: platform of sticks, trash, and other items, in dead tree, artificial tower, or transmission tower. Eggs: 2-4, whitish or cream-colored to cinnamon, marked with brown or olive. Incubation: 32—43 days. Fledging: from 48 to 59 days. The Osprey, sometimes referred to as the Fish Hawk, is unlike most raptors in its close association with lakes, ponds, and rivers and almost exclusive diet of live fish. Except as a passing migrant flying overhead, this species is seldom observed far from open water. It captures fish by plunging and almost disappearing into the water. Ospreys nest at the tops of trees or cliffs, and increasingly on artificial structures near water. Use of the pesticide DDT caused dramatic worldwide population declines during the 1950s—1970s, but the population rebounded following a ban on DDT in the U.S. in 1972 (Poole et al. 2002). The primary breeding range in North America for the Osprey is centered in southern Canada but they can be found breeding across Canada from 96 Robert Randall Alaska to the Atlantic Ocean, in the Pacific Northwest, along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, and at scattered locations inland. Illinois History During the 1800s, the Osprey was described as an uncom- mon and widespread summer resident along the major river valleys and in the northeastern wetlands (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909); only a few actual nestings were reported. Breeding Ospreys gradually disappeared in the first half of the 1900s, with the last known nesting in the state at Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge in Williamson County in 1952 (Bennett 1957). Ospreys continued passing through Illinois as migrants during these years, occasionally lingering a few days at favorable locales. As a result of the population decline, the Osprey is listed as an endangered species in Illinois. After being present for several years as nonbreeding summer residents, Ospreys recently became reestablished as a successful breeding species in Illinois. The first known nesting attempts were in southern Cook County in 1996 and 1997, but they were not successful until 1998 (Thayer 1999); this nest has continued to be successful through 2001 (Kleen 2000a, 2001c, 2002a). In 2001 another pair successfully nested in Massac County, possibly the result of an expansion from a more southern population (Kleen 2002a). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Most raptors are inadequately sampled by the BBS. There is no BBS trend estimate for the Osprey population in Illinois. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest population is 29.3% per year (significant, P = 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL,= none and UM = 3. Distribution Ospreys were reported in priority blocks in 2 counties during the atlas project. Other known occurrences in the state during this time period were not documented by the atlas project. The presence of successful nests in 2001 at both ends of the state indicates that Osprey may be returning as a breeding species to Illinois. Frequency The Osprey was reported from two (0.2%) priority blocks (one southeast of Rockford and the other along the Missis- sippi River north of Quincy) and three nonpriority blocks (all in southern Will County). Breeding was not Confirmed in any block during the Atlas period. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Probable l O21 50.0 1 0.1 Possible 0.1 50.0 4 0.3 Totals 2 0.2 100.0 5 0.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & @ Probable ee Possible O O Ictinia mississippiensis Cathie Hutcheson Code: MIKI Rangewide Distribution: southeastern and south-central U.S., winters in northern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon and local summer resident in southern Illinois. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: forested waterways adjacent to open lands; occasionally parks and towns. Nest: platform of coarse sticks and twigs lined with green leaves and moss, in tree. Eggs: 1—2, whitish to bluish white, unmarked or faintly spotted, often nest-stained. Incubation: 31-32 days. Fledging: about 34 days. Mississippi Kites are graceful diurnal raptors that glide, swoop, and turn in their effortless aerial search for large flying insects. Mississippi Kites breed mainly in the south- east and south-central regions of the U.S. In the eastern U.S., Mississippi Kites nest in the canopies of mature, riparian forests adjacent to expansive open areas where an abundance of large insects, especially dragonflies, can be found (Parker 1999), generally near streams, ditches, or narrow roads. Breeding populations declined in the East following Euro- American settlement but began a gradual recovery by the mid-1900s; populations in the Great Plains have remained stable or increased in the same period (Parker 1999). 98 Illinois History During the mid-to-late 1800s, the Mississippi Kite was reported as “not an uncommon bird in some localities of the southern portion of the state” (Ridgway 1889). For unknown reasons, the population in the state disappeared in the early 1900s. It was not reported during the Gross and Ray surveys of 1907-1909 nor the Grabers surveys of 1956-1958 (Graber and Graber 1963). In 1966 a single bird was reported in northern Alexander County (George 1968). The next report was of 14 birds at the Union County Conservation Area in May of 1970 (Kleen et al., pers. obs.). By 1972 the species was once again nesting and was encountered with increasing frequency at isolated locations within sight of the Mississippi River as far north as Randolph County. Because of its history, limited distribution, and small population size, the Mississippi Kite is listed as an endangered species in Illinois. Although increasing, the population is still limited in the state. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois is at the northern edge of the Mississippi Kite’s breeding range and BBS data are not adequate for estimating population trends for the state or the upper Midwest region. In the southeastern U.S. where this species is more common, the trend estimate is 4.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.14) for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL= none and UM = none. Distribution The Mississippi Kite occurred irregularly along the Missis- sippi River as far north as Adams County during the atlas project. However, it does occur in more than the six counties in which it was found during the atlas project. Since its reestablishment in Illinois in the early 1970s, the Mississippi Kite has spread, most often as pairs, up the Mississippi River to Adams County, up the Ohio River as far east as Pope County, and short distances up the Cache, Big Muddy, and Kaskaskia rivers. Although not yet known to be breeding outside these limits, the species is venturing farther north- ward and could be expected to breed at any of these or other locations in the future. Frequency The Mississippi Kite was reported from nine (0.9%) priority blocks; it was not found in any nonpriority block. This species was Confirmed as breeding in three priority blocks, two in Union County and one in Adams County. Nesting probably occurred in other atlas blocks as well. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 3 0.3 33.3 3 0.2 Probable 4 0.4 44.4 4 0.3 Possible 2 0.2 D2 2 C2 Totals 9 0.9 100.0 9 0.7 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed #& 8 Probable es ® Possible O Mississippi Kite 99 sy: \Co Mt =x-[e [= Haliaeetus leucocephalus Dennis Oehmke Code: BAEG Rangewide Distribution: Alaska and northern Canada, scattered through much of the U.S. 11H Bile) Abundance: fairly common migrant and winter resident along major rivers and lakes; rare (but increasing) summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: threatened. Breeding Habitat: isolated and undisturbed areas usually near large rivers and lakes. Nest: massive platform of large sticks and vegetation, lined with finer materials, in large tree; used repeatedly for many years. Eggs: 1-3 (2 normal), bluish white, often nest-stained. Incubation: 34—36 days. Fledging: from 70 to 98 days. The Bald Eagle is a large bird of prey with up to a seven-foot wingspan. It breeds throughout much of Canada and parts of the U.S. from Alaska to Florida, inhabiting undisturbed areas near large rivers, lakes, and coastal areas. Eagles mate for life and build large nests in the tops of large trees near rivers, lakes, and marshes. Declines in the population began in the mid-to-late 1800s with the loss of nesting habitat and human persecution. From the 1950s through the 1970s, the future of our national bird looked grim as eagle numbers declined considerably during that time. Eagles exposed to a variety of pesticides, especially DDT, experienced decreased reproduc- tive success (Nisbet 1989; Wiemeyer et al. 1993). Bald Eagles were listed as a federally endangered species in 1973 in most of the lower 48 states. The enactment of the Bald Eagle Protection Act in 1940 and the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the banning of DDT in 1972, and other conser- vation measures have contributed to the recent recovery of 100 the Bald Eagle population. In 1995 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reclassified the Bald Eagle to threatened status in the lower 48 states. Illinois History Early accounts indicate that the Bald Eagle occurred along all of the major waterways in Illinois throughout the year (Ridgway 1889) and was a fairly common breeding species in the unsettled parts of the state (Cory 1909). Its population diminished during the early decades of the twentieth century, perhaps due to habitat loss and human persecution. The last known nest during that time was reported from Horseshoe Lake in Alexander County in 1943 (Bellrose 1944). In the 1970s eagles once again attempted nesting in Illinois, close to the Mississippi River at both ends of the state. The first known successful nest in recent times was in Alexander County in 1978, only a short distance from the last known nest. The number of nests increased gradually during the 1980s and accelerated in the 1990s. In 2001 more than half of 50+ nests in Illinois successfully fledged young (Campbell 2002). This success surpassed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s projected goal of 20 active nests in Illinois by the year 2000 (Grier et al. 1983). Because of increasing populations and successful nesting, the Bald Eagle was upgraded from endangered to threatened status in Illinois in ee, Breeding Bird Survey Trends In spite of a growing population in Illinois, there are insuffi- cient BBS data to reliably estimate trends for this species, as is expected for raptors, threatened or endangered species, and species with small populations. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest for 1966—2000 indicates that the population is increasing at a rate of 8.4% per year (significant, P = 0.03), though relative abundance is low. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 3. Distribution Bald Eagles were reported along the Mississippi River, Wabash River, and at two southern Illinois refuges during the atlas project. There were at least 15 known Bald Eagle nests during the atlas project period (not all were atlas records) and since then the number has grown to more than 50 nests (Campbell 2002). Its present distribution in the state is now similar to that of a century ago, that is, along most of the major rivers and lakes and in the more unsettled parts of the state. Frequency The Bald Eagle was reported from six (0.6%) priority blocks and no nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in all six blocks in which it was reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 6 0.6 100.0 6 0.5 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 6 0.6 100.0 6 0.5 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ e Probable a © Possible LJ O | Bald Eagle 101] IN foyaday-jeaMmatclagi-e Circus cyaneus Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: NOHA Rangewide Distribution: Eurasia, Alaska and northern Canada, south through all the U.S and into northern NYellitswaeneou (ere ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant, uncommon winter resident, rare summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: prairies, wet meadows, and marshes; occasionally reclaimed strip mines. Nest: sticks and grass, on elevated ground in thick Wore: 18(0) 0B Eggs: normally five, bluish white, unmarked (occasionally spotted with browns). Incubation: 31—32 days. Fledging: from 30 to 35 days. A species of open country, upland grasslands, marshes, and wet meadows, the Northern Harrier breeds throughout North America and Eurasia. In North America it is widely but locally distributed as a breeding species in most of Canada and in the U.S. north of the southern tier of states. Previously known as the Marsh Hawk, the Northern Harrier is a long- winged, long-tailed hawk with a white rump. It is often observed flying low to the ground, swaying back and forth during its flights from field to field. Unlike most raptors, the male and female differ in color (the male has a pale gray plumage and the female is mostly brown). Northern Harriers nest on the ground in grassy areas and feed on a wide variety of ground-dwelling vertebrates (mammals, small birds, reptiles, and amphibians). The North American population 102 has declined in the twentieth century mostly due to loss of wetlands and grasslands (MacWhirter and Bildstein 1996). Illinois History Mid-to-late nineteenth century accounts indicate that the Northern Harrier had an extensive statewide distribution (Ridgway 1889) and was a common summer resident (Cory 1909). Fifty years later, in the Chicago region, it was reported as a “common resident; more numerous in the summer” (Ford 1956). As marshes and prairies disappeared, so did the Northern Harrier. When pesticides that caused the thinning of egg shells were in use during the 1950s to 1970s, harrier populations declined even further (Anderson and Hickey 1972). Since harriers prefer large grasslands with a variety of cover types, such as prairie grasses, brome, timothy, and fallow fields, potential nest habitat has become limited in Illinois (Herkert 1992). As a result of loss of large grasslands and marshes and a low population level, the Northern Harrier is listed as an endangered species in Illinois. Large grasslands created by programs such as the Conservation Reserve Program may provide important habitat for this species now and in the future. Breeding Bird Survey Trends This species, as with other raptors, is not adequately sampled by the BBS and in Illinois the sample size and relative abundance are low. Trend estimates are 3.4 (nonsignificant, P = ().70) and 1.0% per year, (nonsignificant, P = 0.35) in Illinois and the upper Midwest, respectively, for the period 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution The Northern Harrier had a small and widely scattered distribution throughout the state during the atlas project. It was reported in priority blocks in 28 counties. Two current and consistent nesting sites in Illinois occur in the Prairie Ridge State Natural Area in Jasper and Marion counties; these sites were not sampled during the atlas project. Frequency The Northern Harrier was reported in 45 (4.5%) priority blocks and 14 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 4 (0.4%) of the priority blocks (3 in Vermilion County and | in Knox County). Wandering and nonbreeding individuals can be found occasionally throughout the summer months; therefore, sight records alone are not evidence of breeding in the area. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks * No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 4 0.4 8.9 5 0.4 Probable 10 1.0 29.2 13 Possible Sil el 68.9 41 Totals 45 4.5 100.0 59 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) Le > = ~ : eee : % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & © _ Probable 7 @ | Possible CJ O Northern Harrier 103 Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus Eric Walters Code: SSHA Rangewide Distribution: most of North America below iiTomaUuers (om Ghtues (mm coluliumasruelrcasmielcmeleyuaaCourmer-lbmeymeyelelin America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant, uncommon winter resident, very rare summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous or coniferous woodlands with openings. Nest: broad, flat platform of sticks and twigs lined with finer materials, near trunk of tree. Eggs: 4-5, white to bluish white wreathed with brown marks. Incubation: 32-35 days. Fledging: from 24 to 27 days. In North American the breeding range of the Sharp-shinned Hawk, the smallest accipiter on the continent, includes most of Canada, the northeastern and western U.S., and central Mexico. It is an aggressive bird that feeds almost entirely on small birds and is often found in places where small birds congregate, like winter bird feeders. It can usually be distinguished from the larger Cooper’s Hawk by its squared- off tail. The Sharp-shinned Hawk breeds in deciduous, coniferous, and mixed deciduous-coniferous forests as well as open woodlands; it prefers to nest in forests with some conifers. Its stick nest is placed in the tree canopy. The nesting Sharp-shinned often goes undetected because it is secretive during the nesting season and quietly slips away 104 from its nest when intruders approach rather than actively defending it as the Cooper’s Hawk does. Historically the loss of large forest tracts has impacted its abundance and distribu- tion and population declines in the East in the 1950s to 1970s were probably due to the effects of DDT (Bildstein and Meyer 2000). Illinois History According to early accounts (Nelson 1876; Cory 1909), the Sharp-shinned Hawk was primarily a migrant through Illinois with perhaps a few summer residents and breeding pairs. The only recorded nests for Illinois during the first half of the twentieth century were in Cook County in 1901 (Ford 1956) and Winnebago County in 1947 (Bohlen 1989). The species continues to be a rare and sporadic breeder in Illinois. Nesting has been documented as far south as Alexander (S. Bailey, pers. comm.) and Pope counties (Graber and Graber 1981). Because of a precipitous popula- tion decline (thought to be due to DDT-DDE exposure) in the eastern United States during the 1950s through 1970s (Anderson and Hickey 1972), its intolerance to civilization, and its limited breeding occurrence in Illinois, the Sharp- shinned Hawk was afforded endangered species status in Illinois in 1989 (Herkert 1992). It was delisted in 1999 because of a significant national recovery and because Illinois is at the southern edge of its primary breeding range. During spring and fall migration, it is the most common of the three accipiter species that occur in the state. Breeding Bird Survey-Trends This species occurs marginally as a breeding species in Illinois and is not adequately sampled by the BBS; therefore, trend estimates are not available for the state. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest for 1966-2000 is 7.2% per year (significant, P < 0.01); relative abundance is low. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 3. Distribution Atlas data indicate that the Sharp-shinned Hawk was a rare but widely distributed species in Illinois during the summer months. Atlas data did not provide new information pertain- ing to the breeding status of this species. It is still encoun- tered more often in the northern counties, as it was a century ago, where it occasionally breeds in pine plantations. Frequency The Sharp-shinned Hawk was reported in nine (0.9%) priority blocks and nine nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in three (0.3%) of the priority blocks, one each in Vermilion, Stephenson, and Jo Daviess counties. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 3 0.3 2e ie 4 0.3 Probable l 0.1 11.1 2 0.2 Possible 5 0.5 Sa.6 12 0.9 Totals ) 0.9 100.0 18 1.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ @ Probable A Possible | Oo Sharp-shinned Hawk 105 Cooper’s Hawk yVored] 0)) (=) merele) o]=) 41] Dennis Oehmke Code: COHA Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada, south through all of the U.S. and Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant and winter resident, uncommon and increasing summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous and coniferous forests and open woodlands. Nest: flat, but deep, platform of sticks and twigs lined with chips or strips of bark, in a tree. Eggs: 4—5, bluish to greenish white, usually nest-stained with brownish spots. Incubation: 32—36 days. Fledging: from 27 to 34 days. This woodland raptor is broadly distributed in North America, with a breeding range that includes southern Canada, most of the U.S., and parts of Mexico. Also known as the chicken hawk, the Cooper’s Hawk feeds primarily on birds, although its diet also includes mammals and reptiles. Like the Sharp-shinned Hawk, the Cooper’s Hawk can be found in deciduous woods, coniferous woods, and open woodlands. Cooper’s Hawks usually select mature forests or woodlots for nesting but have recently adapted to urban and suburban areas. Their nests are placed in a main crotch or on a limb against the trunk of a large, mature, canopy tree. Habitat loss and the effects of pesticides such as DDT 106 contributed to the population decline in the eastern part of its range that began in the early 1900s and continued through the 1970s (Rosenfield and Bielefeldt 1993; Jackson et al. 1996). Loss of suitable habitat is still an important factor in current distribution and population trends (Jackson et al. 1996). Illinois History More than a century ago the Cooper’s Hawk was considered to be acommon summer resident of all wooded portions of the state (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). During the first half of the twentieth century, it was reported as fairly common (Ford 1956). It is not known if or how much the population declined during these earlier years, which would have included persecution for attacks on chickens. At the time that the Cooper’s Hawk was listed as an endangered species in Illinois in 1977, the breeding population was very low (Herkert 1992). During the 1980s and 1990s, the population rebounded, not yet to its former numbers, but sufficiently enough to be delisted in 1999. Cooper’s Hawks are now regularly found year-round at residential bird feeders. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The BBS does not adequately sample most raptor species. In Illinois the trend estimate is 0.3% per year (nonsignificant, P=0.91) for 1966-2000, but sample size and relative abundance are low. For the upper Midwest the estimated trend in population for Cooper’s Hawks is 9.7% per year (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 3. Distribution During the atlas project, the Cooper’s Hawk was recorded in priority blocks mainly in the northeast and far east-central parts of the state. Since the atlas project, it has returned to many of its former haunts and is once again a breeding species of statewide, but limited, distribution. Frequency The Cooper’s Hawk was reported from 45 (4.5%) priority blocks and 43 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 21 (2.1%) of the priority blocks, particularly in Vermilion and the northeastern counties. The most frequently used breeding evidence criteria for Confirmed records in priority blocks were fledged young (6 FL records), nest with young (5 NY records), and occupied nest (4 ON records). Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks* —_A\lll Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled . ¥, Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 21 py 46.7 41 Se Probable 7 0.7 15.6 15 Possible 7 ee 37.8 32 Totals 45 4.5 100.0 88 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed &@ @ Probable Ga Possible LC] O Cooper’s Hawk 107 aisle troy alelei(e(-\a-\em ats. Buteo lineatus Joe Milosevich Code: RSHA Rangewide Distribution: eastern U.S and California coast, south into Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant, winter resident and summer resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: threatened. Breeding Habitat: riparian forests and swamps. Nest: platform of sticks, twigs, bark strips, and leaves lined with finer materials, in crotch of a tree. Eggs: 2-4, white to bluish white with brown marks (often nest-stained). Incubation: 28 days. Fledging: from 39 to 45 days. Red-shouldered Hawks breed primarily in the eastern half of the U.S. and along the California coast. Although they can be observed almost any time of day, they are usually most active in midmorning when they are most often heard calling and seen soaring over their territories. Red-shouldered Hawks are most commonly found in bottomland forests or wooded swamps. The Red-shouldered Hawk is a species that often hunts from a perch and forages along streams and backwaters for crayfish, amphibians, reptiles, small mam- mals, and birds. Its stick nest is usually placed in a substan- 108 tial crotch next to the main trunk of a large tree well inside the forest. Once considered common in the eastern part of its range, the population of this woodland species has declined as bottomland forests have become fragmented and cleared (Bednarz and Dinsmore 1981; Jackson et al. 1996). Illinois History In the late nineteenth century, the Red-shouldered Hawk was considered to be the “most numerous of the large hawks in most portions of Illinois, especially timbered districts” (Ridgway 1889) and a common summer resident in Illinois (Cory 1909). During the first half of the twentieth century, it was a common summer resident in the Chicago area (Ford 1956). Since these accounts, the statewide population of Red-shouldered Hawks has plummeted because of modifica- tion and destruction of bottomland forests (Herkert 1992). Although a local stronghold remained in the swamps of southern Illinois, the Red-shouldered Hawk was listed as an endangered species in Illinois in 1977. During the 1980s and 1990s, it returned as a nesting species to parts of its former range and as a result its status was upgraded to threatened in Pepe ke) Breeding Bird Survey Trends This species is seen on few BBS routes and in low numbers in the state. For 1966-2000, trend estimates are —0.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.88) for Illinois and 0.0% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.99) for the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 3. Distribution The Red-shouldered Hawk was most frequently reported from priority blocks in southern Illinois during the atlas project. This hawk was also found in appropriate habitat (1.e., floodplain forests) at scattered sites throughout the state, and in wooded residential areas in northeastern Illinois. It was reported in priority blocks in 29 counties. Frequency The Red-shouldered Hawk was reported from 45 (4.5%) priority blocks and 18 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 14 (1.4%) of the priority blocks, primarily in southern and northern counties. The most frequently used evidence of breeding for Confirmed records in priority blocks was fledged young (7 FL records) or nest with young (5 NY records). Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 14 1.4 Sie 23 1.8 Probable 9 0.9 20.0 12 0.9 Possible 22 ag) 48.9 28 2D) Totals 45 4.5 100.0 63 4.9 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ e Probable a Possible Red-shouldered Hawk 109 Broad-winged Hawk = JUL (-YoWM 0) F-14140) (aby Joe Milosevich Code: BWHA Rangewide Distribution: central and southern Canada and eastern U.S., south to central South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and rare (local) summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: dense and contiguous deciduous or mixed deciduous-coniferous forests often near water. Nest: loose, relatively small platform of sticks, twigs and dead leaves lined with strips of bark and green leaves, in tree. Eggs: 2—3, white to bluish white, wreathed with brown marks. Incubation: 28—32 days. Fledging: about 35 days. This small buteo is a common breeder in the large forests in northeastern and north-central North America and is known to breed throughout the eastern half of the U.S. and much of southern Canada. The Broad-winged Hawk is known for its impressive migrations when flocks of up to several thousand birds congregate in air thermals. Nesting pairs are easiest to detect in early spring when performing aerial courtship flights above the treetops and emitting their drawn-out, high- pitched whistles. Nests are placed within the forest and can 110 be difficult to find. For nesting, Broad-winged Hawks prefer large, contiguous tracts of undisturbed, mature upland forest (deciduous or mixed deciduous-coniferous) with dense understory located close to small forest openings or edges, typically near ponds, streams, or other wet areas. They place their nests in the crotch of a main branch relatively high in a large tree. The Broad-winged Hawk diet includes small mammals, birds, frogs, and snakes. Illinois History During the late nineteenth century, the Broad-winged was a “more or less common summer resident in Illinois” (Cory 1909). In the first half of the twentieth century, it was a rare summer resident in the Chicago region (Ford 1956). Based on the lack of reports, including those from censuses of 1907-1909 and 1956-1958 (Graber and Graber 1963), it would appear that the breeding population of Broad-winged Hawks may have always been low in Illinois. Because of the loss and fragmentation of large, contiguous forests, these hawks have probably disappeared from many areas and are less common now than in the past. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Like most raptors, this species is not adequately sampled by the BBS. Too few individuals occur on BBS routes in Illinois to allow for a reliable trend estimate. For the upper Midwest the trend estimate is 0.00% per year (nonsignificant, P = 1.00) between 1966 and 2000. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, the Broad-winged Hawk was found statewide but not frequently. Since breeding evidence for Broad-winged Hawks is difficult to detect, it is possible that they are more common and widespread than atlas data indicate. Frequency The Broad-winged Hawk was reported from 51 (5.1%) priority blocks and 33 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 9 (0.9%) of the priority blocks. Because of their secretive and quiet nature during the nesting period, Broad-winged Hawks were probably overlooked and likely occurred more frequently than indicated by the atlas data. It is also possible that they nested in many blocks from which they were reported but not Confirmed. Breeding Evidence A Priority Blocks °¢ . All Blocks Er ee No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 9 0.9 17.6 19 ls Probable 7 0.7 le 14 iL Possible 35 She 68.6 51 4.0 Totals Sl Sul 100.0 84 6.5 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | | Priority Nonpriority | Confirmed & ® | Probable & | Possible Broad-winged Hawk 111 Swainson’s Hawk Buteo swainsoni Joe Milosevich Code: SWHA Rangewide Distribution: southwestern and south-central Canada and western U.S., south to southern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: rare migrant, very local summer resident in north. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: open to semi-open grasslands, agricultural areas with nearby trees. Nest: large platform of sticks, twigs, and grass often lined with bark, leaves, or other materials, in a tree. Eggs: 2-3, bluish or greenish white, sparsely marked with brown. Incubation: 34-35 days. Fledging: about 30 days. The Swainson’s Hawk is a common hawk in its breeding range, which is the prairie region of Canada, the western U.S, and northern Mexico. The distance they travel during migration is one of the farthest among North American raptors. Large flocks soar southward each fall through Central America to the pampas in southern South America. This species inhabits open and semi-open grasslands, prairies, and agricultural areas where it generally nests in isolated trees. Swainson’s Hawks feed on insects, mammals, birds, and reptiles. Human disturbance, the effects of Li2 pesticide usage on insect populations, and persecution in its wintering and breeding ranges are causes for concern for this species’ future. Illinois History During the latter part of the nineteenth century, there may have been a small, widely spread, disjunct population in the northern two-thirds of Illinois (Nelson 1876; Ridgway 1889; Hess 1910). There were no documented records until 1947 when a nest was reported in Winnebago County (Prentice 1949); three more nests were reported from there in 1958 (Bohlen 1989). In 1973, a small population that still exists today was discovered in northwestern Kane and southern McHenry counties; five nests were found that first year and two repeated in 1974 (Kier and Wilde 1976). Since then, the Illinois population has been restricted to that isolated area and each year (through 2001) a few birds have returned to nest. The Swainson’s Hawk is listed as an endangered species in Illinois because of its low population level and limited distribution. The population continues to be ex- tremely small and vulnerable with only one or two known nests annually (Herkert 1992). Breeding Bird Survey Trends With only a few pairs breeding in the state, no trend estimate is available for Illinois from BBS data. The trend estimate for 1966-2000 is 1.9% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.70) for the upper Midwest where the species is recorded on few routes and in low numbers. Credibility Index: IL,= none and UM = 3. Distribution Illinois is at the eastern edge of the breeding range of the Swainson’s Hawk. Its breeding distribution in the state is easy to describe: It has been limited for nearly 30 years to northwestern Kane County and southern McHenry County. The Illinois population is a disjunct population well east of its primary breeding range. Frequency The Swainson’s Hawk was reported in five contiguous priority blocks in Kane and McHenry counties, and Con- firmed as breeding in one of the Kane County blocks. It was also reported from one nonpriority block in Kane County, where it was Confirmed. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed | 0.1 20.0 2 Probable 2 0.2 40.0 2 Possible 2 0.2 40.0 2 Totals 5 0.5 100.0 6 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ Probable 2 Possible O ®@ Swainson’s Hawk 113 Joe Milosevich Code: RTHA Rangewide Distribution: all of North America from the Arctic Circle through Central America. 11 Bi (8) Abundance: common migrant, summer resident and winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: wide variety of habitats from wood- lands to open country with scattered trees. Nest: bulky platform of sticks and twigs lined with strips of bark and leaves, in a tree. Eggs: 2-3, white to bluish white, often spotted with brown. Incubation: 30-35 days. Fledging: about 45 days. The Red-tailed Hawk is a large hawk often seen conspicu- ously perched on fence posts and utility poles or sailing effortlessly overhead along highways. The rusty-red tail of the adult birds is a prominent identification feature. Red- tailed Hawks are common and widespread in North America where they breed throughout Canada, the U.S., and much of Mexico and Central America. Historically, populations have increased in range as forests were cleared for agriculture (Preston and Beane 1993). The Red-tailed nests in open areas with interspersed woodlands, isolated trees in the middle of 114 Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis fields, urban areas where prey is plentiful, and often in rural woodlots and forests where the nest is near the forest edge but can be well hidden. The Red-tailed Hawk tends to nest in smaller and less dense woodlands and closer to human dwellings than the Red-shouldered Hawk (Bednarz and Dinsmore 1982). Prey includes rabbits, squirrels, mice, birds, reptiles, and amphibians. Illinois History During the late nineteenth century, the Red-tailed Hawk was very common in most portions of Illinois, but not as common as the Red-shouldered Hawk (Ridgway 1889). Throughout the twentieth century the Red-tailed Hawk has continued to be a common species despite shooting and other human interference. Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS data indicate an increase in the Illinois Red-tailed Hawk population of 11.1% per year (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000, with a decline during the 1966-1979 period of ~9.1% per year (significant, P = 0.02), followed by an increase of 10.9% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the 1980-2000 period. For the upper Midwest the trend estimate for 1966-2000 is 5.0% per year (significant, P < 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Red-tailed Hawk was a common and widely distributed breeding species that was reported in priority blocks in every county during the atlas project. In addition to the breeding population, there are distinct wintering and migratory populations; the interrelationship of these populations is not yet understood. Frequency The Red-tailed Hawk was reported from 720 (72.1%) priority blocks and 133 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 179 (17.9%) of the priority blocks, with the most commonly used breeding evidence being fledged young (83 FL records) followed by occupied nest (31 ON records), nest with young (29 NY records), and adults feeding young (27 FY records). Since Red-tailed Hawks are a conspicuous species, they were most likely found if present. Even though these hawks have fairly large home ranges, it is likely that nesting occurred in the majority of atlas blocks in which they were reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled blocks Blocks — with records Confirmed 179 17.9 24.9 243 Probable 234 23.4 425 266 Possible 307 30.8 42.6 344 Totals 720 Tl 100.0 853 66.3 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed &@ e Probable al ® Possible CJ O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Count 0 + + + + aan + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 6G + 44 5 | fe) O Dt . 0 + + + + 4 Year + + + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Red-tailed Hawk iS American Kestrel Falco sparverius Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: AMKE Rangewide Distribution: all of North America south of the Arctic, south throughout South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant, summer resident and winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open or partly open areas with scattered trees; also, cultivated and urban areas. Nest: in tree cavity, very little nest material added; nest boxes readily accepted. Eggs: 4—5, white to pinkish white, usually marked with browns or lavenders. Incubation: 29-31 days. Fledging: about 30-31 days. The American Kestrel, formerly known as the Sparrow Hawk, is common and widespread throughout North America, where its breeding range includes most of Canada, all of the U.S., and parts of Mexico. It breeds from Alaska to South America. Kestrels are often seen perched on telephone wires and in the tops of trees and are known for their hovering and pouncing behavior in the process of obtaining prey, such as small mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, and insects. Kestrels require short grassy areas with abundant prey and a secure cavity in which to raise their young. They nest in many habitats, usually in rural areas but sometimes in 116 towns and cities; however, they avoid deep woods. Kestrels utilize tree cavities, holes in walls of buildings, and nest boxes. The American Kestrel is one of the few raptors that have distinctly different male and female plumages. Illinois History During the latter part of the nineteenth century and early half of the twentieth century, the American Kestrel was consid- ered a common summer resident (Cory 1909; Ford 1956). There was “an apparent marked reduction in the statewide population of the [sparrow hawk] between 1909 and 1957” (Graber and Graber 1963). During the censuses of 1907— 1909, the bulk of the breeding population was in the southern zone while in censuses of 1956-1958, they were more common in the central zone with the southern zone having a negligible population. The loss of pastureland was thought to be the cause for the decline in the south (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Trend estimates indicate the populations increased in both Illinois and the upper Midwest region over the 1966—2000 period; the annual rates are 7.6 (significant, P = 0.01) and 2.2% (significant, P = 0.01), respectively. Kestrels are found on many BBS routes in the state and the region, even though raptors as a group are generally underrepresented in the BBS. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The American Kestrel,.the smallest falcon that occurs in Illinois, was widely distributed in the state during the atlas project. It was reported in priority blocks in 97 counties. Kestrels were more often reported in priority blocks in the northeast, with decreasing frequency southward. In addition to the breeding population, there are distinct wintering and migratory populations; the interrelationship of these popula- tions is not yet known. Frequency The American Kestrel was reported from 634 (63.5%) priority blocks and 126 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 246 of the priority blocks, most frequently by observation of fledged young (143 FL records). The kestrel is a fairly conspicuous bird and would most likely have been seen by atlasers had it been present. The lack of observations in the southwestern counties cannot be readily explained. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 246 24.6 38.8 BONE 123.3 Probable 159 15.9 25.1 193 15.0 Possible 229 229 36.1 267 =20.8 Totals 634 63.5 100.0 112, 0 bien Bl * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Hin & @ BS B BO Priority Nonpriority Confirmed ® Probable a ® Possible fe O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois + + + + + —- 4 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 67 4+ BI fo) Oo 2+ 0 + + ' ' —-+ + ‘ { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year American Kestrel 117 Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus Eric Walters Code: PEFA Rangewide Distribution: cosmopolitan; all of North America from northern Alaska and Canada south through most of South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant, very local summer resident (reintroduced), rare winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: formerly cliffs, now ledges on buildings or under bridges. Nest: a scrape with accumulated debris, on a ledge. Eggs: 34, white to pinkish cream, occasionally marked with browns or reds. Incubation: 29-32 days. Fledging: from 32 to 42 days. Peregrine Falcons, known as the world’s fastest-flying birds, breed nearly worldwide and occur from the tundra to the tropics in a wide variety of habitats, including wetlands, deserts, and forests. Historically, Peregrines nested on cliffs and bluffs adjacent to open country along rivers, lakes, and coastlines, where they hunted for prey, mainly birds. Per- egrine Falcons were nearly extirpated as a breeding species in North America. The population crash drew national attention beginning in the 1960s. Although several factors were involved, the widespread use of DDT as a pesticide and its effect on reproductive success was determined to be the most likely cause of their near demise (Anderson and Hickey 1972). During the late 1980s and early 1990s, an organized effort was begun to reestablish a population in the eastern U.S. through release programs. Due to the ban on DDT in the 118 U.S. in 1972 and the release of captive-bred birds, Peregrines reoccupied most of their historical range in North America by 1996, although distribution is somewhat spotty (White et al. 2002). The American Peregrine Falcon, which had been listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as an endangered species in 1970, was removed from the endangered species list in 1999. Peregrines now also inhabit urban areas, having adapted to tall buildings and bridges in lieu of cliffs and bluffs for nest sites. Illinois History Historically, the Peregrine Falcon once nested locally throughout Illinois and was considered a rare summer resident in the northern part of the state (Nelson 1876). Toward the end of the nineteenth century, the species was reported as nesting in cavities of sycamore trees in Wabash County (Ridgway 1889) and along the Mississippi River in Jersey and Jackson counties (Widmann 1907). Until recently, the last known nest in Illinois occurred at Hickory Ridge in Jackson County in 1950 and 1951 (George 1968). As part of the Eastern Peregrine Falcon recovery effort, 46 young birds were released from hack sites in the Chicago area from 1986 through 1991. One to five pairs of Peregrines successfully nested in the Chicago area each year from 1987 to 1999. In 2000, 8 nesting pairs fledged 14 young and in 2001, 10 pairs fledged 19 young (Mary Hennen, pers. comm.). The Per- egrine Falcon is currently listed as an endangered species in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Peregrine Falcon numbers are so low that the BBS data are insufficient to estimate trends. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = none. Distribution The current distribution of nesting Peregrine Falcons is limited to the greater Chicago area and the Mississippi River near St. Louis. Nesting attempts have also been reported in Springfield, the Quad Cities, Peoria, and the St. Louis area. Frequency The Peregrine Falcon was not reported from any priority blocks, but was found in three nonpriority blocks in the Chicago area. Breeding was Confirmed in one of the nonpriority blocks. Every known nest throughout the Midwest has been fully monitored since the initiation of the reintroduction project. It is expected that detailed records will continue to be maintained for all nests for several more years. Breeding Evidence y Priority Blocks All Blocks ce No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 0O 0.0 0.0 | 0.1 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 | 0.1 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 l 0.1 Totals 0 0.0 100.0 3 0.2 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ € Probable © Possible C] O Peregrine Falcon 119 n@iale Mat: 1) Rallus elegans Joe Milosevich Code: KIRA Rangewide Distribution: eastern U.S., south to Mexico and Cuba. 11H Hie) Abundance: rare migrant and (local) summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: shallow water or wet areas with grassy vegetation. Nest: a deep basket of dry aquatic vegetation, on hummock above water level, concealed under a canopy. Eggs: 10-12, buff, spotted with browns. Incubation: 21—24 days. Fledging: about 63 days. The King Rail is a widely distributed breeding species in the eastern U.S. Like most rails it is extremely secretive, staying hidden in dense cover in marshy environments. This species prefers wetlands with a thick growth of herbaceous, emer- gent vegetation, such as cattails, bulrushes, and sedges, surrounded by large grasslands. Nests are usually placed along the edge of a marsh in clumps of vegetation. A substantial population decline has occurred throughout its range in the past century due mainly to loss of wetlands 120 (Meanly 1992). The survival of this species is dependent on the preservation and protection of existing marshes and creation and restoration of additional habitat. Illinois History The King Rail, which is the largest rail that occurs in Illinois, was considered a common summer resident in suitable habitat throughout the state during the latter part of the nineteenth century (Ridgway 1895; Cory 1909). It was still considered common in the Chicago area through the early decades of the twentieth century (Ford 1956). Because of its dependence on marshes, the population has declined as a result of the drastic loss of wetlands. In recent years the species has been reported only sporadically by dedicated field observers. Loss and deterioration of wetland habitat and a greatly reduced population level were reasons for the King Rail to be listed as a threatened species in Illinois in 1994 and reclassified as an endangered species in 1999. Breeding Bird Survey Trends No BBS trend estimates are available for this rare and secretive species. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = none. Distribution The King Rail was reported in priority blocks in seven widely scattered counties during the atlas project. Prior to the atlas project, records were known from extreme southern Illinois and the marshy habitats along the Illinois River and in northern counties. Confirmed breeding occurred only in Cook and Will counties during the atlas project. Since the atlas, the King Rail has become a regular breeding species in newly created wetlands in the Prairie Ridge State Natural Area in Jasper County. Frequency The King Rail was reported from eight (0.8%) priority blocks and an additional three nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in three (0.3%) of the priority blocks (two in Will County and one in Cook County) and one nonpriority block (Will County). Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 3 0.3 37.5 4 0.3 Probable l 0.1 IPs l 0.1 Possible 4 0.4 50.0 6 (OS) Totals 8 0.8 100.0 11 0.9 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | Priority Nonpriority King Rail 121 Robert Randall Code: VIRA : Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada to southern South America. 11 He) Abundance: fairly common migrant, rare to uncommon summer resident, decreasing southward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: shallow emergent wetlands usually with cattails, sedge, or bulrush. Nest: a saucerlike structure of coarse aquatic vegetation and grass, in tussock or clumped vegetation. Eggs: 7-12, off-white to buff, with brown spots. Incubation: |8—20 days. Fledging: about 25 days. The Virginia Rail is limited to isolated wetland areas in its range. Its current North American breeding range is gener- ally southern Canada and the northern and western U.S. It is similar in appearance to the King Rail but is smaller and has distinctly gray cheeks. This species inhabits marshes, staying concealed in the emergent vegetation; it is more often heard than seen. The Virginia Rail uses its long, curved bill to probe for aquatic insects and small fish. Virginia Rails nest in dense vegetation near the edge of marshes. The nest, a cup of vegetation, is placed on a mound of vegetation a few inches lie al ceTialt mats Rallus limicola above water. Throughout much of its range, including Illinois, the Virginia Rail is a game species, although it is rarely sought or taken by hunters. Wetland loss and degrada- tion have caused population declines. Like most wetland species, Virginia Rail populations are dependent on the preservation, protection, management, and restoration of wetlands. Illinois History Although early accounts of the Virginia Rail parallel those of the King Rail, that is, acommon summer resident in Illinois especially in the north (Ridgway 1895; Cory 1909; Ford 1956), there were never many records of nests or young. With the quantity and quality of wetland habitat now greatly reduced, it is a fair presumption that the population is also much reduced. A population still exists in northeastern Illinois, according to data acquired immediately before and after the atlas project (Stricker and Paine 1996a), and recent positive evidence of nesting has occurred as far south as Macon and Sangamon counties (Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Due to its secretive nature and low numbers, the Virginia Rail is not adequately sampled by the BBS. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest is —2.5% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.26) for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 3. Distribution Virginia Rails were found almost exclusively in the wetlands in northeastern Illinois during the atlas project. Like the King Rail, the species may occur in suitable wetlands in other parts of the state. Using a specially designed playback technique, Stricker and Paine (1996a) proved they occurred at several wetland sites in 1995 and 1996. Frequency The Virginia Rail was reported from 19 (1.9%) of the priority blocks and another 30 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 3 (0.3%) of the priority blocks (in Will and southern Cook counties) as well as 5 nonpriority blocks (in Lake, DuPage, Cook, and Will counties). It is possible that Virginia Rails bred in many of the blocks in which they were reported and could occur in other wetlands as well. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 3 0.3 15.8 8 0.6 Probable 7 0.7 36.8 18 1.4 Possible 9 0.9 47.4 22 Totals 19 1.9 100.0 49 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) : : % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& © Probable Possible O Virginia Rail 123 To) | Porzana carolina Kanae Hirabayashi Code: SORA Rangewide Distribution: southern half of Canada, south through much of the U.S. to northern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant, uncommon summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: shallow emergent wetlands and wet meadows. Nest: basket of dead aquatic vegetation lined with finer materials, up to 6 inches above water. Eggs: 10—12, brown and buff, marked with brown. Incubation: |8—20 days. Fledging: from 21 to 25 days. The Sora is one of the most abundant and widely distributed North American rails. It generally breeds in the southern half of Canada and northern and western U.S. The Sora is a secretive bird of wet and marshy environments that spends most of its time in dense vegetation on the edge of marshes. It often coexists in the same wetlands with Virginia Rails. Soras tend to wander out into the open and are therefore seen more often than other rail species. Its loud, descending whinny is distinctive and easily imitated. Although the Sora does eat invertebrates, its preferred food is seeds from wetland plants. Nests are placed over shallow water on a mound of plant matter at the edge of vegetation in marshes. 124 In many states, including Illinois, the Sora is a game species but is rarely sought or taken by hunters. In the past century breeding has become localized due to wetland loss and degradation. Like other rail species, Soras are dependent on the preservation, protection, proper management, and restoration of emergent wetlands, which are required for migration, breeding, and wintering. Illinois History Ridgway (1895) described the Sora as an “exceedingly abundant summer resident in all marshy situations” and Cory (1909) stated that it was an abundant summer resident in Illinois. The species was still fairly common during the early 1900s, as evidenced by the fact that 54 nests were found in a single Lake County marsh in 1937 (Beecher 1942). Although still a regular nesting species in the northern half of the state, it is no longer an abundant summer resident because of the loss and disturbance of much of its breeding habitat. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Because of low numbers, the BBS data are insufficient to estimate trends for Illinois. For 1966-2000 the trend estimate is —1.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.53) for the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution The Sora was most frequently encountered in the state’s northeastern wetlands during the atlas project. The records in southern IIlinois (White and Hamilton counties) were unexpected and perhaps represented an unknown breeding area or may have been migrants; those populations have not been relocated since the atlas project ended. Atlas data are not adequate to accurately assess the true distribution of this species. Like the other rails, the Sora may occur in appropri- ate permanent or temporary wetlands throughout the state. Stricker and Paine (1996b) describe monitoring protocols that would assist in the further assessment of the status of this species. Frequency The Sora was reported from 37 (3.7%) of the priority blocks and another 43 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 7 (0.7%) of the priority blocks—6 in Lake and McHenry counties and | in Brown County. It is possible that Soras bred in several of the other priority blocks as well. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed ‘i 0.7 18.9 15 1.2 Probable 10 1.0 27.0 of) 2.1 Possible 20 2.0 54.1 38 3.0 Totals 37 Sy 100.0 80 6.2 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ & Probable ihe @ Possible C] O Joe Milosevich OriTs (a OL ONY (0) Rangewide Distribution: Europe; Asia; Africa; eastern and southwestern U.S., south through most of South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant, rare (local) to uncommon summer resident, decreasing southward. Endangered/Threatened Status: threatened. Breeding Habitat: quiet marshes with emergent vegetation, especially cattails and bulrushes. Nest: a shallow platform of bleached aquatic plants lined with grass, usually over water with a ramp leading down to the water. Eggs: 5—8, cinnamon to buff, marked with reddish brown or olive. Incubation: 19-22 days. Fledging: from 40 to 50 or more days. This rail breeds throughout the eastern U.S. and locally in the West, and in Mexico. It is uncommon over much of its range and its population appears to be declining (Jackson et al. 1996). The Common Moorhen, formerly known as Florida Gallinule and more recently as the Common Gall- inule, is a close relative of the American Coot. It is a quiet, skittish bird that prefers permanent marshes with thick, emergent vegetation, such as cattails, bulrushes, and willows, in water about | to 3 feet deep. Like many marsh birds, Common Moorhens are more often heard than seen. They 126 Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus feed mainly on plant material and seeds of aquatic plants as well as a variety of invertebrates. Nests are usually placed over water on a mound of vegetation within stands of emergent vegetation with nearby open water. The availability of marshes with emergent vegetation interspersed with open water is an important factor in the survival of this species. Management techniques, such as prescribed burns that keep portions of the marsh open and controlling water levels, may benefit this species. Illinois History In the 1800s the Common Moorhen was a common summer resident in marshes and large prairie sloughs throughout the state (Nelson 1876; Ridgway 1895; Cory 1909). It was still common in the Chicago region during the first half of the twentieth century (Ford 1956). As wetlands were filled or drained, the population of Common Moorhens declined and it is no longer the common and widely distributed species it was even 50 years ago. Because it is currently so uncommon and its required habitat is imperiled, the Common Moorhen is listed as a threatened species in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends This species is not adequately sampled by the BBS and trend estimates are not available for Illinois. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest for 1966-2000 is -4.2% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.51). Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 3. Distribution During the atlas project, the Common Moorhen was found primarily in northeastern Illinois. Although nesting and other observations did occur elsewhere, they were sporadic and incidental, perhaps a result of appropriate habitat being temporarily available in wet years. The Common Moorhen occurs regularly as a breeding or summer resident in the Horseshoe Lake area of Madison County. Frequency The Common Moorhen was reported from 11 (1.1%) priority blocks and 23 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 6 (0.6%) of the priority blocks (5 in northeastern Illinois and | in Madison County). It was also Confirmed in 17 nonpriority blocks (16 in the northeastern counties and | in Coles County). Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * _ All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 6 0.6 54.5 23 1.8 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 3 0.2 Possible 5) 0.5 45.5 8 0.6 Totals 11 1.1 100.0 34 2.6 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | Priority Nonpriority | Confirmed % Probable oH @ | Possible Common Moorhen 127 yVenl=la ters] am ezele) Fulica americana Eric Walters OCT: (WAY COL) Rangewide Distribution: southwestern Canada, south through most of the U.S. to central South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and fairly common summer resident, decreasing southward; and uncommon winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open deepwater ponds, lakes, and marshes with emergent vegetation on the periphery. Nest: a large floating platform of dead stems and finer materials anchored to the vegetation. Eggs: 8-12, pinkish to buff, marked with blacks or browns. Incubation: 21-25 days. Fledging: from 49 to 56 or more days. The American Coot, sometimes called the mud hen, is widely distributed in central and western North America and a common breeding species in the prairie pothole region of central North America. It is a conspicuous and gregarious species. Coots, which are considered a game bird, are often mistaken for ducks, but are actually members of the rail family. Like other rails, coots are associated with marshes, but they spend more time in open water than other rail species. They can be found alone or in large flocks, in water or on land close to water, and in shallow ponds or large bodies of water. The coot’s diet consists chiefly of aquatic vegetation. Nests are built on the ground, concealed in emergent vegetation near water. Its presence is often re- 128 vealed by its distinctive vocalizations. The significant decline in abundance and distribution that has occurred since the early 1900s is likely a result of loss of wetlands and overhunting (Brisbin et al. 2002). Illinois History In the 1800s the American Coot was “an exceedingly abundant summer resident in the more northern portions of the state” (Ridgway 1895) and “far from rare in any marsh situation” (Nelson 1876). It continued to be common in the Chicago region during the early decades of the twentieth century (Ford 1956). Historically the large numbers of coots found at Grass Lake in Lake and McHenry counties attracted hunters; in 1942 the harvest of coots was estimated at 23,800 birds, which was about 90% of the coots found on the lake (Havera 1999). American Coots continue to be a game species in Illinois, but are no longer harvested in large numbers (Havera 1999). The extensive loss of wetland habitat since the mid-nineteenth century has presumably reduced the number of coots nesting in Illinois. American Coots continue to be fairly common in the northeastern wetlands; they breed sporadically and opportunistically, primarily during wet years, in the rest of the state. Breeding Bird Survey Trends This species is not adequately sampled by BBS and there is insufficient BBS data to estimate trends for Illinois. For the upper Midwest the BBS data indicate a decline of -5.9% annually (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution American Coots nested or attempted to nest at scattered locations throughout the state during the atlas project. The greatest number of priority blocks with breeding evidence was in the north and decreased southward. There were records of coots in priority blocks in 23 counties during the atlas project. Frequency The American Coot was reported from 32 (3.2%) priority blocks and 42 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 15 (1.5%) of the priority blocks, most frequently by the observation of broods (10 FL records). Because of the difficulty in finding Confirmed breeding evidence in marsh habitats, it is possible that coots nested in several of the blocks in which they were recorded as Probable and Possible breeders. Breeding Evidence ____ Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 15 hes 46.9 39 3.0 Probable 3 0.3 9.4 4 0.3 Possible 14 1.4 43.8 31 2.4 Totals 32 3.2 100.0 74 5.8 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed % Probable Bg @ Possible Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest om 2 1.57 e Oo . _——e Ae 0 St - eee a 0 + + Year 19 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 é American Coot 129 oF Talel ali l meres lal= Grus canadensis Annalee Fjellberg Code: SACR Rangewide Distribution: Siberia, Alaska, and northern Canada, to northern Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and uncommon summer resident in northeast; rare elsewhere. Endangered/Threatened Status: threatened Breeding Habitat: large, undisturbed freshwater marshes and prairie ponds. Nest: a large mound of grass or uprooted plants, on ground or in shallow water. Eggs: 2, buff to olive, marked with browns. Incubation: 28—32 days. Fledging: about 65 days. The large, heronlike Sandhill Crane breeds at scattered locations across North America. Flocks often concentrate at migratory staging areas such as the Platte River in Nebraska. In recent years their breeding range has expanded and Sandhill Cranes have returned to many areas, including Illinois, where they had not nested in over a century. This species inhabits and nests in marshes and wet meadows, and feeds in wetlands and agricultural fields. It feeds on seeds, insects, and other invertebrates. Habitat availability is the most important conservation need for this species and protection, preservation, and management of wetland 130 habitats on the breeding grounds, migratory staging areas, and wintering grounds are critical (Tacha et al. 1992). Illinois History Once abundant on all large marshes (Kennicott 1855), the Sandhill Crane had all but disappeared as a breeding species in Illinois by 1876 (Nelson 1876; Ridgway 1895). The last known nest in Illinois was found in Champaign County in 1872 (Gault 1922). Although birds migrated year after year over the Chicago area from their staging area at Jasper- Pulaski Fish and Wildlife Area in Indiana en route to their more northern breeding areas, none stayed to breed in Illinois. In 1979 Greenberg (1980) found a pair of Sandhill Cranes just south of the Wisconsin line that successfully raised two young. Since then, Sandhill Cranes have contin- ued to spread as a nesting species and now nest successfully in several northeastern Illinois counties. Because of the vulnerability of its small population, the Sandhill Crane was listed as endangered in 1989 but was upgraded to threatened in 1999 because of its successful reestablishment as a breeding species in the state. Breeding Bird Survey Trends This species is increasing in IIlinois but is still too localized to be adequately sampled by the BBS. The upper Midwest population experienced an increase from 1966 to 2000 estimated at 11.5% per year (significant, P < 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 1. Distribution Prior to the atlas project, the Sandhill Crane had only recently returned to Illinois as a breeding species. Its distribution was limited to a few blocks in the northeastern part of the state during the atlas project, but since then the population has continued to expand into suitable habitat in seven counties. In 2001 the nesting population had increased to at least 10 Confirmed and 5 Possible nesting sites in the northeastern counties. Sandhill Cranes nest yearly along the Mississippi River in Carroll and likely in Jo Daviess counties as well (Kleen 2002a; S. Bailey, pers. comm.). Frequency Sandhill Cranes were reported from two (0.2%) priority blocks and nine nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in one priority block and five nonpriority blocks. All confirmations were in Lake, McHenry, and Kane counties. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 1 0.1 50.0 6 0.5 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 4 0.3 Possible 0.1 50.0 0.1 Totals 2 0.2 100.0 11 0.9 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | Priority Nonpriority | Confirmed @& ® | Probable By @ - Possible Cl O l Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest nN ae eer © : Sa | 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 4 | Year Sandhill Crane 131 Killdeer Charadrius vociferus Annalee Fjellberg Code: KILL Rangewide Distribution: Alaska and the lower half of Canada, south through all of the U.S. to northwestern South America. 117 File) he Abundance: abundant migrant, common summer resident, uncommon winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: fields, meadows, pastures, and other open areas. Nest: a scrape on ground, often in driveways and parking lots. Eggs: 4, buff-colored, with brown or black marks. Incubation: 24—28 days. Fledging: about 25 days. The Killdeer is the most widely distributed shorebird in North America and a common to abundant breeding species across the southern half of Canada, all of the U.S., and Mexico. Killdeer often arrive on their breeding grounds early in the spring (February in Illinois) and sometimes must contend with late-spring snowstorms. They are most often found in bare open areas and short vegetation, at least during the breeding season. The Killdeer is a native species that has adapted well to environmental changes, and now success- fully nests on the ground in cropland, golf courses, airfields, gravel roads, parking lots, and on flat, gravel rooftops. At one time the population was in serious decline due in part to overhunting, but this species is probably more abundant now 152 than in the past because of its adaptive nature (Jackson and Jackson 2000). It is known for its loud call and broken wing act used to trick intruders, both man and potential predators, away from the nest and young. Illinois History During the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Killdeer was a common and well-known summer resident throughout the state (Ridgway 1895; Cory 1909) and continues to be so. Census data indicated increased densities in the north in 1957 compared to 1909 (Graber and Graber 1963). The number of Killdeer in the state varies from year to year, perhaps influenced by the effects of weather extremes on their relatively exposed nests during the April to June nesting season (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS data show population increases during 1966-2000 and the two subintervals (1966-1979 and 1980-2000) in Illinois and the trend estimates are all significant. From 1966 to 2000 the Killdeer population in Illinois increased at an annual rate of 8.1% (significant, P < 0.01). For the upper Midwest, trend estimates are also positive and significant for all three time periods and the data indicate an increase in population at a rate of 2.7% per year (significant, P < 0.01) between 1966 and 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, the Killdeer was a very common breeding species throughout the state and was reported from priority blocks in all 102 counties. It was one of the most frequently reported species from priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4). Frequency The Killdeer was reported from 948 (95%) priority blocks and 160 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 594 (59.5%) of the priority blocks. The Killdeer was one of the easiest species to confirm; its presence could be detected by its “kill-deer, kill-deer” call and the presence of a nest or young by its distraction displays. The most frequently used evidence of Confirmed breeding in priority blocks was the observation of young (334 FL records) followed by distrac- tion displays (173 DD records). Nests with eggs were more difficult to find (36 NE records). The Killdeer would have been Confirmed as a breeding species in many more priority blocks given more sampling time. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** BESS EC e eee ee om mem No. % Sampled %Blocks No. % Sampled Oseeeeee Pere Blocks with records blocks © 0@ Tae om Confirmed 594 59.5 62.7 692 53.8 BOR A" = = a4 Siomem, @0e Probable = 207 20.7 21.8 241 18.7 z Jeg88 8 See 8.0] oon ae Possible 147 14.7 15.5 175 H13.6 BEES eee ee momdmomon 3m Totals 948 +~=—«495.0—S—«*100.0=s«,108S« 86.2 ha ae Be i ies mTesgenes we Bee eeeaee pew # iori pane aie Bian ionty and nonpriority) 124 acres) (Brown and Dinsmore 1986) undis- turbed lakes with patches of tall, emergent vegetation, such as Cattails and bulrushes. Black Terns nest as scattered pairs or in loose colonies, usually 10 or fewer pairs. Nests are placed in dense vegetation near open water and may be 150 floating, completely surrounded by water, and weakly attached to the vegetation, or placed on an old muskrat house, floating log, or raised patch of mud. The loss of wetlands, especially larger ones, has negatively impacted Black Tern populations since Euro-American settlement. Their success as a breeding species requires the availability of suitable, undisturbed high-quality marshes for nesting. Illinois History During the 1800s and early 1900s, the Black Tern was considered an abundant summer resident on the inland lakes and marshes of northeastern Illinois (Nelson 1876; Cory 1909) and remained a common summer resident in the Chicago region through the first half of the twentieth century (Ford 1956). With the draining, filling, and other modifica- tions of wetlands, available nesting habitat has been greatly reduced. Black Terns continue to nest in isolated and well- protected marshes, especially in northwestern Lake County. The small population and diminished availability of suitable wetland habitat prompted the listing of the Black Tern as an endangered species in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends There are insufficient BBS data for estimating trends for this wetland species. In the upper Midwest the trend estimate is —4.4% (significant, P = 0.04) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 3. Distribution During the atlas project, Black Terns were limited to the high-quality wetlands and lakes of McHenry, Lake, Kane, Cook, and DuPage counties with additional observations in Ogle and Winnebago counties. Currently there are less than five known breeding sites. Frequency The Black Tern was reported from 7 (0.7%) priority blocks and 11 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 4 (0.4%) of the priority blocks and 5 nonpriority blocks. The occurrences in Winnebago and Ogle counties, which are near the expected breeding area of northeastern IIlinois, need further investigation. The Possible record from Moultrie County was probably a late spring migrant. Breeding Evidence | Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** ‘ No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 4 0.4 Syl 9 0.7 Probable | 0.1 14.3 3 0.2 Possible y) 0.2 28.6 6 0.5 1.4 Totals i, 0.7 100.0 18 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) 4 % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & @ Probable © Possible [] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends | Upper Midwest ss By cori. * ss ilps: aj cea ae ciearae *-9-o an ocar ee 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year a —— Black Tern 15] Rock Pigeon Columba livia Dennis Oehmke Code: ROPI Rangewide Distribution: native to Eurasia; introduced and established throughout the world; in North America from southern Canada through all of the U.S. and Central America. ILLINOIS Abundance: abundant year-round resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: cliffs, ledges, urban and rural buildings, and bridges. Nest: a loose saucer of roots, stems, and leaves, on a ledge or under eaves. Eggs: 2, white, unmarked. Incubation: 16—19 days. Fledging: about 25-26 days. Rock Pigeons were introduced into the United States around 1621 (Long 1981) and are now abundant and widespread throughout North America; their breeding range extends from southern Canada to Central America and includes all of the U.S. More commonly known as pigeons, Rock Pigeons are nonmigratory, permanent residents in urban and rural areas that can be found wherever a continual supply of food, especially grain, is available. They usually occur in flocks and regularly congregate around and nest on man-made structures, such as grain elevators, farm buildings, bridges, churches, warehouses, and city buildings, especially those with ledges. Rock Pigeons come in a variety of color patterns and are commonly domesticated and raced by pigeon fanciers. Illinois History Although Rock Pigeons were present in Illinois in the 1800s and early 1900s, they were ignored in early publications (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909; Schantz 1928) because they were a domesticated species. In the 1950s the Rock Pigeon was considered a common (Ford 1956) and abundant (Smith and Parmalee 1955) permanent resident. This species was included in the Spring Bird Count beginning in 1972 (Kleen 1973a) and the Christmas Bird Count in 1973 (Struthers 1974). Presently it is still an abundant permanent resident, especially in urban settings. Breeding Bird Survey Trends For 1966-2000 the trend estimate for the Rock Pigeon in Illinois is —1.0% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.14). The data indicate an increase of 3.0% per year (significant, P < 0.01) in the Illinois population from 1966 to 1979 and a decrease of —3.9% per year (significant, P = 0.01) from 1980 to 2000. The trends were similar for the upper Midwest, with an estimated rate of -0.7% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.05) for 1966-2000 and a positive trend (significant, P < 0.01) for 1966-1979 followed by a negative trend (significant, P < 0.01) for 1980-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Rock Pigeons are a common nesting species in all 102 Illinois counties. During the atlas project it was one of the most frequently reported species from priority blocks. Frequency The Rock Pigeon was reported from 824 (82.6%) priority blocks and 155 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 510 (51.1%) of the priority blocks and probably occurred in the majority of the other priority blocks where they were recorded. This species was easily Confirmed. The most frequently used breeding evidence for Confirmed records in priority blocks was occupied nests (274 ON records) followed by fledged young (88 FL records) and nest with young (65 NY records). Since Rock Pigeons are easily observed and typically occur in flocks, they may have actually been absent during the atlas project in those blocks where they were not reported. Breeding Evidence ; Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 510 ate 61.9 595 46.3 Probable 137 13.7 16.6 168 13.1 Possible 177 17.7 21.5 216 Totals 824 82.6 100.0 979 * 998 priority blocks ** 1,286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) O =e nes O @ a % of 998 sampled priority — % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this speci i ies or this species) this species B i Priority Nonpriority a Confirmed & ® Probable @ ~ Possible C O LJ = | Breeding Bird Survey Trends = Illinois = 247 - 21+ ris ; ; 15; e 7s" Le OO. Z 12; ; a 9+ 6+ 3+ 0 + — + 4. +. + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 247 21+ 18+ 6+ 3+ 0 + n +- + + + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year a fele), @ ad [[=J0) 4) 153 Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura Dennis Oehmke Ory: (LY (0) TO) Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada, south through nearly all of the U.S. to Panama. ILLINOIS Abundance: abundant migrant and summer resident, common winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open woodlands, agricultural areas, grasslands, and urban/suburban areas. Nest: a flimsy saucer of crossed sticks and twigs, usually in a tree (occasionally on the ground). Eggs: 2, white, unmarked. Incubation: 13-14 days. Fledging: from 12 to 14 days. The Mourning Dove is one of the most abundant and widespread birds in North America, where it breeds from southern Canada to southern Mexico, including all of the lower 48 states. It is one of a few native species that thrives in an environment changed by agriculture and urbanization, and its distribution and abundance have increased since Euro-American settlement of North America. This species forages and nests in a variety of open habitats, including 154 hedgerows, edge shrubbery, orchards, and residential areas. It feeds primarily on seeds and grain. Mourning Doves begin courtship and nesting as soon as the earliest warm spell arrives (February or March in Illinois) and continue to nest throughout the summer, producing several broods each year. The Mourning Dove is the leading game bird in North America (Mirarchi and Baskett 1994). Illinois History During the late 1800s, the Mourning Dove was considered a common summer resident in northern [linois and a common permanent resident in southern Illinois (Cory 1909). During the 1907-1909 and 1956—1958 censuses, Graber and Graber (1963) reported that the population levels were similar in 1909 and 1957, and, with some variability, the population was higher in the southern zone in the summer during both censuses. The northern population becomes decidedly smaller during the winter months. Mourning Doves are a popular game bird in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimates for the Mourning Dove population are 0.5% (nonsignificant, P = 0.37) for Illinois and —0.1% (nonsignificant, P = 0.76) for the upper Midwest from 1966 to 2000. The fluctuation in annual abundance may be due to factors such as weather during the preceding winter and breeding seasons and the phenology of the current breeding season. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, the Mourning Dove was one of the most common (Table 4) and widely distributed species. It occurred in priority blocks in every county in the state. Frequency The Mourning Dove was reported from 988 (99.0%) priority blocks and 182 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 733 (73.4%) of the priority blocks and may have occurred in all priority blocks. The Mourning Dove was an easy species to detect and confirm. Half the Confirmed records in priority blocks were fledged young (372 FL records). Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 733 73.4 74.2 856 66.6 Probable 214 21.4 Ale), 255 19.8 Possible 41 4.1 4.1 59 4.6 Totals 988 99.0 100.0 1,170 91.0 * 998 priority blocks ** ] 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & 8 Probable © Possible Cl O Breeding Bird Survey Trends C@8e@0e0eCC80® Cle elie @ je Ho B H|a Illinois B68 8 | 6 8 G B o|@ Be SB Bees a a = + + + 1976 1981 1986 1991 Year . + + 1966 1971 1996 4 2000 Upper Midwest + + + 1981 1986 1991 Year + ‘ : + 1966 1971 1976 1996 4 2000 ae i a @ 8 8 @/\8 @ 8 S| @ (| @ 8 Mourning Dove 155 Monk Parakeet Myiopsitta monachus : i, Dennis Oehmke Code: MOPA Rangewide Distribution: primarily a species of south-central South America; occurs in isolated populations at scattered locations in the U.S., especially in Florida and Texas. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon and local permanent resident in Chicago and spreading to surrounding communities. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: urban areas with groves of trees. Nest: a large, bulky, dome-shaped structure of sticks with several compartments for communal use, in a tree, building, or on a telephone pole. Eggs: 4-6, glossy white. Incubation: 28—31 days. Fledging: 35 or more days. The Monk Parakeet, a medium-sized green, gray, and yellow parrot with blue primaries, is native to southern South America. During the late 1960s and early 1970s, the Monk (or Quaker) Parakeet was introduced into the wild in North America at several locations as a result of released or escaped pets. Small, scattered populations occur in several states, especially Florida and Texas. It builds a bulky communal nest of sticks up to three feet in diameter in trees 156 or on utility poles and transformers. It feeds on a variety of seeds and fruits. Biologists and agricultural economists are monitoring the Monk Parakeet population, hoping it does not become the agricultural pest that it is in its native South America. Illinois History The Monk Parakeet is a new addition to the breeding avifauna of Illinois. The only parrot native to Illinois was the Carolina Parakeet, which was last recorded in the wild in Illinois in 1912 (Bent 1940) and is now extinct. Monk Parakeets occur at various sites throughout the state as a result of escaped and intentionally released birds. Those in the Chicago area have survived and established breeding colonies. The first successful nest was identified at Hinsdale in 1973 (Larson 1973). Since then, colonies have become established in other locations in Cook County and have expanded into at least Lake, DuPage, and Will counties. At Hyde Park in Cook County, South (1999) reported 49 different nests, indicated that 1 nest contained up to 83 active chambers, and estimated the local population there to be about 240 birds. Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS data were insufficient to estimate population trends for this introduced and localized species. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = none. Distribution During the atlas project, the Monk Parakeet was limited to Cook, Lake, and DuPage counties. Even though the popula- tion expansion has been exponential in some areas (Van Bael and Preutt-Jones 1996), the Illinois population may not be expanding so rapidly (South 1999). Periodic surveys should be planned to monitor its population. The recent discovery of a new nest in Carlyle suggests the species may become established outside of the Chicago area. Frequency The Monk Parakeet was reported from four (0.4%) priority blocks and nine nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed in three of the priority blocks. Monk Parakeets were easy to detect when present. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 3 0.3 75.0 1] 0.9 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible l 0.1 25.0 2 0.2 Totals 4 0.4 100.0 13 1.0 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed e Probable ie Possible a O Monk Parakeet 157 Peter Dring Code: BBCU Rangewide Distribution: southeastern Canada and U.S. east of the Rockies, south to northwestern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant, uncommon summer resident in north, decreasing southward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: forest edges, open woodlands and thickets, shrublands. Nest: a flimsy platform of sticks and twigs lined with ferns, grass, roots, etc., near the trunk of a tree. Eggs: 2-3, blue-green, usually unmarked. Incubation: 10-13 days. Fledging: from 7 to 9 days. The Black-billed Cuckoo 1s a secretive and elusive woodland bird. It nests in forest edges, thickets, and groves of trees and nests are concealed in trees, bushes, or vines. It is frequently confused with and more difficult to detect than the more common Yellow-billed Cuckoo. The Black-billed tends to occur in the older, more wooded side of woodland edges, and is less likely to be found near suburbia than the Yellow-billed Cuckoo. Cuckoos are notoriously late and variable in completing their spring migration. Cyclic population fluctuations are common for cuckoos (Jackson et al. 1996). The main food of cuckoos is large insects, especially caterpillars, and their populations may fluctuate in response to caterpillar abundance (Hughes 2001). Black-billed Cuckoos breed primarily in southern Canada and the northern two-thirds of the U.S. from Montana to the east coast. In North America, Black-billed Cuckoos were for- merly much more common; population densities have declined since the early 1900s, especially in the past 20 or so years (Hughes 2001). 158 =) F-(e1 Geli |(=\e Mm Leer cole) Coccyzus erythropthalmus Illinois History During the mid-to-late 1800s and early 1900s, the Black- billed Cuckoo was a common summer resident in northern Illinois and considerably less common in the southern portion of the state (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). During the first half of the twentieth century, it was a fairly common summer resident in the Chicago region (Ford 1956) and in central Illinois, but rare in the south (Smith and Parmalee 1955). Graber and Graber (1963) reported that the Black- billed Cuckoo was primarily a northern species and that the Yellow-billed outnumbered it statewide by a ratio of 14 to | in the 1950s. From the early 1900s, loss of nesting habitat, such as orchards, hedgerows, and shrubby field boundaries, has negatively impacted the Black-billed Cuckoo population (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for the population of the Black-billed Cuckoo is —3.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.32) from 1966 to 2000. For the upper Midwest the trend is estimated at —1.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.07) for the same period. An annual increase of 7.4% (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 1979 was followed by an annual decrease of —2.9% (significant, P <.0.01) from 1980 to 2000 in the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Atlas data indicate that the Black-billed Cuckoo was present throughout the state with frequency decreasing from north to south. It was reported in priority blocks in 63 counties. This species was Confirmed as nesting as far south as Union and Jackson counties. Frequency The Black-billed Cuckoo was reported from 211 (21.1%) priority blocks and 66 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 39 (3.9%) of the priority blocks, with the most commonly used evidence being adults feeding young (20 FY records). The rate of confirmation (i.e., 39 of 211 blocks, or 18%) is relatively low. Since these cuckoos are still migrat- ing during the first half of June and many records were of calling birds heard on only one day in early June, some Possible records may have been migrating birds, especially in southern Illinois. Therefore, Probable and Confirmed records may provide a more reliable picture of their actual breeding distribution in Illinois. Because of its secrecy during the nesting season, the Black-billed Cuckoo is almost always detected first by its call, which is very similar to that of the Yellow-billed Cuckoo. Atlasers were urged to identify the Black-billed Cuckoo visually as well as by sound to reduce misidentifications. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 39 3.9 18.5 60 4.7 Probable 46 4.6 21.8 61 4.7 Possible 126 12.6 ey bi Ido) 121 Totals 211 yA Ws 100.0 PT tire 2ld * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority __ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed e Probable ee Possible @ O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest a ze 1.5+ z 1 T ee rs v 2 . . 1 ; DEBS ‘eae : reget ng 8 3 0.5+ OQ + - + ' + — + 1 1966 1971 1976 =1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year . |=} F-Tod Ci 0) | [=10 Mm O10 (67, (oye) 159 Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus ‘ : Oe = = Code: YBCU Rangewide Distribution: eastern, central, and southwestern U.S., south to central South America. BH Ie) Abundance: common migrant and summer resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open and riparian woodlands with dense undergrowth and thickets. Nest: a flimsy platform of sticks and twigs lined with rootlets and dried leaves, in tree or shrub. Eggs: 4, light blue (fading to light greenish yellow), unmarked. Incubation: 9-11 days. Fledging: about 7 or 8 days. The Yellow-billed Cuckoo, a fairly large bird with a long tail, generally stays out of sight in dense vegetation and is more often heard than seen. Its distinctive calls commonly heard from May to July have generated nicknames like Rain Crow and Cow-cow. The Yellow-billed occurs most commonly in open to semi-open woodlands with areas of dense brushy undergrowth. Nests are most commonly placed in thick brushy areas, including hedgerows, roadsides, and riparian areas but are also found in backyards, parks, and orchards. Natural population fluctuations are common for cuckoos, many times coinciding with the abundance of caterpillars, their principal food (Jackson et al. 1996). Cuckoos are valued because they eat noxious species such as tent caterpil- lars. In North American their breeding range includes most of the central and eastern U.S., and the southwest U.S. and 160 Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery northern Mexico. They are generally common in the South- east and less abundant elsewhere (Hughes 1999). Popula- tions of Yellow-billed Cuckoos are greatly declining throughout their entire breeding range (Hughes 1999). Illinois History Throughout its recorded history, the Yellow-billed Cuckoo has been a common summer resident throughout the state (Cory 1909) but more common in the south than in the north (Ridgway 1889; Graber and Graber 1963). Graber and Graber (1963) noted a significant population decline between the censuses of 1909 and 1957. The loss of orchards and shrubby hedgerows and roadsides coincided with the decline of the Yellow-billed population. The Yellow-billed is more common than the Black-billed Cuckoo in Illinois. In the late 1950s Yellow-billed Cuckoos outnumbered the closely related Black-billed Cuckoo during the breeding season by a ratio of 14 to 1 (Graber and Graber 1963). During the atlas project, the Yellow-billed was found in 778 priority blocks compared to 211 for the Black-billed Cuckoo. Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS data from 1966 to 2000 indicate population declines at annual rates of —2.9%<(significant, P < 0.01) for Illinois and —2.5% for the upper Midwest (significant, P < 0.01). Trend estimates indicated increasing populations for 1966-1979 for Illinois and the upper Midwest at annual rates of 6.1% (significant, P = 0.02) and 5.2% (significant, P < 0.01), respectively. During 1980 to 2000, the populations declined in the state and the region at —3.4% per year (significant, P = 0.04) and —3.6% per year (significant, P < 0.01), respectively. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Yellow-billed Cuckoo was reported from priority blocks in every county in the state during the atlas project. It was reported most frequently from priority blocks in the southern and central regions. The current distribution is similar to that of a century ago. Frequency The Yellow-billed Cuckoo was reported from 778 (78.0%) priority blocks and 88 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 211 (21.1%) of the priority blocks, with adults feeding young being the most frequently used evidence of breeding (108 FY records). Like the rarer Black-billed Cuckoo, the Yellow-billed Cuckoos are still migrating during the first two weeks of June (Peterjohn 1989). Since many records were of calling birds heard on only one day in early June, some Possible records may have been migrating birds, especially in southern Illinois. Therefore, Probable and Confirmed records may provide a more realistic picture of their actual breeding distribution in Illinois. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 211 21.1 Dial 231 18.0 Probable 285 28.6 36.6 319 24.8 Possible 282 28.3 36.2 316 24.6 Totals 7718 78.0 100.0 866 3967.3 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ r Probable O Possible Cl a a Ld r 8 —~ 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 0 —+— + f + + y y 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Yellow-billed Cuckoo 161 Barn Owl Tyto alba Dennis Oehmke Code: BNOW Rangewide Distribution: worldwide; most of the U.S., to southern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: very rare migrant, summer resident and winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: grasslands and meadows near hollow trees or barns, silos, and other man-made structures. Nest: in tree cavity, nest box, or on an undisturbed, elevated area inside a building, occasionally lined with wood chips, sticks, or straw. Eggs: 5—7, white, often nest-stained. Incubation: 30—34 days. Fledging: from 52 to 56 days. Barn Owls are among the most widely distributed land birds and are found nearly worldwide (Marti 1992). In North America they breed from the northern states to Central America, including most of the U.S. Since they are nocturnal and secretive, few are encountered. These birds, sometimes referred to as monkey-faced owls, occur most commonly in open grasslands, meadows, and hayfields and use hollow trees, silos, or farm buildings for nesting and roosting. In addition to tree cavities they readily accept nest boxes when 162 available. Barn Owls hunt mostly at night, flying low in open habitats. Their main food is small mammals. Their nesting success and the number of young raised is dependent upon the availability of an adequate rodent supply, especially voles (Marti 1992). Barn Owl populations are healthy in some areas but have declined in others. Drastic population declines in the Midwest in the past half-century have been caused by changing agricultural practices that have decreased available nesting sites, small mammal populations, and grasslands for foraging (Marti 1992; Jackson et al. 1996). Illinois History The Barn Owl may have been a locally common species in Illinois in the 1800s (Ridgway 1889). By the early 1900s it was described as a casual occurrence in the north and a suspected regular breeder in the south (Cory 1909). The greatest abundance of Barn Owls in the Midwest occurred during the early 1900s (Colvin 1985). In the early 1950s Smith and Parmalee (1955) recorded it as an uncommon permanent resident. Prior to the 1960s it occurred in nearly every small town and on some farms (Bohlen 1989). The population has since plummeted due to changes in farming practices. Because of its reduced population and the de- creased availability of nesting and foraging habitats, the Barn Owl is listed as an endangered species in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Owls in general are not adequately sampled by the BBS and this rare and localized species is no exception. There are insufficient BBS data to estimate trends for this species. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = none. Distribution The Barn Owl was reported from priority blocks in four counties during the atlas project. The known population has been modestly increasing in numbers and distribution since the atlas project and it has recently been reported as a Confirmed breeder in Pulaski, Union, Jasper, Christian, and Pike counties. Some birds stay in southern Illinois through- out the year; however, most either migrate or move season- ally. Frequency The Barn Owl was reported from four (0.4%) priority blocks and no nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in one priority block (a nest with young in Pulaski County). Since Barn Owls are nocturnal, rare, and very secretive, they are a challenge to find and document. This species is undoubtedly underrepresented by the atlas data. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 1 0.1 25.0 1 0.1 Probable ‘ 0.3 75.0 3 0.2 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 4 0.4 100.0 4 0.3 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) SY % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority | Confirmed @ Probable © Possible CJ O Barn Owl Eastern Screech-Owl Megascops asio Joe Milosevich t OFiys (Hs Oye Wel @) Rangewide Distribution: extreme southeastern Canada and eastern half of U.S., south to eastern Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: common permanent resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open deciduous forests and woods, scrub, parks, towns, and riparian habitats. Nest: in a tree cavity or nest box, lined with remnants of feathers, fur, or debris. Eggs: 4-5, white, unmarked. Incubation: 26 days. Fledging: about 27 days. Eastern Screech-Owls are permanent residents found primarily throughout the U.S. east of the Rockies and in northeastern Mexico. This small owl has two color morphs— rusty and gray. Both morphs are common in Illinois and young of both morphs may occur in the same nest. Screech- owls can be found in a wide range of habitats, including forest edges, open woodlands, urban woods, and residential areas. They have probably benefited from forest fragmenta- tion, which has increased forest edge habitat (Jackson et al. 1996). Screech-owls use tree cavities for roosting and nesting sites but also readily accept nest boxes. Adult birds 164 will defend their territory and are known to attack humans (and their pets) that wander, usually unknowingly, too close to newly fledged young. Screech-owls eat small mammals, small birds, reptiles, amphibians, and insects; their diet is the most varied of North American owls (Gehlbach 1995). Because of their fondness for rodents, screech-owls are considered a highly desirable and beneficial species on the farm. Illinois History During the 1800s the Eastern Screech-Owl may have been the most abundant owl species in Illinois, according to Ridgway (1889). Up through the early 1950s it was still a common permanent resident throughout the state (Smith and Parmalee 1955). During the latter half of the twentieth century, screech-owl populations have declined. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The BBS was not designed to survey nocturnal species. Screech-owls are found on only a few BBS routes and in low numbers. The trend estimate for 1966—2000 is —3.0% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.78) for Illinois and 1.5% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.22) for the Upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 3. Distribution The Eastern Screech-Owl] was fairly commonly reported throughout the state; it was reported in priority blocks in 85 counties. The Eastern Screech-Owl was likely present in many more blocks than those reported. Frequency The Eastern Screech-Owl was reported from 326 (32.7%) priority blocks and 74 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 94 (9.4%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observation of fledged young (66 FL records) and nest with young (16 NY records). The species was most easily detected by its whinnying call or cooing trill. In many instances the owls responded to human or taped imitations. In one instance an atlaser was struck in the back of the head by an ow] after imitating the screech-owl call. Because of their nocturnal behavior and early breeding season, these owls were often not detected during the atlas project. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 94 9.4 28.8 139 10.8 Probable 76 7.6 23.3 90 7.0 Possible 156 15.6 47.9 171 Totals 326 Seis 100.0 400 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed 3 Probable fl @ Possible O Eastern Screech-Owl 165 Great Horned Owl Bubo virginianus Dennis Oehmke C Oriys (tar @3 5 (OMY Rangewide Distribution: most of North America from northern Alaska and Canada, to southern South America. 115 Bile) Abundance: common permanent resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: forests, woodlands, swamps, riparian areas, parks, and residential areas. Nest: abandoned nest of other species, or a gathering of sticks, bark, or rootlets lined with feathers and down; in a tree, a tree stump or on the elevated floor of an undisturbed building. Eggs: 2-3, dull white, unmarked. Incubation: 26-35 days (asynchronous hatching). Fledging: about 35 days. The Great Horned Owl is a large and powerful owl easily recognized, even in silhouette, by the two feather tufts on its head for which it is named. The distribution of this perma- nent resident is extensive— most of North America from Alaska and northern Canada to Central America and parts of South America, including all of the U.S. These owls hunt day or night but are primarily nocturnal. They often perch at dusk and dawn on the top of a tall tree, telephone pole, or the roof of a building. Their loud, resonant, low-pitched hoots can be heard for a great distance. Great Horned Owls inhabit forests and open areas with trees in rural and urban areas. This early-breeding species begins its courtship and incubates 166 eggs in the winter months (December and January in Illinois). Their simple nests are located in the hollow of a broken off snag or abandoned nests of other large birds or squirrels. Their diet is one of the most diverse of North American raptors and consists primarily of large prey, such as rabbits, opossums, woodchucks, skunks, squirrels, and birds, which they hunt by the perch-and-pounce method. At one time the Great Horned Owl was severely persecuted; it was afforded legal protection in the late 1940s. Illinois History During the 1800s, the Great Horned Owl was considered much less numerous than the Barred Owl and “more plenti- ful than the farmer or poultry raiser desires” (Ridgway 1889). By the early 1900s it was “rather common throughout heavily wooded portions of Illinois and . . . formerly quite common in the vicinity of Chicago, but now rare” (Cory 1909). In the 1950s it was an uncommon permanent resident in the Chicago region (Ford 1956) and relatively uncommon statewide (Smith and Parmalee 1955). The Great Horned Owl has once again become common statewide. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Since the BBS was not designed to survey populations of owls and other nocturnal species, trend estimates for this species may not be reliable. The trend estimates for 1966— 2000 for Illinois and the upper Midwest are 3.5 (nonsignifi- cant, P = 0.07) and 1.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.20), respectively. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Atlas data support the idea that the Great Horned Owl may be the most abundant and widely distributed owl in the state. This species was found in priority blocks in 93 counties. Because it is nocturnal and has an early breeding season, breeding birds were undoubtedly missed by the atlas survey and this species is probably more widespread than indicated. Frequency The Great Horned Owl was reported from 399 (40.0%) priority blocks and another 114 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 117 (11.7%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observations of fledged young (86 FL records) and nest with young (16 NY records). Since Great Horned Owls begin nesting in January and the young have normally fledged by May, Confirmed breeding was underreported by the atlas project. Presumably, Great Horned Owls nested in many more blocks than indicated by the atlas data and likely nested in most blocks with Probable and Possible records. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled - Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 117 LT, 293 186 14.5 Probable 86 8.6 21.6 103 8.0 Possible 196 19.6 49.1 224 17.4 Totals 399 40.0 100.0 513 39.9 * 998 priority blocks ** |,286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) % of priority blocks with records for this species Confirmed @& _ Probable ES Possible Priority Nonpriority | [ola a Og ® Great Horned Owl 167 Barred Owl Strix varia ci) Kanae Hirabayashi Code: BDOW Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada, eastern and northwestern U.S., parts of Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: common permanent resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: mature bottomland forests, swamps, river valleys, upland and mixed forests with ravines/ streams. Nest: in tree cavity, occasionally a nest box. Eggs: 2—3, white, unmarked. Incubation: 28-33 days. Fledging: about 42 days. This large woodland owl is distributed widely but with low density in southern Canada from the west to the east coast, the eastern half and northwest U.S., and parts of Mexico. The Barred Owl is the “hoot” owl known for its call “Who cooks for you, who cooks for you-all.” Although mostly nocturnal, it calls during daylight hours as well. This species responds readily to imitations of its call. The Barred Owl is a year- round resident that inhabits mature woods, bottomland forests, and river valleys that contain hollow trees with sizable cavities for nesting and roosting. The Barred Owl is a generalist predator with a varied diet that includes small mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, fish, insects, and 168 crayfish. Deforestation and timber harvest, which limit the availability of old-growth forest, along with forest fragmen- tation are threats to this species. Protection and preservation of large tracts of mature woodlands and wooded riparian areas that include dead and dying trees would benefit this species. Populations in North America have been stable or have increased in the last three decades (Mazur and James 2000). Illinois History Toward the end of the nineteenth century, the Barred Owl was “by far the most numerous species of owl in wooded portions of the state” (Ridgway 1889) and was still common at the turn of the century (Cory 1909). By the mid-1950s it was considered a fairly common permanent resident in the north and central portions of the state and probably the most common owl in the south and along the river bottoms of central Illinois (Smith and Parmalee 1955). The Barred Owl is still common in most bottomlands and swamps in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Owls in general are not adequately sampled by the BBS. Trend estimates are 0.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.86) for Illinois and 3.4% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.18) for the upper Midwest for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution The Barred Owl was found in most of the larger bottomland forests throughout the state during the atlas project. It was reported in priority blocks in 78 counties, but was rare in the northeast. This species is known to occur in more locations than reported during the atlas project. Frequency The Barred Owl was reported from 279 (28.0%) priority blocks and 33 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 60 (6.0%) of the priority blocks, most commonly by finding fledged young (51 FL records). Since Barred Owls are an early nesting species, the opportunity to confirm nesting was often missed during the atlas project. Therefore, Barred Owls probably nested in many more blocks than indicated by the atlas data. Since Barred Owl vocalizations are easily recognized and this species is not known to roam widely, the blocks with Probable and Possible records may have been nesting sites as well. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** C) [eo ol ome No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Oooslo omlc o@ Blocks — with records blocks e e Confirmed 60 6.0 id 73 Or Oo Probable 79 79 28.3 92 rie. Possible 140 14.0 50.2 147 11.4 a C Totals oie 28.0 100.0 Side 124.3 e * 998 priority blocks _ - - = ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) - LI O ea Hom Of] i O oe : 5 oO % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks = Sen | Gade blocks (gray = no records with records for a for this species) this species 7 . | ®@ i 1] Priority Nonpriority Ooo ss me a Confirmed & e = - a Probable a @ - = = 3 = g Possible LJ O = 3 7 “ es ai ) 4 m w a Oo Oo oO ° a) a fia CJ a Be BS | O w Cy — 4 @ & O Bg Oe Oo Og @ Omgood OOUgGo|l | & L] Ks i [ 0 B o 0 i) fs O ia OB | fel CO Barred Owl 169 Short-eared Owl Asio flammeus Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: SEOW Rangewide Distribution: Europe, Asia, South America, northern Alaska and Canada, south through most of the U.S. to Central Mexico. 115 Bile) te Abundance: uncommon migrant and winter resident, rare summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: grasslands, meadows, and marshes. Nest: a scrape sparsely lined with grass or weeds, on ground, concealed by low vegetation. Eggs: 4-7, white to creamy white, unmarked. Incubation: 26-28 days. Fledging: from 31 to 36 days. The Short-eared Owl is found nearly worldwide. In North America the breeding range is generally the western half of the continent and eastern Canada. Since it inhabits open areas and sometimes hunts during daytime, it is one of the more visible owl species. This nomadic species requires large grasslands, marshes, and wetlands with plentiful small rodent populations (Holt and Leasure 1993). Northern Harriers often occur at the same sites but they are rarely serious competitors for prey since the short-eared is most active during the hours around dusk and dawn. Nesting takes place early in the season. Short-eared Owls are ground nesters and nest mostly in grasslands. Populations have declined in many areas of North America, especially in the northeastern U.S. (Holt and Leasure 1993). Elimination of grassland habitat has been a key factor in population declines and preservation, restoration, and proper management of large grassland tracts are critical to the Short-eared Owl 170 population. Areas enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program appear to have enhanced Short-eared Owl habita- tion in Missouri (Jacobs and Wilson 1997). Reclaimed strip mines may also provide additional habitat for this species. Illinois History During the 1800s, the Short-eared Owl was “the most abundant species of the family . . . common everywhere, on prairies and marshes, during the winter” (Nelson 1876). Ridgway (1889) stated that it occurs “in all open grassy situations, either as a winter visitant or resident, and is particularly common on the prairies.” Cory (1909) noted that it Was common in spring and fall and a “not uncommon resident throughout the year.” By the 1950s it was an irregular migrant in the south and an uncommon permanent resident in the central and northern zones of Illinois (Smith and Parmalee 1955). With the disappearance of native grassland and wetland habitats, the breeding population in Illinois has become extremely scarce. In 1990 Short-eared Owls nested at five locations in the state, the first docu- mented nestings since 1973 (Herkert 1992). The Short-eared Owl is listed as an endangered species in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends There are insufficient BBS data for Illinois to estimate reliable population trends for this rare and localized species. The trend estimate is 13.6% per year (significant, P = 0.03) from 1966 to 2000 for the upper Midwest; sample size and relative abundance are low. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 3. Distribution Once a fairly common breeding species in the prairies, the Short-eared Owl is now a rare breeder in Illinois. It was reported in priority blocks in Vermilion and Shelby counties and a nonpriority block in Pike County during the atlas project. Herkert (1992) reported that the species also nested in Lee, McLean, Jasper, and Marion counties during the atlas project period. The nomadic Short-eared Owls are found in areas with abundant prey and could occur where large tracts of grassland are available, such as Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie in Will County and Prairie Ridge State Natural Area in Jasper and Marion counties. Frequency The Short-eared Owl was reported from four (0.4%) priority blocks and one nonpriority block. Breeding was Confirmed in two of the priority blocks (adjacent blocks in Vermilion County). Because of their crepuscular activity, Short-eared Owls could have been missed easily during the atlas project. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 2 0.2 50.0 2 0.2 Probable 0) 0.0 0.0 1 0.1 Possible 2 0.2 50.0 2 Or Totals 4 0.4 100.0 5 0.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & ® Probable Possible LJ O Short-eared Owl 171 Chordeiles minor Common Nighthawk Gary Herren Code: CONI Rangewide Distribution: southern half of Canada, south through most of the U.S. to northern Argentina. 115 FTO) he Abundance: common migrant and fairly common summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open and semi-open areas with little vegetation, and cities on flat-roofed buildings. Nest: a depression on flat ground or on flat, graveled rele) 4 (0) oF Eggs: 2, white to olive, with olive mottling. Incubation: 19 days. Fledging: about 21 days. The Common Nighthawk, colloquially known as bullbat, breeds throughout most of the U.S. and southern Canada and in parts of Mexico and Central America. Historically, it was known as a species of the open country that nested on areas of bare ground with unobstructed visibility. Although it still occurs in natural settings, Common Nighthawks are now found in urban areas and have adopted flat, gravel-topped roofs as their new, predator-free nesting habitat. The first record of rooftop nesting occurred in 1869 (Gross 1940). During the breeding season, nighthawks can be heard or seen any time of the day or night but are most active around dusk when they are in search of flying insects. Nighthawks feed Le. exclusively on insects taken on the wing. Early in the breeding season the nighthawk produces a distinctive booming sound during its courtship flight. At other times its call is a nasal-like “zeep.” Nighthawks often sit in trees, perching parallel to the branches because their feet are too small and weak to grip the branches. This behavior and their cryptic plumage help to conceal them. Illinois History The Common Nighthawk has historically been a common summer resident throughout the state (Cory 1909; Smith and Parmalee 1955). It is now most commonly reported from cities and towns where flat-topped roofs are available. Armstrong (1965) and Wedgwood (1973) suggest that the density of flat roofs is an important factor in selection of urban home ranges. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimates for 1966—2000 for Illinois and the upper Midwest are —9.9% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.10) and —1.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.52), respectively. This crepuscular species is not adequately sampled by the BBS. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution The Common Nighthawk was evenly distributed throughout the state during the atlas project and was reported in priority blocks in 77 counties. At present, it is most frequently encountered in cities and towns where the lights attract flying insects and flat, gravel-topped roofs provide nesting habitat. Since most cities and towns were outside of priority blocks, Common Nighthawks were probably underrepresented in the atlas data. The absence of records from the southern tip of the state is puzzling and may be a result of insufficient sampling in this region. Frequency The Common Nighthawk was reported from 233 (23.3%) priority blocks and 73 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 31 (3.1%) of the priority blocks. Due to the inaccessibility of their rooftop nesting sites, confirmation of breeding was difficult. It was Confirmed in only 13% of the 233 priority blocks in which it was recorded, which is among the lowest rates of confirmation for species reported in more than 10 priority blocks. Common Nighthawks probably nested in most blocks where they were reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled O88 @ Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 31 a1 13.3 43 3.2 Probable 73 43 31.3 93 8) Possible 129 12.9 55.4 WO 13.2 Totals oN s3 100.0 30699 23.8 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed ® Probable a Possible Ss O C] @ eI Common Nighthawk 173 Chuck-will’s-widow Caprimulgus carolinensis Code: CWWI Rangewide Distribution: southeastern U.S., south through Central America to northern South America. 115 Fle) Abundance: uncommon migrant and summer resident in south, very rare and local in central part of the state. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open pine-oak woodlands and deciduous forest edges, especially uplands. Nest: none; on ground, uses same dead-leaf area each year. Eggs: 2, variable colors but mostly white, cream, or pinkish with brownish or purplish gray mottling. Incubation: 20+ days. Fledging: about 17 days. This nocturnal woodland species breeds mainly in the southern U.S. from the Atlantic states to Texas and Okla- homa. At night during the breeding season it repeats its name over and over again. Although the Chuck-will’s-widow and Whip-poor-will occur in the same areas and can be heard at the same time, the Chuck prefers drier, more open wood- lands, including savannas, barrens-like areas, and forest edges. It is rarely seen because its cryptic plumage camou- flages the bird on a tree limb or the forest floor. Nests are 174 placed in the leaf litter on the forest floor in dense brushy cover. Chuck-will’s-widows feed at night, flying low to the ground and using their large funnellike mouth to capture flying insects. Little is known about the life history, habitat requirements, or population trends of the Chuck-will’s- widow or Whip-poor-will because their cryptic coloration and nocturnal habits make them difficult to study. Illinois History In the 1800s the Chuck-will’s-widow was “not uncommon” as far north as Wabash County (Ridgway 1889). Its current distribution is comparable to that of a century ago. Presently the Chuck-will’s-widow, which is the largest nightjar species in Illinois, is uncommon outside of the three southernmost tiers of counties. Breeding Bird Survey Trends As with other nocturnal species, the BBS is not an adequate survey for determining population status. From 1966 to 2000 the population trend in Illinois is estimated at -16.5% (nonsignificant, P = 0.12). The upper Midwest trend estimate is -0.9% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.38) for the same period. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution . The Chuck-will’s-widow is primarily a southern bird. The southern tip of Illinois is at the northern limit of its breeding distribution. This species was most frequently reported from priority blocks in the southern three tiers of counties during the atlas project. However, the species has recently occurred and perhaps even bred at isolated locations as far north as southern Cook County. Calling territorial males have been reported at Sand Ridge State Forest in Mason County and near Willow Springs in Cook County. Frequency The Chuck-will’s-widow was reported from 29 (2.9%) priority blocks and another 3 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in | priority block and | nonpriority block. As is the case for other nocturnal and crepuscular species, the Chuck-will’s-widow population may be underrepresented in the atlas data. Breeding Evidence ____ Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed l 0.1 3.4 2 0.2 Probable 10 1.0 34.5 12 0.9 Possible 18 1.8 62.1 18 1.4 Totals 29 2.9 100.0 oo oa * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed ® Probable Possible C] G Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 23 1.54 r= a 1 ft * 6 hod a A& MN 0.54 : ee 0 + + - t - + + { 19 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Aap : Year Chuck-will’s-widow 175 Whip-poor-will Caprimulgus vociferus Todd Fink / Daybreak Imagery Code: WPWI Rangewide Distribution: extreme southeastern Canada, eastern U.S., south through Central America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous and mixed deciduous- coniferous forests with leaf cover. Nest: none; on well-drained ground near edge of woods. Eggs: 2, white with brown, olive, or lavender dots. Incubation: |9—20 days. Fledging: about 20 days. The Whip-poor-will is often heard but rarely seen due to its cryptic coloration and crepuscular and nocturnal foraging behavior. At dawn and dusk and occasionally all night, it repeats its name over and over again. It is uncommon in its breeding range, which is generally eastern North America from southern Canada to, but not including, the Gulf states, and parts of Mexico and Central America. Whip-poor-wills inhabit deciduous or mixed deciduous-coniferous forests with little underbrush. Unlike the larger Chuck-will’s-widow, the Whip-poor-will prefers denser forests with an open understory (Cink 2002). They do not use disturbed areas or grazed woodlands, but will nest in second-growth or less- than-mature woodlands. Whip-poor-wills do not construct formal nests but simply lay their eggs on the ground in the leafy litter and rely on their cryptic plumage to avoid detection while incubating them. Their diet consists of insects captured on the wing in open areas at dawn, dusk or at night. Because of their habit of sitting along the roadside, 176 Whip-poor-wills are often hit by passing vehicles. As is typical of many nocturnal and crepuscular species, much information remains to be gathered for this species. Illinois History Early accounts of the Whip-poor-will in Illinois indicate that it was widely distributed throughout the state, but failed to mention how common it was. Smith and Parmalee (1955) stated that it was a common summer resident in the central and southern zones but uncommon in the north, and Ford (1956) indicated that it was fairly common in the Chicago region. Bohlen (1989) refers to it as a common summer resident throughout the state. During the latter decades of the twentieth century, the Whip-poor-will population has declined. Breeding Bird Survey Trends For 1966-2000 the trend estimate for Illinois is —9.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.08) and for the upper Midwest it is -2.5% per year (significant, P = 0.02). BBS data are not adequate for estimating population trends for crepuscular or nocturnal species such as the Whip-poor-will. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, Whip-poor-wills were mostly found in southern and western Illinois, where forest cover is more extensive in the state (see Fig. 14). The lower number of priority block records in the eastern and northwestern regions may be related to the generally smaller and more fragmented forests and the more extensive agricultural land use in those parts of the state. In southern Illinois, Whip-poor-wills coexist with the Chuck-will’s-widow but they prefer differ- ent habitats. Frequency The Whip-poor-will was reported from 259 (26.0%) priority blocks and 21 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 14 of the priority blocks. It was Confirmed in only 5% of the 259 priority blocks in which it was recorded, which is among the lowest rates of confirmation for species reported in more the 10 priority blocks. Breeding evidence for Confirmed records in priority blocks consisted of distraction display (5 DD records), fledged young (4 FL records), nest with eggs (4 NE records), and adults feeding young (1 FY record). It is likely that nesting occurred in the majority of the blocks in which they were heard. As with other nocturnal and crepuscular species, the atlas data may not accurately reflect the actual distribution of this species in the state. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 14 1.4 5.4 17 iB. Probable 111 11.1 42.9 123 9.6 Possible 134 13.4 Sly 140 10.9 Totals 259 26.0 100.0 280 21.8 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed #& @ Probable ie @ Possible ay O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois O+ 0 + - + + + + + =1 19 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 - 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest + + + Year + + + 196 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 4 m® O Whip-poor-will 177 Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica Frys (a OF s ROY Rangewide Distribution: southeastern Canada and eastern U.S., south to central South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open areas, especially near human habitation, swamps with hollow trees, silos and airshafts. Nest: half saucer of twigs and saliva attached to vertical wall of chimney or hollow tree. Eggs: 4-5, white, unmarked. Incubation: 19-21 days. Fledging: from 28 to 30 days. The small, fast-flying Chimney Swift, sometimes described as the “flying cigar,’ is a species that has benefited from human settlement. The swifts’ dependence on hollow trees changed when they found the dark, interior walls of chim- neys in homes, schools, and other buildings suitable for nesting (Cink and Collins 2002). The birds accept these substitutes in rural, suburban, and urban settings. The use of natural sites for nesting is now rare. During daylight, swifts are constantly airborne in search of flying insects. Their chattering sounds are familiar throughout the summer. Chimney Swifts breed throughout the U.S. and southern Canada east of the Rockies. They are fairly common to 178 Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery common in their range; however, populations have declined throughout their range in the past few decades. The current trend of capping chimneys has reduced the number of potential nesting sites (Cink and Collins 2002). Illinois History The Chimney Swift may have become more common as Euro-American settlement took place (Graber and Graber 1963). By the late nineteenth century it was considered a common summer resident throughout Illinois (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). It continued to be common throughout the twentieth century (Smith and Parmalee 1955; Ford 1956; Graber and Graber 1963; Bohlen 1989), especially in areas where open chimneys and an abundant food source were readily available. Despite the prevalent use of man-made structures, Chimney Swifts have been observed to still use natural nesting sites, especially in the swamps in southern Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Populations of the Chimney Swift in both Illinois and the upper Midwest declined from 1966 to 2000. The trend estimates are —2.5% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the state and —1.6% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the region. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Chimney Swift was a common species and reported from priority blocks in every county during the atlas project. The lack of observations in certain priority blocks may be attributed to the shortage of nesting sites, especially in the largely agricultural areas. During the atlas project, the swift was among the most frequently reported and widely distrib- uted species in priority blocks and it likely bred in most of the blocks in which it was recorded. Frequency The Chimney Swift, an easy species to detect, was reported from 846 (84.8%) priority blocks and 136 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 300 (30.1%) of the priority blocks; 81% of these records were confirmed by the observa- tion of occupied nests (244 ON records). Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 300 30.1 a Se Probable 59 3.9 7.0 67 oe Possible 487 48.8 57.6 565 43.9 Totals 846 84.8 100.0 982 76.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& @ Probable © Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 + + + } t ' ' { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 247 21+ 18+ + = | 0+ 4 : + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 = Chimney Swift + + 179 aielehaitalces-1cclomalblanlailiare elias VV cols} [efor gs] ec-mere) (8) e) ai r Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: RTHU Rangewide Distribution: southeastern and south-central Canada and eastern U.S., south to Panama. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and summer resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous or mixed deciduous- coniferous woodland, open areas with scattered trees, flower gardens, and parks. Nest: small cup of bud scales and lichens lined with plant down and bound with spider silk, placed on a tree branch in dense vegetation, usually beneath the tree canopy. Eggs: 2, white, unmarked. Incubation: | 1-14 days. Fledging: from 14 to 28 days. The Ruby-throated Hummingbird has a breeding range that includes much of eastern North America from southern Canada to the Gulf coast. It is the smallest bird in eastern North America and the only hummingbird that regularly breeds in the eastern half of the continent. The name is derived from the humming of its wings as it moves from place to place or hovers while feeding. The male has an elaborate courtship flight that loops back and forth, pendu- lum-fashion, above the female. The Ruby-throated prefers 180 deciduous forests and mixed deciduous-coniferous wood- lands but also utilizes woodland edges and openings. In addition to feeding on floral nectar and small insects, the Ruby-throated is readily attracted to hummingbird feeders. These hummingbirds are aggressive, often chasing other birds away from food sources. Illinois History The Ruby-throated Hummingbird has always been a fairly common breeding species throughout Illinois (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909; Bohlen 1989). It commonly occurs where there is an abundance of nectar-producing flowers or well- maintained feeders. These birds are often found at humming- bird feeders in mid-to-late summer. Feeding stations in Jackson and Union counties attract more than a hundred hummingbirds on a daily basis in July and August. Breeding Bird Survey Trends From 1966 to 2000 the trend estimate is 4.7% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.11) for the Illinois hummingbird population. The trend estimate indicates that the population in the upper Midwest increased at an annual rate of 3.9% (significant, P < 0.01) for the same period. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Atlas data indicate that hummingbirds occurred throughout the state. They were found in priority blocks in 93 counties and Confirmed as breeding in 40 of them. They were found more often in priority blocks in the southern half of the state. Frequency The Ruby-throated Hummingbird was reported from 420 (42.1%) priority blocks and another 37 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 73 (7.3%) of the priority blocks; three-fourths of these records were reports of occupied nests (30 ON records), nest with eggs (13 NE records), or fledged young (12 FL records). Atlasers often relied on homeowners with hummingbird feeders to provide evidence of occurrence for the atlas project. Because hummingbirds are small, quick, and vocally weak, and their nests are extremely difficult to locate, confirmation of breeding was not easy. They were Confirmed in 17% of the 420 priority blocks in which they were reported, which is a relatively low rate of confirmation considering the total number of breeding records. It is possible that the Ruby-throated bred in the majority of blocks in which it was reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** = | a LJo a O No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Oog mo ls 4 Blocks — with records blocks of ® Confirmed 73 ta 17.4 87 6.8 0 Ao @ Probable 122 12.2 29.0 131 10.2 0 Possible 225 22:5 53.6 239 18.6 cs J = Om Totals 420 42.1 100.0 AS Te 35.5 aia oO 4 ~ 998 priority blocks he a = 1,286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) 2 5 ° C | 1 ada O 2 BI % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for al LD @ for this species) this species 2 = @ |) a e Priority Nonpriority e z = 8 Confirmed & r) - =e Probable i @ = -58 Possible O | ee a Breeding Bird Survey Trends 4 = Illinois is i 2 ; = a= ise] : caine 1.5+ : i i 3 al oO Be e) rH OHOBB OMB has si) mw) |} @ Oo = el es | 0 + + t t ' t { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 a Be Year Upper Midwest | 0 2) = a @ tes = cs Bod 1 @ e Sly i e) 0.5+ . LJ QO + - . : + + ; 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Ruby-throated Hummingbird 18] sievitclom @iarenieyatcis Ceryle alcyon Annalee Fjellberg Code: BEKI Rangewide Distribution: throughout most of North Niele MO HWAVELy Carli em ie ulnourm Onliner maxeltien| through Central America. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and summer resident, uncommon winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: along rivers, streams, and other watercourses. Nest: a saucer lined with grass and leaves at the end of a burrow or cavity in a vertical bank, near water. Eggs: 6—7, white, unmarked. Incubation: 23—24 days. Fledging: 23 or more days. In North America the Belted Kingfisher breeds in suitable habitat from northern Canada and Alaska through the southern states, except for the southwestern U.S. It is the only species in this generally tropical family to occur in its range. This species is one of only a few species of North American birds in which the female is more brightly colored than the male. Belted Kingfishers, which are easily identified by their rattling call, are found around clear open water and during the breeding season, where there is a vertical earthen bank for nesting. They capture fish and occasionally amphib- ians and crayfish in shallow water or near the surface by plunging beak-first into the water from an overhanging perch or from a hovering position. For nesting they prefer stream or river banks, but may use any vertical bank of suitable 182 height and texture (e.g., sand and gravel pits, landfills, and sawdust piles) in which to dig their nesting burrows. At one time kingfishers were persecuted by fishermen and at fish hatcheries because of their diet. Illinois History The status and distribution of Belted Kingfishers in Illinois is virtually unchanged since the late 1800s. The account by Cory (1909) characterizes the Belted Kingfisher as a common summer resident in Illinois and considered it a familiar bird wherever there was water. The Belted King- fisher is one of only three species that occur in Illinois that builds its nest in a burrow (the other two are the Bank and Rough-winged swallows). Breeding Bird Survey Trends In Illinois, the Belted Kingfisher population has increased at an annual rate of 5.9% (significantly, P < 0.01) between 1966 and 2000. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest popula- tion for the same period is 0.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.92). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Belted Kingfishers occurred throughout Illinois but were found more frequently in priority blocks in the northern three-quarters of the state during the atlas project. Their occurrence as a breeding species is highly dependent on the availability of suitable nesting sites. The gaps in occurrence records for the central and south-central portions of the state include many blocks that were not adequately surveyed. Kingfishers were reported in priority blocks in 98 counties and probably occurred in every county. Frequency The Belted Kingfisher was reported from 538 (53.9%) priority blocks and 110 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 144 (14.4%) of the priority blocks. Most of the evidence for Confirmed records in priority blocks was observations of adults feeding young (62 FY records), occupied nests (42 ON records), and fledged young (28 FL records). Since Belted Kingfishers can be identified readily by sight and sound, they were usually found where present in blocks that were adequately searched. Although nesting burrows are easily recognized when seen, they are not easy to find and in most instances require searches by boat to find them. Therefore, most blocks where kingfishers were recorded but not Confirmed were probably breeding sites. Breeding Evidence a Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 144 14.4 26.8 169 Sal Probable 176 17.6 32.7 228 isi Possible 218 28 40.5 251 19.5 Totals 538 53.9 100.0 648 50.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & & Probable Possible EI O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0+ + + + t : . { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest pi 1.57 g a1] 1S) 0.5+ a QO + + + + + + + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year i iy Belted Kingfisher a{=1e by at=y-(e(-Tem\| (elele|el-ler (1 Melanerpes erythrocephalus ae Robert Randall t OiTs (aw 4s AYO) Rangewide Distribution: extreme south-central and southeastern Canada and eastern U.S. 1H H We) Abundance: common migrant and summer resident, fairly common to uncommon winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous woodlands, savannas, swamps, open areas, parks, and other areas with dead Si eae Nest: an excavated cavity lined with wood chips, in a tree or utility pole. Eggs: 4-5, white, unmarked. Incubation: |2—13 days. Fledging: from 27 to 30 days. The strikingly colored Red-headed Woodpecker, the only woodpecker in the eastern North America with an entirely red head, is a noisy and aggressive bird. During the breeding season, it prefers open woodlands, savannas, woodland edges, and parks but is also known to inhabit cleared woodlands and bottomland forests. The Red-headed Wood- pecker excavates a hole in a tree trunk, utility pole, or fence post for a nest. It feeds on acorns, nuts, and corn which it frequently stores, and sometimes insects. The numbers of this species have fluctuated greatly over the past two centuries, perhaps due in part to the variation in mast (e.g., acorns) production. Red-headed Woodpeckers breed 184 throughout much of the eastern half of North America from southern Canada to the Gulf coast. Rangewide, the popula- tion has declined in recent decades, according to Breeding Bird Survey data. Competition with European Starlings for nesting cavities and the loss of nesting trees and oak wood- lands are considered factors causing population declines in the past century. Illinois History In the 1800s the Red-headed Woodpecker was “decidedly the most numerous member of the family” in the more heavily wooded portions of Illinois (Ridgway 1889). At the turn of the century it was an abundant summer resident and a regular winter resident in southern Illinois (Cory 1909). From the early to mid-1900s the summer population significantly declined, most prominently in the southern third of the state. The decline was attributed to the competition from starlings and loss of savanna habitat (Graber and Graber 1963; Wallace et al. 1961). Populations increased with massive tree die-offs caused by the spread of Dutch elm disease and major flooding. In recent years, the Red-headed Woodpecker population has experienced another major decline. Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS data indicate that the Illinois and upper Midwest populations of this woodpecker have been declining over the past 35 years. The trend for 1966—2000 for Illinois is estimated at —2.8% per year (significant, P < 0.01). The trend estimate for the upper Midwest is also negative at —3.8% per year (significant, P < 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, the Red-headed Woodpecker was a widespread breeding species throughout the state despite its declining population. This species was found in priority blocks in every county and was among the most frequently reported and widely distributed species in priority blocks. Frequency The Red-headed Woodpecker was reported from 861 (86.3%) priority blocks and 105 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 558 (55.9%) of the priority blocks. The presence of this woodpecker was easy to detect. Ninety percent of the Confirmed records in priority blocks were confirmed by observation of adults feeding young (203 FY records), occupied nests (170 ON records), and fledged young (131 FL records). Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 558 55.9 64.8 613 47.7 Probable 174 17.4 20.2 202 | ee y Possible 129 12.9 15.0 ileyll Li? Totals 861 86.3 100.0 966 oa * 998 priority blocks ** ] 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& @ Probable @ Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Ny Llinois Count Pa . 0 + : —- ~ - ' : { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 107 gu Count As O + + + + + 1976 198i, 1986) 1991 Year + 1966 1971 1 996 2000 Red-headed Woodpecker 185 Red-bellied Woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus Dennis Oehmke Code: RBWO Rangewide Distribution: eastern half of the U.S. ILLINOIS Abundance: common permanent resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: upland and bottomland deciduous forests and woodlands, swamps, parks, and towns. Nest: an excavated cavity in a deciduous tree, occasionally a utility pole. Eggs: 4-5, white, unmarked. Incubation: |2—14 days. Fledging: from 24 to 27 days. The Red-bellied Woodpecker is a common, conspicuous, and noisy permanent resident of upland and bottomland forests in the eastern half of the U.S. from Canada to the Gulf coast. This species inhabits a wide variety of forest types and also occurs in semi-open and open areas with a scattering of trees and around settled areas, such as parks and older residential areas. Nesting and roosting cavities are usually excavated in dead tree limbs, often on the underside of the limb. The Red- bellied feeds on a variety of food sources, such as fruits, insects, seeds, and especially acorns. This species competes 186 with Red-headed Woodpeckers and European Starlings for nesting sites, and is rarely found in the same tree. The Red- bellied may occur in the same area as the Red-headed Woodpecker but generally breeds in larger, denser forests (Jackson et al. 1996). The breeding range of the Red-bellied expanded north and west during the last half of the 1900s, and the species is abundant in the southeastern states (Shackelford et al. 2000). Illinois History During the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Red-bellied Woodpecker was a “rather uncommon resident in northern Illinois . . . but common in southern Illinois” (Cory 1909). During surveys of 1907-1909, the breeding population was mostly limited to the southern zone. During 1956-1958 surveys this species was found throughout the state but the nesting population in the northern zone was still very sparse (Graber and Graber 1963). By 1957-1958 the number of Red-bellied Woodpeckers had greatly increased in the state (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends During the period 1966-2000 the Red-bellied Woodpecker populations increased in Illinois and the upper Midwest at annual rates of 1.7% (significant, P < 0.01) and 1.6% (significant, P < 0.01), respectively. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Red-bellied Woodpecker was found statewide during the atlas project, with priority block records in all but one county. It was more frequently reported in priority blocks in the central and southern portions of the state, which is the distribution pattern reported in the 1950s (Graber and Graber 1963). Frequency The Red-bellied Woodpecker was reported from 762 (76.4%) priority blocks and another 97 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 388 (38.9%) of the priority blocks. The breeding evidence for 93% of Confirmed records was adults feeding young (175 FY records), fledged young (114 FL records), and occupied nests (70 ON records). Since Red- bellied Woodpeckers are permanent residents and their presence was easy to detect, it is likely that nesting occurred in the majority of blocks in which the species was recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** Boeegoo mom, a8 No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Ommieo ge o ah a “ace, Blocks — with records blocks Oe O | Ge | | ye Confirmed 388 38.9 50.9 432 33.6 Os am ae - one @ 58 Probable 172 Wife: 22.6 202 By. 7/ fal el lt ig Possible 202 20.2 26.5 22> 17.5 a a = e A * Suen 9 Totals 762 764 1000 859 668 Beale oo 224/00 P20 8 a oO ces | i oon : bf 2 a Rego Sua biotes (prisity and nonpriority) z - e eB ! : Ag i O | B Bom Omg Bo : 0 @ segue of oO oo A cn | Be wUOSs © pom B Oo © % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks me _= aM, Gotti met eek blocks (gray = no records with records for S O BB | a 8 BD for this species) this species Os Tha ele 2 sas i a= Seeieoo HOD eee fp Soe a gawe r Priority Nonpriority ee he oe = @ ==” os i a 2 # Confirmed #& @ os fa 28 go = Probable © eee ee Seomsaa omsgees Possible O Seo =—we =i ~ > Oo BoOe| g@oesees Te | Breeding Bird Survey Trends See Geese a ae Oo Ea is Illinois ee ee i l a gh 68 8 7 oe oe | 5 8 eh en eo ops Shee elcoa Hae 8 oO \a e See ioes S seeeeoeeoct| eae eUgos ie Un Boe @ Boe So Oo |aeae = B BEBE eeee @ ‘ 18 @ jos @ Bee eae ele ew ee Be ie Bee aon 2 een a OO |aeee a 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 r] BOCs Bee Blo do x Baa ese Se 0S Pee Upper Midwest i i oe a] ae O | 2] i ee | a mote 0 : a) ae a liom | gO Oo Be moms 0 NX ia “ oe 0 + | + eet + (4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year la {=xe br el=)//[=Yo | Leleye| o]-Yo1. (1g 187 Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Sphyrapicus varius Peter Dring Code: YBSA Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada, the eastern half of the U.S. to western Panama. 11H Ble) te Abundance: fairly common migrant, rare summer resident, uncommon winter resident, decreasing northward. | Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous or coniferous forests. Nest: a tree cavity lined with chips. Eggs: 5—6, white, unmarked. Incubation: 12—13 days. Fledging: from 25 to 29 days. The Yellow-bellied Sapsucker, named for its yellow belly and sap-feeding habits, is common to fairly common in deciduous and coniferous forests, and prefers large tracts of habitat (Jackson et al. 1996). Its breeding range includes the northern states from the Atlantic coast to North Dakota and much of southern and western Canada. The sapsucker drills neat rows of small holes in circles on live trees and feeds on the sap that wells up in the holes and the insects that are attracted to the sap. Drilling in the late winter and early spring is timed to occur when the sugar content in the running sap is at its highest and other sources of food are scarce. Sapsuckers also eat fruit. The male excavates cavities for nesting and roosting. Unlike most woodpeckers that 188 require older, mature trees and dead snags, the Yellow- bellied Sapsucker makes extensive use of early successional forests (Walters et. al. 2002). Illinois History The Yellow-bellied Sapsucker, whose breeding range is primarily north of Illinois, has never been an easy species to find nesting in the state. Although Kennicott (1855) noted that nesting was known to occur in Cook County and Cooke (1888) referenced the presence of two nests in Vermilion County in 1884, Ridgway (1889) wrote that “though it may perhaps breed sparingly in the extreme northern portion, I can find no record of its doing so.” Cory (1909), likewise, indicated that it was an occasional summer resident in northern Illinois without citing specific records. Between 1888 and 1955, nesting was recorded in Marshall, Tazewell, Putnam, Cook, and Henderson counties (Bohlen 1989). More recently, nesting has been reported from Carroll and Vermil- ion counties (Guth 1986; Kleen 1987). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Yellow-bellied Sapsucker is a rare breeding species in Illinois and BBS data are insufficient for estimating popula- tion trends for the state. The upper Midwest population trend estimate is 1.5% (nonsignificant, P = 0.21) for 1966—2000. From 1980 to 2000 the data indicate that the Midwest population increased (significant, P < 0.01) at an annual rate of 3.8%. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution Three breeding or potential breeding locations for Yellow- bellied Sapsuckers were reported during the atlas project, all south of the expected range. Although breeding sapsuckers are rare in the state, they are more commonly expected in the bottomlands of the Mississippi River from Henderson County northward and perhaps the bottomlands of the Illinois River from Peoria County northward. Yellow-bellied Sapsuckers continued to maintain a small and spotty breed- ing population in northern Illinois. This species regularly nests at Lost Mound National Wildlife Refuge in Jo Daviess and Carroll counties (D. Wenny, pers. comm.). Frequency The Yellow-bellied Sapsucker was reported from three (0.3%) priority blocks and no nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in a single priority block located in Vermil- ion County, where recently fledged young were found. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 1 0.1 33.3 1 0.1 Probable Yu 0.2 66.7 2 0.2 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 3 0.3 100.0 3 0.2 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ Probable ra) Possible a O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 0 + rh Year + + + + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Yellow-bellied Sapsucker 189 ai Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: DOWO Rangewide Distribution: southeastern Alaska, southern half of Canada, and the U.S. except the southwest. 11 BO) Abundance: common permanent resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous and coniferous forests and woodlands, parks, orchards, and residential areas. Nest: an excavated tree cavity lined with chips. Eggs: 4-5, white, unmarked. Incubation: 12 days. Fledging: from 20 to 25 days. The Downy Woodpecker is the smallest woodpecker in North America. Its breeding range includes southern and western Canada and all of the U.S. except for the Southwest. The Downy looks like a smaller version of its congener, the Hairy Woodpecker. During the breeding season, the Downy Woodpecker is primarily a forest dweller that utilizes a variety of wooded habitats, including riparian corridors, forest edge, small isolated woodlots, and residential areas. Downy Woodpeckers nest and roost in cavities in dead branches of trees, usually in the forest interior. Since the 190 Downy Woodpecker led [oxe) (0 [Xm o] 1] ofS 4 Downy is a permanent resident, its diet changes throughout the year in response to the availability of food. The breeding season diet consists primarily of insects, especially wood- boring insects; it also eats fruit, nuts, and corn. Illinois History The Downy Woodpecker has always been described as a common permanent resident throughout the state (Cory 1909; Smith and Parmalee 1955; Bohlen 1989; Graber and Graber 1963). In the mid-1900s most of the population was found in the central and southern parts of the state and the Downy was about four times as common as the Hairy Woodpecker (Graber and Graber 1963). On the 2000 Spring Bird Count the ratio was about five to one (Kleen 2000b). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Downy Woodpecker is a common species that varies in abundance from year to year, the causes of which are not well understood. The trend estimate for Illinois for 1966— 2000 is 0.0% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.99). For the upper Midwest the data indicate an increase in population of 0.8% per year for the same period (significant, P = 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 2. Distribution : The Downy Woodpecker was widely distributed throughout the state. It was found in priority blocks in every county during the atlas project and was among the most frequently reported and widely distributed species in priority blocks. Frequency The Downy Woodpecker was reported from 862 (86.4%) priority blocks and 163 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 411 (41.2%) of the priority blocks. As with other woodpeckers, the most frequently used breeding evidence criteria for Confirmed records in priority blocks were fledged young (188 FL records), adults feeding young (123 FY records), and occupied nest (53 ON records). Because their nests are difficult to locate, the level of breeding confirmation for this species may be correlated with the amount of sample time spent in the blocks. Since Downy Woodpeckers are permanent residents, it is likely that nesting occurred in the majority of blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 411 41.2 47.7 493 38.3 Probable 218 21.8 25.3 27k Zu. Possible 233 fie 27.0 261 20.3 Totals 862 86.4 100.0 1,025 79.7 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed r Probable a 3) Possible a O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 47 34 = 627 © .*, oO Wise . vie §) Aes - f e H _~——_* ee v ¥ 0 t ' ' ' ' ' { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 4- 3 Hu f 5 2 5 . = ‘ ° : neers pe | az = S eat ete P_ . x 23 S if + 0 + + + + _ + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Downy Woodpecker 191 Hairy Woodpecker Vd (exe) (0 [Xa] (eX-1 0 Eric Walters OCT: (He 5 PANY CO) Rangewide Distribution: southeastern Alaska and most of Canada, south throughout most of the U.S. to Panama. 11 Bile) fe Abundance: fairly common permanent resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous forests and woodlands with dead limbs and snags. Nest: an excavated tree cavity lined with chips. Eggs: 4, white, unmarked. Incubation: | 1—15 days. Fledging: from 24 to 30 days. This species is a nonmigratory resident throughout most of the U.S. and Canada and the highlands of Mexico and Central America; it is one of the most widely distributed woodpeckers in North America. The Hairy Woodpecker looks and sounds like the smaller Downy Woodpecker but is more likely to be found in larger, mature forests and wood- lands. The presence of dead trees and dead branches on live trees is essential for nesting and feeding. The Hairy Wood- pecker usually nests in the interior of forests using cavities excavated on the underside of a limb. Like the Downy, the Hairy feeds primarily on wood-boring insects but also eats nuts, fruits, seeds, and tree sap from wells made by sapsuck- ers. Since it is shy and flies off when approached, the best Laz way to detect the presence of a Hairy Woodpecker is its sharp, high-pitched, piercing call or rattle. Although fairly common throughout its range, steady declines in the Hairy Woodpecker population have occurred in eastern North America, likely due to forest fragmentation, loss of old growth, and competition for nest sites from European Starlings (Jackson et al. 2002). Illinois History Nineteenth and early twentieth century accounts of Hairy Woodpeckers in Illinois refer to them as common permanent residents (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). However, Barnes (1912) suggested the population was declining. Graber et al. (1977) believed that the Hairy Woodpecker population was certainly declining during the late 1950s through early 1970s. The Hairy Woodpecker population is currently estimated to be about one-fifth the size of the Downy population (Kleen 2000b). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Because of its preference for large blocks of unfragmented forest, the Hairy Woodpecker is not as well sampled by the BBS as the Downy. In Illinois the population trend for 1966— 2000 is estimated at 0.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.56) and in the upper Midwest it is 1.0% per year (nonsignificant, P= 0,10); Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Atlas data indicate that the Hairy Woodpecker was distrib- uted throughout the state. Even though it was less common than the Downy, it was still reported in priority blocks in all but one county during the atlas project. Because it is depen- dent on large woodland tracts, this species is not expected to occur in heavily agricultural areas. Frequency The Hairy Woodpecker was reported from 510 (51.1%) priority blocks and 96 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 127 (12.7%) of the priority blocks. The breeding evidence for most of the Confirmed records was fledged young, adults feeding young, or occupied nests (50 FL, 50 FY, and 15 ON records, respectively). Like the Downy, Hairy Woodpeckers are permanent residents and their nests are difficult to find. It is likely that nesting occurred in the majority of blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** Os Booo| oss (j= wom|, No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Oog oO w a. ao 4 Oo oO 5° “a, Blocks — with records blocks : nace ay be an ; 3 6) Confirmed 127 12.7 7 a <7 a ae a] ssePe fee Probable 124 12.4 et en hse LO =_ ] O afeacls Possible 259 26.0 50.8 289 25 O 9 |°°me an Totals 510. 51.1 100.0 606 47.1 . | te ——s = 12 °s os CJ )) vs eas (ned and nonpriority) = - e AP Tw a Com mm@é Og Oo oO. Oo |. oO oO o foo fe ia) B i) f=] ime) nOOs O % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks eae a ee BEES Ra ye 40060" due spetice| ; mien ee 0 Oe a sole % a ee | Oo » Priority Nonpriority = olo ae oO a Confirmed & @ 3 m@oo a o a @ eng a o 8 OC @ 1o oe oe ee Possible O s oe » re “ += @ OS aN ea moO OC Mm oO oO | @ i ies i [ mw Oe 2 td EEE Ren oe =e =e \e Beeepoo oO Om )OU = | m Oo i Ne Oo Beoom Ye i Omo i eo nO @ ZBeolbve O ea og il) 9 ce | @ 2 5 Breeding Bird Survey Trends = ansioosde no Upper Midwest ] Z's Og co O a | = ape o Z SOgsgoOmoogaoo gen Om ols D SOC] i Z 1} = 2 [ u r 0.54 apes 5 TS OT ae ath a BETS EEN 0 + + + ' t ~ a 1966 1971 1976 oe a 1991 1996 2000 Hairy Woodpecker 193 Joe Milosevich Code: YSFL Rangewide Distribution: nearly all of North America; most of Alaska, Canada, south through Central America. 117) Ble) Abundance: common migrant and summer resident, fairly common winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open areas with scattered trees. Nest: an excavated cavity in a tree snag or pole. Eggs: 5-8, white, unmarked. Incubation: | 1—14 days. Fledging: from 25 to 28 days. The Northern Flicker is one of only a few bird species that nests in all 49 continental states. Its breeding range includes woodland habitat in almost all of the U.S. and Canada and the highlands of Mexico and Central America. The Northern Flicker, or yellow-hammer, is a woodpecker of open or semi- open areas with a scattering of large trees. It is much less dependent on forests than the other woodpecker species. Its habitat preferences include open woodlands, hedgerows, woody edges, savannas, and urban woodlots that are close to open, grassy foraging sites. Since ants are a favorite food, flickers spend a considerable amount of time foraging on the ground. Flickers nest in cavities in dead trees or branches, utility poles, and fence posts. Yellow-shafted Flickers (found 194 Northern Flicker (Ove) F-Te) (tow ee] mostly in the East), Red-shafted Flickers (found mostly in the West), and three other closely related flicker species were combined into a single species, the Northern Flicker, in 1973 (American Ornithologists’ Union 1973). Although consid- ered common, populations are believed to be declining. Competition for nest sites with European Starlings and loss of suitable nesting trees are possible causes. Illinois History The Northern Flicker (the Yellow-shafted is the form that occurs in Illinois) was historically a common to abundant summer resident throughout Illinois (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). A significant decline in population occurred in the first half of the 1900s (Graber and Graber 1963). The suspected causes were conversion of savannas, open fields, and grasslands to row crops, loss of isolated nesting trees, and the invasion of the European Starling beginning in the 1930s. The breeding population was considerably higher in the north compared to the south in the early and mid-1900s (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends From 1966 to 2000 the Northern Flicker population declined in Illinois and the upper Midwest region at —2.6% (signifi- cant, P < 0.01) and —3.4% (significant, P < 0.01) per year, respectively. The trend estimates were also negative and significant for the subintervals (1966 to 1979 and 1980 to 2000) for both the state and the region. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution The Northern Flicker was reported in priority blocks in all 102 Illinois counties during the atlas project. It was one of the most frequently reported and widely distributed species in priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4). Frequency The Northern Flicker was reported from 920 (92.2%) priority blocks and another 173 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 467 (46.8%) of the priority blocks. The breeding evidence criteria for 89% of the Confirmed records in priority blocks were fledged young (188 FL records), adults feeding young (118 FY records), and occupied nest (109 ON records). Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 467 46.8 50.8 565 43.9 Probable 206 20.6 22.4 261 20.3 Possible 247 24.7 26.8 267 =. 20.8 Totals 920 92.2 100.0 1,093 85.0 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) % of priority blocks with records for this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed Probable Possible [ Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 a + + + + + { 1966 =1971 1976 1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest fa Count 1966 1971 te 1976 + 1981 Year +— I + 4 1986 1991 1996 2000 © @ iy) Northern Flicker Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus HG a! Michael Jeffords OTs (9 od AYO) Rangewide Distribution: southern half of Canada, eastern half of U.S. and the northern West Coast to central California. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon permanent resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: mature, deciduous, bottomland forests. Nest: an excavated tree cavity lined with chips. Eggs: 4, white, unmarked. Incubation: 15-18 days. Fledging: from 26 to 28 days. The Pileated Woodpecker, colloquially known as the “cock of the woods,” is the largest woodpecker that occurs in North America. This crow-sized bird is active and noisy. Its loud flickerlike call and distinct drumming, which it uses to establish territory and attract a mate, can be recognized from a distance. The Pileated Woodpecker is an elusive permanent resident of mature forests, especially bottomland forests with dense canopy cover, and is often seen when it flies across a roadway or open area from one forest parcel to another. This species requires large blocks of forest with large trees to excavate nesting and roosting cavities. Cavities are usually large oval holes in live or standing dead trees. The Pileated’s diet consists primarily of wood-dwelling insects, including ants (especially carpenter ants), wood-boring beetles, and grubs as well as acorns, seeds, and nuts. An abundance of 196 downed or standing dead trees are needed for foraging (Bull and Jackson 1995). Pileated Woodpeckers are found in southern Canada from the east to west coast and in the eastern half and northwestern part of the U.S. They are common to fairly common in the southeastern states but uncommon elsewhere. The eastern U.S. population declined sharply in the early 1900s due to forest clearing but began to recover in the 1920s following the regrowth of forests; this population continues to expand (Bull and Jackson 1995). Illinois History During the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Pileated Wood- pecker occurred in wooded areas throughout Illinois and was abundant in the more heavily timbered areas (Ridgway 1889). According to Cory (1909) it occurred sparingly in the wooded areas of northern Illinois. A major decline inthe Pileated’s population occurred in the late 1800s and early 1900s, probably in response to widespread deforestation in the state. In the mid-1900s the population expanded up the major river valleys from the south (Graber et al. 1977). Although probably not as abundant as it once was, the Pileated Woodpecker now occupies most of its former Illinois range (Graber et al. 1977). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Pileated Woodpecker population increased during 1966— 2000 in Illinois at an estimated rate of 7.1% per year (significant, P < 0.01) and in the upper Midwest at 3.9% per year (significant, P < 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, the Pileated Woodpecker was found in the large, mature, floodplain forests and corridors along the Mississippi, Illinois, Kaskaskia, and Ohio rivers and their tributaries, the Wabash River drainage up to Vermilion County, and in the southern counties. It was most frequently reported from priority blocks in southern and southwestern Illinois. Frequency The Pileated Woodpecker was reported from 196 (19.6%) priority blocks and 21 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 28 (2.8%) of the priority blocks. This species was Confirmed in 14% of the 196 priority blocks in which it was recorded, which is among the lowest rates of confirma- tion for species reported in more than 10 priority blocks. Since the Pileated is a permanent resident, it is likely that nesting occurred in most blocks where it was recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** st O No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Bea Bf Blocks — with records blocks Q oy Confirmed 28 2.8 14.3 32 2.5 e Probable 58 5.8 29.6 63 4.9 Possible 110 11.0 56.1 122 9.5 Totals 196 19.6 100.0 2X 16.9 @ * 998 priority blocks 9 ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) O = O O ° % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks @ blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species By O ie) 0 Priority Nonpriority Oo = Confirmed #& 8 Fe Probable es @ = as omg Possible O a - | —— Breeding Bird Survey Trends O 8 Illinois ane ta Phe oO mon Ee) ie) @ B | i | eer L] S 5 ies a o) & a | @ gl , Pa) 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 | i) @ Year & Upper Midwest O Be - _ @ BO OO 1.54 a = Omo a, i @ OO @ Leu gC O @ + ja + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year 0 + + 7 Pileated Woodpecker 197 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens Dennis Oehmke Code: EAWP Rangewide Distribution: eastern half of the U.S. and adjacent southern Canada, south to northwestern South America. 115 Bile) Abundance: common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous and mixed forests, open woodlands, woodland edges, and parks. Nest: a camouflaged cup of grass, weed stems, lichens, and cocoons lined with finer materials, well out on a horizontal tree branch. Eggs: 3, white to creamy, marked (sometimes wreathed) with browns or purples. Incubation: 12-13 days. Fledging: from 14 to 18 days. This woodland species is fairly common and widespread as a breeding species throughout the eastern half of the U.S. and southeastern Canada. The Eastern Wood-Pewee’s plaintive song, “pee-a-wee,” can be heard from dawn to dusk through- out the summer, even on the hottest days when no other birds are singing. In the East, it inhabits a variety of wooded habitats including mature upland and bottomland forests, 198 woodland edges, and small woodlots. Pewees spend much of their time high in the canopy. Like other flycatchers, pewees are almost exclusively insectivores. They perch motionless on the end of a branch for minutes at a time, then dart off in pursuit of insects, capturing them in flight. Their camou- flaged, lichen-covered nests are placed in the fork of a high horizontal limb far out from the tree trunk. The population of this species has declined over the last 25 years but it is still considered common (McCarty 1996). Illinois History The Eastern Wood-Pewee, historically and presently, is a common summer resident (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909; Graber et al. 1974; Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for 1966—2000 for the Eastern Wood- Pewee is 0.0% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.97) in Illinois and —0.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.19) in the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution The Eastern Wood-Pewee was found throughout the state and reported in priority blocks in all 102 counties during the atlas project. The Eastern Wood-Pewee was one of the most frequently reported and widely distributed species in priority blocks. The Eastern Kingbitd was the only flycatcher found in a greater number of priority blocks. Gaps in distribution generally occurred in the highly agricultural parts of the State. Frequency The Eastern Wood-Pewee was reported from 812 (81.4%) priority blocks and 144 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 212 (21.2%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observations of adults feeding young (69 FY records) and occupied nest (60 ON records). Pewees were easily detected because of their persistent daylight singing; however, nests are difficult to find. The Probable breeding category was relatively easy to establish simply by visiting the bird’s territory at least twice during a single breeding season. The Eastern Wood-Pewee likely bred in the majority of blocks in which it was reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 212 ele 26.1 248 19.3 Probable 348 34.9 42.9 414 Senn Possible 252 254 31.0 294 oad Totals 812 81.4 100.0 956 74.3 * 998 priority blocks ** ],286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) y % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & & Probable @ Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 8 = 6 ak Bay! ° e) eae ge PE a ae ns 2 Ih a ° f . me . . 0 + + ' ' ‘ t t 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 8 + 5 6 4 4 0 ' + t + + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year eA ZA Ee IE) A Bf EH B O O SH | @| @ @ Eastern Wood-Pewee ay a [| gf as ee | i a ge O O i es O 2 ele 0 a EI ea) OW [ Bon © HE BO a_§ | oO AN i | ie & @ I i=] 7108 wo a @ HHO HN 08 HB B&B © a" @ Be m i i a] |_| O IN | aE @ DeKXGg es iS NY & | ne we a BG @ 1" | & ea |\ aN SS ww i a as) O a HEEB ig a fs im G a oS iM oO is f aN i j i) TO DOW eee A | SO ow oO 7 iss ® OO O | OReeoOMMOoO | ® eo aa = i ne & ] (ag m Ow an © | O t] Hats ® @ Rag |iga igi ER OW ®@ \ fe C 199 PANor-Yolr-laM mi \\(er-l (eats Joe Milosevich OFT: (ta \ OF OF Rangewide Distribution: eastern U.S., south to northwestern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident in southern Illinois, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous bottomland and upland forests, swamps, riparian thickets, and wooded ravines. Nest: a ragged, thin, shallow cup of bark, twigs, weed stems, and grass lined with finer materials, well out on a horizontal sapling branch; distinctive streamer of vegetation hanging from bottom of nest. Eggs: 3, creamy white, spotted with browns. Incubation: 14 days. Fledging: from 13 to 15 days. Acadian Flycatchers are interior woodland species that breed in the eastern half of the U.S., especially in the southern states. This species is hard to visually distinguish from the other flycatchers in the genus Empidonax. During the breeding season, however, it is the only one likely to be encountered in large bottomland forests and swamps with dense understory, especially along streams and in damp ravines. Their distinctive songs are the best clue to detecting this species’ presence. The most common song is an explo- Sive “pizza” and the second is a prolonged trill made while the male is entranced in a fluttering, circular flight. The Acadian nests in the understory of bottomland forests and places its nest near the end of a horizontal limb of a sapling, Empidonax virescens often over water, a trail, or a road. The Acadian’s diet consists mostly of insects captured on the wing and gleaned from vegetation. In its breeding range this species is im- pacted by loss, fragmentation, and decreased size of forests in addition to nest parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds (Whitehead and Taylor 2002). Illinois History A century ago the Acadian Flycatcher was considered to be “the most numerous and generally distributed species of the genus in the state” (Ridgway 1889) and “a rather common summer resident throughout Illinois” (Cory 1909). Graber et al. (1974) reported that there was an apparent decline in the north during the 1930s and that by the 1970s it was common in southern and central Illinois but rather rare in the north. During the early 1960s, there was a modest resurgence in the north (Petersen 1964). Breeding Bird Survey Trends For the Acadian Flycatcher the trend for the Illinois popula- tion is estimated at —2.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.20) for 1966-2000. The upper Midwest population decreased at an annual rate of —2.0% (significant, P = 0.01) over the same 35-year sample period. The BBS does not adequately sample interior riparian forests, the preferred habitat of the Acadian Flycatcher. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Acadian Flycatcher was reported in priority blocks in 81 counties during the atlas project. It was most frequently encountered in the southern half of the state. Since this species prefers large forested areas, its distribution may be a reflection of this preference (Blake and Karr 1987). It is possible that this species nests in every Illinois county (Graber et al. 1974). Frequency The Acadian Flycatcher was reported from 306 (30.7%) priority blocks and another 21 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 83 (8.3%) of the priority blocks. Finding nests for this species is difficult. The primary evidence criteria used for Confirmed records in priority blocks were occupied nest (20 ON records), nest building (18 NB records), nest with eggs (14 NE records), and adults feeding young (11 FY records). Owing to the territorial nature of this species, it is likely that nesting may have occurred in many of the blocks in which it was recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 83 8.3 27.1 91 7.1 Probable 92 9.2 30.1 99 ney: Possible 131 te 42.8 mr 1? Totals 306 30.7 100.0 ed 25.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority — % of priority blocks with records for blocks (gray = no records for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed e Probable : oy Possible CJ O Breeding Bird Survey Trends O Illinois in) + Count a NN QO + - - + + - + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 3 s 2° Count 0 + + + + + + + 1 1966 1971.5 1976) 1981 1986: 1991 1996). 2000 Year i y Bo a Acadian Flycatcher 201 Code: ALFL Rangewide Distribution: eastern Alaska and most of Canada, south through the eastern U.S. to northern South America. 11 Bile) Abundance: fairly common migrant, very rare summer resident in north. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: alder and willow swamps and thickets, bogs. Nest: an untidy, loose cup of bark, weed stems, and grass lined with finer materials. Eggs: 3—4, white, with brown spots near the larger end. Incubation: |2—13 days. Fledging: about 13-14 days. Except for its three-syllable “fee-bee-o” song, the Alder Flycatcher is virtually indistinguishable from the Willow Flycatcher in the field. Until the 1970s they were considered to be the same species, the Traill’s Flycatcher. The breeding range of the Alder Flycatcher is more northern than the Willow Flycatcher’s. Alder Flycatchers breed in much of Canada and the northeastern U.S. from Minnesota to Maine. 202 PAN Co [=a a \Vfor-) Cer aly Empidonax alnorum Where the two species coexist they may sometimes be distinguished by their habitat preferences. The Alder usually chooses wet thickets and brushy wetlands with tall, dense vegetation (Zink and Fall 1981) and is less likely to breed in the drier, more open upland settings. The Alder’s nest is more loosely constructed, like that of the Song Sparrow or Indigo Bunting, and placed low to the ground (1-3 feet) while the Willow’s is more compact, comparable to that of a Yellow Warbler or goldfinch, and placed 3—10 feet above the ground (Brauning 1992; Peterjohn and Rice 1991). Alder Flycatchers perch in shrubs, darting out to catch flying insects; they also glean insects and spiders from vegetation. Illinois History In Illinois the Alder Flycatcher had virtually no records as a species until 1973, when it became recognized as a full species. Alder Flycatchers typically nest north of Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Adequate BBS data are not available for the Alder Flycatcher in Illinois. For the upper Midwest, the population of this species is estimated to have increased at an annual rate of 1.4% (significant, P = 0.02) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 1. Distribution Illinois is at the extreme southern tip of the Alder Flycatcher’s breeding range. Atlas records for this species were limited to the northern part of the state. Frequency The Alder Flycatcher was reported from six (0.6%) priority blocks and nine nonpriority blocks. Breeding was not Confirmed in any block. Because this species is a notori- ously late spring migrant and males regularly sing their territorial songs while migrating to their nesting grounds, atlas records may have been of migrating birds. Interestingly, the reports of territorial males suggest that breeding may have been attempted. Since the Alder and Willow flycatchers look alike, misidentifications are very possible and the atlas data for these two species may not be totally accurate. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled d Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Probable 4 0.4 66.7 9 0.7 Possible z 0.2 NG Es 6 Totals 6 0.6 100.0 15 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & Probable Possible LJ : Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 0 + ‘ re ' ' 19 1971 1976 1981 1986 Year + 1991 1996 2000 Alder Flycatcher 203 Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii Walter Marcisz Code: WIFL Rangewide Distribution: extreme southern Canada, south through most of the U.S. to central South America. ABN) tS Abundance: fairly common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: swamps and streamside thickets (especially willows), more open habitats than Alder Flycatcher. Nest: a compact cup of bark, weed stems, and grass lined with finer materials, in an upright or slanting fork. Eggs: 3-4, buff (occasionally white), with brown spots near the larger end. Incubation: |12—13 days. Fledging: from 12 to 14 days. The breeding range of the Willow Flycatcher is generally the northern two-thirds of the U.S. and extreme southern Canada. At one time the Willow Flycatcher and the Alder Flycatcher were considered to be one species, the Traill’s Flycatcher, but were split into two species by the American Ornithologists’ Union in 1973. These two species are difficult to distinguish except by song. The Willow Fly- catcher can be identified by its two-syllable song, “fitz-bew. Although both the Willow and Alder Flycatcher occur in ’ 204 Illinois, the Willow breeds in the state and the Alder, a late spring and early fall migrant through the state, has yet to be confirmed as breeding in Illinois. During the breeding season, the Willow inhabits moist shrubby areas such as thickets of willows or young trees along the edges of wetlands or near streams, and upland brushy areas such as hedgerows and roadsides. Willow Flycatchers eat insects that they catch on the wing or less often by gleaning from vegetation. Illinois History Late nineteenth and early twentieth century accounts indicate that the Traill’s [Willow] Flycatcher was a fairly common summer resident (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). It was once considered a species associated with orchards (Ridgway 1889; Barnes 1890) but that is no longer evident. Willow Flycatchers have adapted to strip-mined land, especially in east-central Illinois (Karr 1968), perhaps indicating this species may opportunistically move from areas where habitat has been lost or destroyed to new shrubby habitats. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Trend estimates for the Willow Flycatcher are —1.0% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.39) for Illinois and —0.7% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.18) for the upper Midwest for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Willow Flycatcher was encountered in priority blocks more frequently in the northern and eastern parts of the state. This species was reported in priority blocks in 89 counties and possibly occurs as a breeding species in every county. Frequency The Willow Flycatcher was reported from 406 (40.7%) priority blocks and 116 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 82 (8.2%) of the priority blocks. The most frequently used breeding evidence criteria for Confirmed records were adults feeding young (23 FY records), occupied nest (15 ON records), nest building (14 NB records), nest with eggs (12 NE records), and fledged young (10 FL records). It is likely that nesting occurred in many of the blocks in which it was recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 82 8.2 20.2 117 9.1 Probable 160 16.0 39.4 218 17.0 Possible 164 16.4 40.4 187 14.5 Totals 406 40.7 100.0 a22 40.6 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for eal for this species) this species a Priority Nonpriority Oo Confirmed & ® Probable i) = Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 2+ 1.5+ r= ely O 0 + + + + + t t { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 27 Lot 3 1 1 08 e . . ry . O . e L. i! e = = . 0.57 0 + + + + + + 4 { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Willow Flycatcher 205 Least Flycatcher Empidonax minimus Dennis Oehmke Code: LEFL Rangewide Distribution: southern half of Canada, U.S. east of the Rockies, south to Panama. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and rare summer resident, decreasing southward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open deciduous woodlands or brushy areas with scattered trees. Nest: a compact cup of bark, weed stems, and grass lined with finer materials, on a horizontal tree limb. Eggs: 4, creamy white, unmarked. Incubation: 13-14 days. Fledging: from 12 to 16 days. The Least Flycatcher, the smallest of the North American flycatchers, is common and widespread across the northern U.S. and much of Canada. During the breeding season, it prefers forest edges, open woodland habitats, shrubby areas, and second-growth habitats. Nests are placed in an upright crotch or on a horizontal limb about 10 to 40 feet above ground near the trunk. Except for the persistent singing of its song, “che-bek,” throughout the breeding season, this small drab-colored bird would probably go undetected. Least Flycatchers are noted for aggressive defense of their territo- ries and nests, perhaps leading to relatively low rates of nest 206 parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds (Briskie 1994). As with other flycatchers, this species perches, waiting for prey, and catches flying insects in the air. Illinois History Ridgway (1889) indicated that the Least Flycatcher in Illinois “is a summer resident in the northern portions . . . but the southern limit of its breeding range is unknown.” Cory (1909) notes that it was a rather common summer resident in the northern part of the state. However, by the mid-1950s, it was described as “an uncommon summer resident, formerly more common” (Ford 1956). Graber et al. (1974) believed that records attributed to being summer occurrences in central Illinois lacked substantiation and were probably late migrants. This may be true of some of the atlas data as well since many records were one-time occurrences of singing males. Breeding Bird Survey Trends For Illinois, the trend is estimated at —1.0% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.85) for 1966-2000, but this species was found on few routes and in low numbers. For the upper Midwest, which includes a substantial portion of the breeding range, the population declined during 1966—2000 at a annual rate of —1.8% (significant, P < 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 1. Distribution The Least Flycatcher was a rare breeding species in Illinois during the atlas project. Since Illinois is at the southern edge of its breeding range, most breeding records would be expected in the northern part of the state. Most of the records in central Illinois could reasonably be considered late-spring migrants, although there are records prior to the atlas project of summer occurrences in central Illinois. A small breeding population was reported at Lowden-Miller State Forest in Ogle County in the mid-1990s (S. Bailey, pers. comm.). Frequency The Least Flycatcher was reported from 24 (2.4%) priority blocks and 22 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 2 of the priority blocks (one observation of nest building in Adams County and one of nest with young in Will County). It is possible that nesting may have occurred in the blocks where observations were recorded after mid-June. Atlas records prior to mid-June may be late-spring migrants. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 2 0.2 8.3 3 0.2 Probable 3 0.3 12 12 0.9 Possible 19 1.9 79.2 31 2.4 Totals 24 2.4 100.0 46 3.6 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& e Probable @ Possible gi O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 0 + + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Yi al Least Flycatcher 207 Eastern Phoebe Sayornis phoebe Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: EAPH Rangewide Distribution: central and southeastern Canada and the eastern half of the U.S., south through eastern Mexico. 115 Hil @) fe Abundance: common migrant, fairly common summer resident, rare winter resident in south. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open and riparian woodlands, rocky ravines, bridges near wooded streams. Nest: a cup of mud pellets, moss, and plant fibers lined with finer materials, often under a bridge, on a porch or overhanging ledge. Eggs: 4-5, white, mostly unmarked (some with small brown spots). Incubation: 16 days. Fledging: from 15 or 16 days. The breeding range of the Eastern Phoebe includes central and southeastern Canada and the U.S. east of the Rockies. It is one of the earliest migrants to nest in the northern U.S. and southern Canada. The Eastern Phoebe announces its presence with its familiar “fee-bee” call and is easily recognized by the bobbing of its tail. It is found mostly in rural areas where there is water and woody cover; this includes upland and riparian forests, edge habitat, and areas with scattered trees. Phoebes often nest on buildings and under bridges instead of their natural nesting habitat, which is generally rock ledges protected by an overhang. The acceptance of man-made structures for nesting sites has benefited the Eastern Phoebe 208 population in terms of numbers and breeding range (Weeks 1994). Threats to the Eastern Phoebe population in its breeding range include nest parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds and severe winter or early spring weather (Jackson et al. 1996). Illinois History The Eastern Phoebe, the first flycatcher to return to Illinois in the spring, must have been less common prior to the arrival of Euro-American settlers. Its current distribution is largely the result of its adaptation to nesting on man-made structures. In the late 1800s and early 1900s it was already an abundant summer resident (Cory 1909) and in the mid-1950s it was still described as a common summer resident (Ford 1956; Smith and Parmalee 1955). At present, it is considered an uncommon (Bohlen 1989) to fairly common summer resident. Breeding Bird Survey Trends According to BBS data, Eastern Phoebe populations in Illinois and the upper Midwest experienced an increase for the period 1966-2000. Trend estimates for this period are 4.3% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for Illinois and 2.3% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the upper Midwest. The state and regional trend estimates were negative from 1966 to 1979, but significantly positive from 1980 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 2:and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, the Eastern Phoebe was reported in priority blocks in all but three counties. It probably nests in every county. This species was concentrated in priority blocks in the southern and western parts of the state. Phoebes are likely present where suitable nesting habitat and wood- land streams coexist. Frequency The Eastern Phoebe was reported from 608 (60.9%) priority blocks and 62 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 390 (39.1%) of the priority blocks, with the most fre- quently used breeding evidence criteria being occupied nest (128 ON records), used nest (88 UN records), nest with eggs (57 NE records), and nest with young (47 NY records). Because this species is easy to detect and identify, Phoebes were rarely missed in blocks where they occurred, even those blocks that were surveyed for only a few hours on a single day. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks Blocks with records No. % Sampled blocks Confirmed 390 | 64.1 422 32.8 Probable 84 8.4 13.8 oF Possible 134 13.4 22.0 151 Totals 608 60.9 100.0 670 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed Probable es Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends 0 + Illinois —+ — + . 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 Year 4 1991 0 + + + Upper Midwest + i 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 Year 1991 1996 2000 Eastern Phoebe 209 Mytarchus crinitus Great Crested Flycatcher Robert Randall Oriys (yn C2 OI DF Rangewide Distribution: eastern U.S. and adjacent southern Canada, south to northwestern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open deciduous forests and woodlands, and parks. Nest: a tree cavity (sometimes a nest box) lined with leaves, fur, feathers, and other available materials, especially snake skins. Eggs: 5, creamy white or buff, marked with browns, olive, or lavender. Incubation: 13—15 days. Fledging: from 12 to 21 days. The Great Crested Flycatcher is common in its breeding range, which includes extreme southeastern Canada and the Great Plains to the Atlantic coast in the U.S. It inhabits forest edges and a wide size range of open upland and bottomland forests. It most often occurs in the upper canopy of trees, with a preference for oaks. Its loud and frequent “wheep” call is easily identified and a common summer sound in woodlands. Cresteds nest in existing tree cavities or well- placed nest boxes; they have the unique habit of sometimes including shedded snake skin as part of the nest (Bohlen 1989). It has been suggested that they compete for nesting cavities with House Sparrows, European Starlings, Red- 210 headed Woodpeckers, and Red-bellied Woodpeckers; however, such competition may be low because Cresteds nest more often in cavities in live trees or dead limbs in live trees than the other species (Stauffer and Best 1982). This species is almost exclusively insectivorous and obtains its food by flycatching and gleaning insects from vegetation. Great Crested Flycatchers are probably not as common as they were prior to the arrival of the European Starling, but have benefited from the increased amount of edge habitat created by forest fragmentation. Illinois History In the 1800s the Great Crested Flycatcher was considered to be “a regular although not a common summer resident in northern Illinois . .. more numerous in southern Illinois” (Cory 1909). Since then, it has been described as a common summer resident throughout the state (Smith and Parmalee 1955; Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends For 1966-2000 the trend estimates for the Great Crested Flycatcher populations in Illinois and the upper Midwest are —0.5% (nonsignificant, P = 0.34) and -0.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.30), respectively. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 2. Distribution ; Great Crested Flycatchers were reported in priority blocks in all but one county during the atlas project. It was widely distributed throughout the state but less frequent in the heavily agricultural parts of the state. This flycatcher should be present in many mature and second-growth forests as well as older, larger woodlots, including city parks. Frequency The Great Crested Flycatcher was reported from 742 (74.3%) priority blocks and 125 nonpriority blocks. This species was Confirmed as breeding in 208 (20.8%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observations of adults feeding young, occupied nest, and fledged young (73 FY, 67 ON, and 44 FL records, respectively). The Crested’s distinctive call is the main means of detecting its presence. Finding nests for this flycatcher, as for most forest-dwelling species, is difficult. Because of the territorial nature of this species, it is likely that nesting occurred in the majority of blocks in which it was recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 208 20.8 28.0 249 19.4 Probable 290 29.1 39.1 352 27.4 Possible 244 24.4 32.9 266 20.7 Totals 742 74.3 100.0 867 67.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & ® Probable a @ Possible CJ O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 6= 44 al fe) Oo . fying 2 js ee xi 5 a ° - Sy pte, 0 7 + + + + aa + = 1966 =1971 1976 =1981 1986 =1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest ae 4 - ee Le : e*e . 2 Se a m ce . ig . NS li Soo Sar 5 | fe) Oo 9 4. QO + + + + + t ' 1 1966 1971 1976 =: 1981 1986 =1991 1996 2000 Year ao 8 Great Crested Flycatcher 211 =E-Kj (da Gale lelige, Tyrannus tyrannus Dennis Oehmke Code: EAKI Rangewide Distribution: southern half of Canada, south through most of the U.S. to central South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: forest edge, farmland, and open or riparian woodlands. Nest: a bulky cup of weed stems, grass, and plant down lined with fine grass, rootlets, hair, and feathers, in upper portion of a tree. Eggs: 3-4, white, creamy or pinkish, mottled with browns, olive or lavender (sometimes wreathed). Incubation: 16—18 days. Fledging: from 16 to 18 days. The Eastern Kingbird breeds in much of Canada and the U.S. except the Southwest. It is a distinctively marked black-and- white bird that perches conspicuously on power and tele- phone lines and fences. Kingbirds prefer open or semi-open habitats with a scattering of trees, such as pastureland, orchards, shrubby areas, roadsides, and forest edges. The Eastern Kingbird is an aggressive bird that vigorously defends its territory. Its diet is chiefly insects captured on the wing during sallying flights from a conspicuous perch. The 212 large, somewhat disheveled nests are found on horizontal branches near the top of the canopy in trees in open areas. Illinois History During the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Eastern Kingbird was a very common bird throughout the state (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). The Eastern Kingbird population in 1957 was about half the level of 1909, especially in the south; this decline was attributed to the loss of habitat, especially pastures, orchards, and hedgerows, and the use of pesticides (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Eastern Kingbird populations in Illinois and the upper Midwest experienced declines during the sample period 1966 to 2000. The Illinois trend estimate is —-2.2% per year (significant, P < 0.01) and for the upper Midwest it is -1.9% per year (significant, P < 0.01). The trend estimates also indicate population declines during both subinterval time periods (1966-1979 and 1980-2000) in the state and the region. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 2. Distribution Atlas data indicate that the Eastern Kingbird was uniformly distributed throughout the state. It was found in all 102 counties and Confirmed as breeding in all but one. Because this species is conspicuous and easily identified, gaps in distribution were more likely due to lack of coverage than absence of birds. It was one of the most frequently reported and widely distributed species in priority blocks (Table 4) and the most frequently reported flycatcher species during the atlas project. Frequency The Eastern Kingbird was reported from 935 (93.7%) priority blocks and 161 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 557 (55.8%) of the priority blocks. Breeding evidence criteria for about three-fourths of the Confirmed records in priority blocks were adults feeding young (176 FY records), occupied nests (129 ON records), and fledged young (122 FL records). Like other highly territorial species, the Eastern Kingbird probably bred in all the blocks in which it was reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 557 55.8 59.6 653 50.8 Probable 250 Peyi 26.7 290 22.6 Possible 128 12.8 NS? 153 11.9 Totals 935 oar 100.0 1,096 85.2 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed Probable Possible Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 + t + + 0 + + t -+ ' ¢ ' { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest + + + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year 4 6S 8\8 gz | U @ | B| B 8|@ & 8) @ B B Eastern Kingbird 213 Joe Milosevich Code: LOSH Rangewide Distribution: south-central Canada, south through most of the U.S. and Mexico. 115 Bile) Abundance: rare migrant and uncommon to rare summer and winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: threatened Breeding Habitat: open fields with scattered trees, open woodland, and shrubland; thorny trees. Nest: a bulky cup of twigs, forbs, and bark strips woven together and lined with finer materials, in tree. Eggs: 5-6, grayish buff, marked with gray, brown, or black near large end. Incubation: 16-17 days. Fledging: from 17 to 21 days. The breeding range of the Loggerhead Shrike includes south- central Canada, much of the U.S. except the northeastern and northwestern regions, and Mexico. Shrikes inhabit open country with short vegetation interspersed with hedgerows, scattered trees, and bushes, where they are often seen perching on branches or wires along roadsides, waiting for prey. Loggerhead Shrikes eat large insects, small mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians. Hedges and trees that have slender, sharp-pointed thorns, such as Osage orange and honey locust, are used for impaling and caching prey; hence its nickname “butcher bird.” As hedgerows have disap- peared, shrikes have increasingly used barbed wire fences for the same purpose. They often utilize Osage orange, honey locusts, red cedars, and rose for nesting because they offer concealment and protection for their nests. Loggerhead Shrike populations have declined throughout North America 214 Moye fe(=Vaal=r-(emelal al Lanius ludovicianus in recent decades (Yosef 1996). Loss of grassy pastures and hedgerows due to changing agricultural practices and development in the latter half of the 1900s have contributed to the decline (Graber et al. 1973). Increased use of pesti- cides such as DDT has been suggested as negatively impact- ing the population but the shrike population has continued to decline even after these pesticides were banned (Yosef 1996). Illinois History In early accounts the Loggerhead Shrike was described as “a more or less common species” (Ridgway 1889) and a common summer resident (Cory 1909). In the 1950s it was still a fairly common species in the Chicago region (Ford 1956). Graber et al. (1973) reported that the population had steadily declined in the northern and central portions of Illinois between 1907 and 1957, and by 1973 the entire northern and central population had basically disappeared. The loss of hedgerows and pastures was thought to be the primary reason for its decline at that time. As a result of a dramatic population decline especially between the 1950s and 1970s, the Loggerhead Shrike is listed as a threatened species in I]linois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends For 1966-2000, the trend estimate for the population in Illinois is -4.5% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.10). The upper Midwest population of the Loggerhead Shrike declined from 1966 to 2000 at an annual rate of —-8.4% (significant, P< 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Loggerhead Shrikes occurred statewide (they were reported in priority blocks in 80 counties) but were concentrated in the southern and western counties during the atlas project. Records were scattered in the northern and central counties. There is now a fairly large population at the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie in Will County, which was not reported during the atlas project. Although the northern and central Illinois populations were nearly eliminated by the 1970s, atlas data suggest that local and widely scattered populations are occurring in those parts of the state. Frequency The Loggerhead Shrike was reported from 244 (24.4%) priority blocks and 23 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 125 (12.5%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observations of fledged young (59 FL records) and adults feeding young (29 FY records). Breeding was relatively easy to confirm. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled ¥ Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 125 (eres, ae 139 10.8 Probable 42 4.2 i Be 48 ci) Possible a ded 31.6 80 6.2 Totals 244 24.4 100.0 267 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & ® Probable ® Possible ea O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois tO g = ° oO 1 = O + + ' - + + : 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 3 ~ o) 4 (e) . Oo a l i : . oh} ea i aa | ey 0 + + + + + + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Loggerhead Shrike 215 Vireo griseus White-eyed Vireo Todd Fink / Daybreak Imagery | OTs (HAS DAS | Rangewide Distribution: eastern U.S., south to eastern Central America and the Caribbean Islands. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and summer resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: thickets along streams, old brushy fields, early successional forests, and treefall gaps in mature forests. Nest: a cup of twigs, roots, strips of bark, coarse grass, and leaves bound with silk and fiber and lined with finer materials, suspended from a fork in a shrub or sapling. Eggs: 4, white, spotted with brown or black. Incubation: 12-16 days. Fledging: about 9 to 11 days. The White-eyed Vireo, a common species in its preferred habitat, breeds primarily in the eastern U.S. south of the northern tier of states to eastern Mexico. It inhabits brushy thickets and dense shrubs, unlike most other vireo species that breed in the Midwest. White-eyed Vireos commonly occur in regenerating clear-cuts, overgrown pastures, and brushy woodland margins. Because of its affinity for dense shrubby cover, this bird is more often heard than seen. It has a series of loud songs but is quiet and secretive when close to its nest. Its pendulous cup nest is placed within a few feet of the ground. Despite being hidden in tangled vegetation, nests are frequently parasitized by Brown-headed Cowbirds. Insects are the main food item, which this vireo searches for at intermediate heights in trees and shrubs. Illinois History A century ago the White-eyed Vireo was “abundant in suitable localities” (Ridgway 1889) and a “common summer resident in southern I[Ilinois, but of only casual occurrence in northern Illinois” (Cory 1909). It rarely occurred in the Chicago region (Ford 1956). Its population remained fairly stable between 1909 and 1957 (Graber et al. 1985). Currently the Illinois population is concentrated in the southern part of the state but has been increasing in numbers and frequency in central and northeastern Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for 1966-2000 for the White-eyed Vireo is —1.8% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.23) in Illinois. The population trend estimate for the upper Midwest is 0.0% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.97) for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Illinois is at the northern edge of the breeding range of the White-eyed Vireo. During the atlas project, this species was most frequently reported from priority blocks in extreme southern Illinois, with decreasing frequency northward. White-eyed Vireos were reported in priority blocks in about three-fourths of the counties. It still rarely breeds in the western and northwestern portions of the state. Frequency The White-eyed Vireo was reported from 272 (27.3%) priority blocks and 36 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 54 (5.4%) of the priority blocks. Although White-eyed Vireos were easily recognized by sight and sound, their nests were difficult to locate. This species was Confirmed in 20% of the 272 priority blocks in which it was reported, which is a relatively low rate of confirmation. The most commonly reported breeding evidence for Confirmed records in priority blocks was adults carrying food for young (25 FY records). Like the other highly territorial species, the White-eyed Vireo probably bred in many of the blocks in which it was reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 54 5.4 199 63 49 Probable 92 92 33.8 1i2 8.7 Possible 126 12.6 46.3 133 Totals 272 Pt 100.0 308 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & ® Probable © Possible CT O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 3 3 _ et iS = oe! ° Bi as 0 + - - : - : - { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 3 = . (XC 2+ | o . . ° ~ bee? ata a = . — a jie 0 + + + + + + —+ 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year White-eyed Vireo Bell’s Vireo Vireo bellii Robert Randall Code: BEVI Rangewide Distribution: central and southwestern U.S, south to Honduras. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: dense riparian thickets and hedgerows, willow thickets. Nest: a deep cup of dried leaves, shredded bark, plant fibers, and spider cocoons lined with finer materials, suspended by a rim between two twigs. Eggs: 4, white, with scattered brown spots (especially near the larger end). Incubation: 14 days. Fledging: from | 1—12 days. The Bell’s Vireo is a nondescript and reserved insectivorous bird best identified by its unique bubbly song. It breeds primarily in the central and southwestern U.S. and northern Mexico. This vireo occupies a variety of dense shrubby areas, including early successional habitats, riparian areas, roadsides, fencerows, and old fields. Although it has similar habitat requirements, the Bell’s Vireo prefers more open habitat than the White-eyed Vireo (Graber et al. 1985). Bell’s Vireo nests, which are commonly parasitized by Brown- headed Cowbirds, are placed a few feet from the ground, well-hidden in dense shrubby foliage. Abundance appears to be a function of availability of suitable nesting habitat and the level of cowbird parasitism (Brown 1993). Because of 218 the transitory nature of successional habitat and the subse- quent need for these birds to move to new nesting sites every few years, long-term population studies are difficult to conduct. Populations have seriously declined in the central part of its range in recent decades (Brown 1993). Preserva- tion of habitat along rivers and streams is important for this species. Illinois History Early accounts describe Bell’s Vireo as “confined to the prairie districts, and is almost everywhere a much less common bird than [the White-eyed Vireo]” (Ridgway 1889). A couple of decades later, it was “a not uncommon summer resident of Illinois” (Cory 1909). During the first half of the twentieth century, it was an uncommon summer resident in the Chicago region (Ford 1956). From 1909 to 1957 the statewide population level was fairly stable (Graber et al. 1985). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimates for the Illinois and the upper Midwest Bell’s Vireo populations are —1.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.66) and -4.9% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.21), respectively, for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Illinois is at the northeastern limit of the breeding range of the Bell’s Vireo. During the atlas project, this fairly uncom- mon species was thinly scattered through the state. Graber et al. (1985) expected the species to nest in all Illinois counties except the extreme south, where the White-eyed Vireo was dominant. However, the Bell’s Vireo has now become a regular breeder in the southern counties as well. The popula- tion fluctuates, in part as a response to the maturation of successional habitat. Frequency The Bell’s Vireo was reported from 159 (15.9%) priority blocks and 22 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 31 (3.1%) of the priority blocks. Unfamiliarity with its song and late-season visits to atlas blocks may have resulted in fewer reports. This species was Confirmed in 20% of the 159 priority blocks in which it was reported, which is a relatively low rate of confirmation. The Bell’s Vireo, like most other territorial species, probably bred in most of the blocks in which it was reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 31 3.1 19.5 39 3.0 Probable 55 a 34.6 64 5.0 Possible tye: ed 45.9 78 6.1 Totals 159 15.9 100.0 181 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& 6 Probable ea @ Possible L] O Bell’s Vireo 219 =| o)'Vad dal geycicsye Mm Al azo) Vireo flavifrons Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: YTVI Rangewide Distribution: eastern half of the U.S. and adjacent southern Canada, south through northwestern South America. 11H Bi (e) te Abundance: fairly common migrant and summer resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open deciduous forest, forest edge, and riparian habitat. Nest: a deep cup of grass, forbs, shredded bark, and plant fibers decorated with lichens and lined with finer materials, suspended in tree by rim from prongs of forked twig. Eggs: 4, white to pinkish white, spotted with browns (near the larger end). Incubation: 14 days. Fledging: about 14 days. The most brightly colored and perhaps the loudest of all the vireo species, the Yellow-throated Vireo breeds fairly commonly throughout the eastern U.S. from the Great Plains to the East Coast. Its “three-aye” song phrase is the best means of detecting its presence since it is more likely to be heard than seen. This vireo inhabits a variety of mature upland and bottomland forest edge habitats. Like the Red- eyed Vireo, the Yellow-throated Vireo forages for insects in the upper levels of well-canopied deciduous forests that have i) NO i) fairly open understories but tends to breed in more frag- mented forests (Rodewald and James 1996). While it nests on the forest edge, the Yellow-throated Vireo requires large blocks of forest for successful breeding (Rodewald and James 1996). Nests are typically built 25-50 feet above the ground. This species is a common host of Brown-headed Cowbirds. Rangewide, the population of this vireo has increased in recent decades, according to Breeding Bird Survey data. Illinois History At the beginning of the twentieth century, the Yellow- throated Vireo, according to Cory (1909), was a “not uncommon summer resident” in Illinois. Ford (1956) listed it as a fairly common summer resident in the Chicago region. Graber et al. (1985) found no evidence that the population had changed much within historical times. The Yellow- throated Vireo currently occurs in low numbers (Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends From 1966 to 2000 the trend estimates for the Yellow- throated Vireo are 2.2% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.15) for Illinois and 1.7% per year (significant, P = 0.02) for the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Yellow-throated Vireo was found statewide and reported in priority blocks in 92 counties. Its distribution is spotty, perhaps because habitat availability is a limiting factor. Frequency The Yellow-throated Vireo was reported from 301 (30.2%) priority blocks and 53 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 39 (3.9%) of the priority blocks, with adults feeding young (16 FY records) being the most frequently used breeding evidence criterion in those blocks. The treetop nests of this species are hard to find. It was Confirmed in 13% of the 301 priority blocks in which it was recorded, which is among the lowest rates of confirmation for species reported in more than 10 priority blocks. The Yellow- throated Vireo probably bred in most of the blocks in which it was recorded and may have been underreported as a result of difficulties with visual observation and song recognition. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks Blocks with records No. % Sampled blocks Confirmed 39 3.9 13.0 48 auf Probable 87 8.7 28.9 107 8.3 Possible 175 17.5 58.1 199 Totals 301 30.2 100.0 354 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed 8 Probable Possible C] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois g aly O 0.5+ 0 + + - . : t { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest oles she =| alt . ; O e * . 0.5+ 0 + + + + + - + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Yellow-throated Vireo 221 Warbling Vireo Vireo gilvus _ | £ a cin we Betty Darling Cottrille/Cornell Lab of Ornithology Code: WAVI Rangewide Distribution: western and south-central Canada, south to Honduras. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open deciduous woodlands, riparian forests, thickets, and parks. Nest: compact, basketlike cup of bark strips, leaves, and grass lined with finer materials, suspended by rim from prongs of forked twig. Eggs: 4, white, spotted with browns or black. Incubation: 12 days. Fledging: about 16 days. The Warbling Vireo is a common breeder in much of the U.S. outside of the southern states, and in central and silver maples, and willows (Graber et al. 1985). It inhabits the canopy of tall trees where it forages for insects. Nests are generally found in the periphery of tall trees 5—60 feet above ground. Forest fragmentation, which tends to have a negative impact on many forest-dwelling species, may benefit this species by providing additional edge habitat (Hall 1983). Brown-headed Cowbirds frequently parasitize nests. Illinois History In the late 1800s and early 1900s the Warbling Vireo was “abundant in all cultivated portions of the country” (Ridgway 1889) and “a common summer resident in suitable localities” (Cory 1909). It remained a common summer resident throughout the 1900s (Smith and Parmalee 1955; Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Warbling Vireo population experienced an increase of 2.5% per year (significant, P = 0.01) in Illinois from 1966 to 2000. The trend estimate for the same period for the upper Midwest is —0.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.82). Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 2. Distribution The Warbling Vireo was found throughout Illinois during the atlas project, but with gaps in distribution in the highly agricultural areas, which may have lacked suitable habitat. Evidence of breeding was reported in priority blocks in every county during the atlas project and these vireos may actually nest in every county. Graber et al. (1985) suggested that they may even nest in every township in the state. Frequency The Warbling Vireo was reported from 678 (67.9%) priority blocks and 124 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 157 (15.7%) of the priority blocks, and the most fre- quently used evidence criteria for these records were adults feeding young (49 FY records), fledged young (42 FL records), and occupied nest (28 ON records). The Warbling Vireo probably bred in most of the blocks in which it was reported. western Canada. A plain, gray-colored vireo with a distinc- tive warbling song, the Warbling Vireo can be heard at any time of day throughout the breeding season. The male even sings from the nest. The Warbling Vireo is a species of relatively open woods and woodland edges usually along rivers, streams, and ponds in association with cottonwoods, Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 157 15.7 23.2 201 15.6 Probable 261 26.2 38.5 316 24.6 Possible 260 26.1 38.3 285 222 Totals 678 67.9 100.0 802. 62.4 * 998 priority blocks ** |,286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ e Probable 3 © Possible ey O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Count 0+ + + + a) 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 67 44 g = . le} hd op ee ° . ed Oo MI e Ore ~~ ae 0+ + t f —t- ' | { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Warbling Vireo 223 Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus Todd Fink / Daybreak Imagery Code: REVI Rangewide Distribution: western and southern Canada, northwestern and eastern U.S., south to northern South America. 115 Bin (8) Abundance: common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous forest and woods. Nest: a dainty, basketlike cup of grapevine bark, fine grass, rootlets, and spider webs lined with finer materials, suspended by rim from forked twig. Eggs: 4, white, spotted with browns or black (especially on larger end). Incubation: | 1—14 days. Fledging: from 12 to 14 days. This species is one of the most abundant birds in the forests of North America, with a breeding range that includes the eastern half of the U.S., the northwestern U.S., and most of Canada. The Red-eyed Vireo is a drab-colored, incessantly singing bird that is more often heard than seen. It inhabits the forest interior and prefers extensive stands of mature upland or bottomland deciduous forests with closed canopies but is also known to breed in smaller woodlands. Within the forest interior it occupies the mid-to-upperstory levels. Red-eyed Vireos suspend their nests in the understory or midstory (2 to 55 feet above ground) from horizontal forked branches (Graber et al. 1985). During the breeding season, Red-eyed Vireos eat mostly insects, which they glean from foliage and branches in the forest canopy. This species is frequently 224 victimized by Brown-headed Cowbirds (Robinson 1994). In recent decades the populations in the U.S. and Canada have increased, according to Breeding Bird Survey data. Illinois History During the 1800s, the Red-eyed Vireo was referred to as “perhaps the most abundant woodland species” not only in Illinois but in its entire range (Ridgway 1889). It remained common through the first half of the twentieth century (Ford 1956; Smith and Parmalee 1955) and its population remained fairly stable for the next few decades (Graber et al. 1985). Red-eyed Vireos are probably now less common in Illinois due to fragmentation of forests and woodlands and perhaps cowbird parasitism. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for the Red-Eyed Vireo population in Illinois is —-0.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.93) for 1966-2000. The upper Midwest population increased at an annual rate of 1.8% (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000 and trend estimates are also positive and statistically signifi- cant for the two subintervals (2.3% per year for 1966-1979 and 2.4% per year for 1980-2000). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project, Red-eyed Vireos were reported throughout Illinois; they were found in priority blocks in 98 counties. They probably occur wherever there are large tracts of mature deciduous forests. Graber et al. (1985) stated that the species “surely nests in every county and probably in nearly every township.” Although the Breeding Bird Survey data do not indicate a substantial decline in population, the atlas data indicate a less ubiquitous distribution than the Graber statement suggests. Frequency The Red-eyed Vireo was reported from 496 (49.7%) priority blocks and 133 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 75 (7.5%) of the priority blocks. It was Confirmed in 15% of the 496 priority blocks in which it was reported, which is a relatively low rate of confirmation considering the fairly large number of records in priority blocks. The most fre- quently used breeding evidence criteria for Confirmed records in priority blocks were adults feeding young and fledged young (37 FY and 12 FL records, respectively). Red- eyed Vireos were easy to detect because of their persistent singing, so they were likely either scarce or absent from blocks where they were not reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** a @0U No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled can BS goo Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 75 7.5 hoe 116 9.0 ~ Probable 169 16.9 34.1 251 18.0 Possible 252 25.3 50.8 282 94219 - Totals 496 49.7 100.0 629 48.9 fs) i . . ) * 998 priority blocks whe om | ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) si 4 al fe wo a @ i (es & CO He | @ O ta & % of 998 sampled priority _ % of priority blocks — 3 @ te blocks (gray = no records with records for O i) =O, Ei 8 for thi ‘ : or this species) this species a Oo ss | @ BO Oo O ® 10 me }@O0 : O — roe = o Priority Nonpriority oi it i L + ° os &@ Confirmed @& & 0 5 os ~ ae ee Probable © = & jac 9) O Possible ol am B is ANS Nv C a Bs Breeding Bird Survey Trends 0 O C1 = Illinois GB ™ i & 7 & WW SB 167 a wg ] © a Bom LO & @ = 14 \@ lo O 12+ 97-2 a Oe _—— at! 1 @ a 5 8 I ~ es ae ig bi Omvloo isa ral ne w Pine ita JOO B 7 i o a oT ao sy ik i @ UO 0 + + + + ' ' + { O “7 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 - oe ] Year Upper Midwest wg a Ue 16 el i L_] E) i za @ a Be @ @ Oo SO eo O moO fo mo on wy a 41 Ym fo 30 @ 2+ \ 4. 0+ + + t —+ t n { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Red-eyed Vireo fitioe Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Lis ( mss: a 2 e@e@0O ” @ aoe ee he] SyopemsF; Totas 927. 929 100.0 1,108 ~—- 86.2 : a Ze aecees (Seiad eae aes Te eOe@eeed m mceee So" DEOEEY DIGCES if | ta Teo eee eo ** |.286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) | ; ~ hig Roe yy a BOsvoe BO ao on ee | (e) Gta | |\BPEMBOOOS BOBHAE ae ee S t ] HoBEMwOB Be 8 & @ BEBESB BB BH BOP DOI BP ARmeenttdeaewoooeeeae| oe en kar LA | | ] © gS en BRE B&B % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks 7 ee ae S ae blocks (gray = no records with records for I | no © eeoee!) ooo | i a Ba for this species this species PeCIcs) ine So0am a2 sl eeeeedeeeeeet @ SO B/O @ B® — © We BE Reese oe | i oe | qj 8 é ° @ Priority Nonpriority ALeaag Beg soem Oe O88 BBO Meee Confirmed ai ® i i 1 — BBO 1S B B/C oe ee ee Possible O BB Be mi | Lo) & Ze BG BH | BB BS @ Bak S&S B | ao | Breeding Bird Survey Trends Jee 0 eae@an - | ee ee Illinois | B Bg a = i a) a 48) SeBee@eesloge ia |e mc ae(| oe 42; ie oe Af | O Bee lk Oee| OBs y aia e@egee8 See oOCUboOoe 7 O BO Aw | & ] \ Ne |] Bl fia} BB a ee ee BH B i Lt Lt CJ vt a a a 6 | ARUOU DROWN WN BM BI ; in | | Tey fe J + + + + + + + 4 ~ 1966 1971 1976 =1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 a BG ANN BB Oo BLA Year @ BL ipa | i ae A Upper Midwest er Eero i) @ a w 48> ok, = = {ey oie oa] ) & ies} IX] @ OC [| ee So) @ G@ & fey Bt) @ U0 fio @ sR BBB | 18+ i L B y i27 & BL 6+ Al 0 + : t + ‘ + 4 ] 1966 ~=-:1971 1976 =1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 oe American Crow 229 Fish Crow Corvus ossifragus Joe Milosevich Code: FICR Rangewide Distribution: Atlantic and Gulf states from Massachusetts to Texas and inland U.S. along the major rivers of the East. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant and summer resident along the Ohio River and southern portion of the WW ETSSTSS10) 0) 8 eho Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: edges of floodplain woods along the major southern Illinois rivers. Nest: a cup of twigs and sticks lined with bark, hair, grass, leaves, and other fine materials, in a tree. Eggs: 4—5, bluish or grayish green, marked with brown or gray blotches. Incubation: 16—18 days. Fledging: 21 or more days. Fish Crows are generally found in the southeastern and Atlantic coast states where they are common along the coast, but their range and numbers have been expanding inland along large rivers in the late twentieth century (McGowan 2001). Inland populations inhabit bottomland forests and rarely venture far from water. They often occur in small and occasionally in large flocks. The Fish Crow is best distin- guished from the slightly larger American Crow by its nasal “carr” or “eh-eh” call notes. It is omnivorous, consuming crustaceans, fish, insects, eggs, carrion, and nestling birds by foraging on the ground, at the edge of water, and in trees. Fish Crows usually nest high in trees. 230 Illinois History The Fish Crow is apparently a newcomer to the state. Although there may be some archeological records, the Fish Crow, if it occurred in Illinois during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, was not recognized as such. The earliest account for the Fish Crow in Illinois was a sight record in 1962 (Bohlen 1989). Although nesting had been suspected for years because of observations of adults carrying food for young and recent fledglings, the first Fish Crow nest in Illinois was not confirmed until 1992 (Kleen and Schwegman 1992). The Fish Crow has since become a fairly common species in the floodplains of the rivers in southern Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends This southern species has been found on only a few BBS routes in Illinois and the upper Midwest and the trend estimates have deficiencies due to small sample size, low relative abundance, and annual variability in abundance. The trend estimate for the Fish Crow for 1966-2000 is 10.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.59) for Illinois and 9.2% per year (nonsignificant, p = 0.33) for the upper Midwest. In the southeastern states, where the species is more common, the trend estimate is 1.4% per year (significant, P = 0.04). Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 3. Distribution Although Fish Crows occur along the Mississippi River as far north as southern Adams County, the most northerly record during the atlas project was in southern Madison County. Fish Crows also occur along the Ohio River as far north as Gallatin County, but were not reported beyond western Massac County during the atlas project. The current distribution of this species is closely associated with the floodplains of the Ohio, lower Mississippi, Cache, Big Muddy, and Kaskaskia rivers. Frequency The Fish Crow was reported from 13 (1.3%) priority blocks; it was not reported from any nonpriority block. It was Confirmed as breeding in 4 blocks; all were adults carrying food for young. Since most of the Fish Crow’s nesting activities were completed by the time the blocks were surveyed and because of potential confusion with the American Crow, it is likely that the atlas data underrepresents the actual status and distribution of this species. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 4 0.4 30.8 4 0.3 Probable 3 0.3 Zoid 3 0.2 Possible 6 0.6 46.2 6 0.5 1.0 Totals ie) 13! 100.0 13 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & & Probable ® Possible ie O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois @) - . : + + + { 1966" 1971 ~=1976, 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year 231 Horned Lark Eric Walters COCs (as 5s (6) By. Rangewide Distribution: Eurasia, northern Africa, throughout North America from northern Alaska and Canada to central Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant, summer and winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open country, grasslands, agricultural areas with sparse vegetation, airports, and golf courses. Nest: a shallow, cuplike depression in the ground lined with roots, grass, and hair. Eggs: 3-4, variable, gray or greenish, heavily speckled with brown. Incubation: | |—12 days. Fledging: from 9 to 12 days. The Horned Lark is a widespread and common bird of open country with sparse vegetation. Its breeding distribution is holarctic and includes much of North America from the Arctic to central Mexico. This cryptically colored species is a ground-feeding and ground-nesting bird that inhabits bare or short-grass habitats and is found in crop fields, pastures, along roadsides, and at airports. As natural grasslands disappeared, Horned Larks adapted to the agricultural landscape (Graber and Graber 1963; Beason 1995). The population expanded dramatically in the Midwest and East in 232 Eremophila alpestris the late 1800s and early 1900s. The Horned Lark begins nesting early in the season. During the breeding season, the male’s “tinkling” song and his impressive courtship flights, similar to those of other larks, are distinctive. Nests are placed in areas with little or no standing vegetation next to a dirt clod, a clump of grass, or in crop stubble. The Horned Lark’s diet consists of seed, grains, and insects. Illinois History The Horned Lark has been a common, year-round resident since the early accounts (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). Between 1909 and 1957 the statewide summer population increased more dramatically than for any other Illinois species, from 0.8 million to 5.6 million birds, as they expanded into agricultural habitats (Graber and Graber 1963). Although numbers fluctuate substantially from year to year, Horned Larks are currently considered to be common permanent residents. Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS data indicate that populations of the Horned Lark declined during 1966—2000 in Illinois and the upper Mid- west. The trend estimate for Illinois is —1.0% per year (significant, P = 0.01). The long-term trend estimate for the upper Midwest is —1.2% per year (significant, P < 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution The Horned Lark was a widely distributed species during the atlas project. It was reported from priority blocks in all 102 counties and was one of the species most frequently reported from priority blocks. It was less common in the populated northeastern and the heavily forested southern areas of the State. Frequency The Horned Lark was reported from 870 (87.2%) priority blocks and 57 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 532 (53.3%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observations of fledged young (405 FL records). There were only 10 records of nests with eggs or young. Because they may nest early in the season (as early as February in Illinois), many individuals may have completed their breeding cycle before atlasers began their field surveys. It is likely that Horned Larks bred in most blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 532 533 61.1 562 43.7 a Probable 197 19.7 22.6 213 16.6 Possible 141 14.1 16.2 Se 11.8 8 @ Totals 870 87.2 1000 927. 721 : * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) BO 8 B B) Oo Bi Ms % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | Zo Oat i oe Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& r) Probable Fal © Possible ey O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois & | f | a 124 = a 63 My] a 0+ + + + + + — 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 48+ 42+ 36+ 30+ 324+ o) ee 6 a I O + ‘ ' ++ + + ‘ { 1966 ~=:197] 1976 =-1981 1986 =1991 1996 2000 Year Horned Lark 233 Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: PUMA Rangewide Distribution: south-central Canada and most of the U.S. except the Rockies, south through central South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: locally common migrant and summer resident, mainly where nesting boxes provided. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open and rural areas especially near open water. Nest: a cavity in a tree lined with grasses, mud, and feathers; now primarily uses bird boxes and gourds. Eggs: 4-5, white, unmarked. Incubation: 15-18 days. Fledging: from 26 to 31 days. The Purple Martin, a conspicuous and well-known bird, is the largest swallow in North America. It generally breeds in southern Canada and in the U.S. from the Great Plains to the Atlantic coast, with scattered populations in the western U.S. and Mexico. It has a long and close association with man- kind. Native Americans provided gourds for nesting and the settlers that followed continued the tradition of providing nesting habitat. In eastern North America Purple Martins now breed almost exclusively in birdhouses rather than in tree cavities excavated by woodpeckers in dead snags (Brown 1997). They are most common in open areas near 234 Purple Martin Progne subis large bodies of water. Historically they inhabited forest edge and riparian areas in the East, but with their adaptation to birdhouses they are now found mostly around human settlements (Brown 1997). Purple Martins are among the earliest migrants to arrive in the spring as well as the earliest to depart in the fall. They usually nest in colonies that vary in size from a couple of pairs to several hundred. Purple Martins capture insects on the wing by sweeping and diving over open areas, especially near water. Populations are often affected by prolonged cold and wet weather, which reduces the availability of their insect prey, and by competition for nesting sites with House Sparrows and European Starlings. Illinois History By the time the earliest observations were recorded in Illinois, the Purple Martin was a common summer resident (Cory 1909). Purple Martins had adapted to urbanized habitats long before 1900, and almost exclusively preferred residential habitats in the 1950s (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Trends for Illinois and the upper Midwest are similar. The trend estimates indicate a decline in the Purple Martin population in Illinois at —3.3% per year (significant, P < 0.01) and in the upper Midwest at —3.2% per year (signifi- cant, P < 0.01) for the period 1966-2000. The factors responsible for the decline are not known; however, a lack of suitable nesting sites is probably not one of them because there are many unoccupied, apparently suitable, martin houses. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, Purple Martins were reported from all but three counties, but their distribution was patchy. Graber et al. (1972) suggested that Purple Martins probably nested in every Illinois township in the 1950s and 1960s. Frequency The Purple Martin was reported from 565 (56.6%) priority blocks and 87 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 386 (38.7%) of the priority blocks. Since the majority of Purple Martins now use artificial nest boxes, it was fairly easy to confirm their breeding. The breeding evidence for two-thirds of the Confirmed records in priority blocks was occupied nests (215 ON records). Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 386 38.7 68.3 441 34.3 Probable 35 she) 6.2 43 Ses} Possible 144 14.4 2D 168 13.1 Totals 565 56.6 100.0 652 S107) * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed #& & Probable @ Possible Zz O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 + + + a == re j 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest Count QO + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Yee * S Purple Martin 235 Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolor Joe Milosevich Code: TRES Rangewide Distribution: most of North America from Alaska and northern Canada, south to eastern Central America. IH Hie) Abundance: common migrant and common summer resident, decreasing southward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open country, usually near water (often dead snags in water). Nest: a cavity in a snag lined with grass, feathers, and other fine materials; often in nest boxes. Eggs: 4—6, white, unmarked. Incubation: 13-16 days. Fledging: from 16 to 24 days. The Tree Swallow, which is brilliant blue-green above and white below, breeds from northern Canada and Alaska through most of the U.S. except the southern tier of states. It is usually the first swallow to return each spring and the last to depart in fall. Because of its early arrival, this species is vulnerable to severe weather either directly or by elimination of the flying insects it feeds on. It is found near lakes, rivers, reservoirs, open fields, and marshes. Traditionally, Tree Swallows nest in single pairs or loose colonies in old woodpecker or naturally occurring cavities in trees in standing water, but also accept nest boxes intended for 236 bluebirds, Wood Ducks, and Purple Martins, sometimes some distance from water. Populations likely benefit from nest-box trails (Robertson et al. 1992). Tree Swallows compete with other secondary cavity-nesting species for natural and man-made nesting sites. Illinois History The Tree Swallow has been a common breeding species in Illinois since early accounts (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909), with breeding occurring mostly in the northern half of the state. A population decline was reported along the Illinois River during the late 1800s (Barnes 1912) primarily due to competition for nesting sites with the expanding House Sparrow population. The Tree Swallow’s range has expanded and this species is currently a well-established summer resident in the southern half of the state as a result of construction of large reservoirs, which has increased the availability of nesting sites (i.e., dead snags in water). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimates for Illinois and the upper Midwest for the Tree Swallow populations are 5.2% per year (nonsignifi- cant, P = 0.32) and 1.7% per year (significant, P < 0.01), respectively, for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution Once limited primarily to the northern half of Illinois, Tree Swallows now occur where nest boxes or tree cavities are available in or near ponds, lakes, marshes, and reservoirs. During the atlas project, they were more frequently reported in the priority blocks in the northeastern counties and along the large rivers. Frequency The Tree Swallow was reported from 313 (31.4%) priority blocks and 113 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 153 (15.3%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observation of occupied nests (51 ON records), fledged young (47 FL records), adults feeding young (21 FY records), and nests with young (19 NY records). In many areas Tree Swallows nest in holes in dead snags over water, which is a difficult habitat to survey. The widespread use of nest boxes in the northern portion of its range may account for many of the Confirmed records in the northeastern counties. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 153 153 48.9 229 17.8 Probable 53 Se 16.9 oy 4.4 Possible 107 10.7 34.2 140 10.9 Totals He 31.4 100.0 426 oe at * 998 priority blocks ** | _286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed ® Probable oe Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 ' t t t { 1966 =1971 1976 =1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 0 = + + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Tree Swallow jee NCoyadal-leamacelecelamwilare(-(eme\i-liCed wy Stelgidopteryx serripennis Walter Marcisz Code: NRWS Rangewide Distribution: extreme southern Canada, south through most of the U.S. to Panama. 117 Bi l6) te Abundance: common migrant, fairly common summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: riverbanks and road cuts near running water. Nest: a cavity in a bank, cliff, or culvert lined with grass, leaves, weed stems, and other fine materials, often in drain pipes or holes under bridges. Eggs: 5—6, white, unmarked. Incubation: 12 days. Fledging: from 19 to 21 days. The Northern Rough-winged Swallow, a brown-backed bird similar in appearance to the Bank Swallow, breeds from southern Canada to Central America, including nearly all of the U.S. Its common and scientific names refer to the unique feature on the outer web of the outer primary; this feather lacks terminal barbules and feels rough when stroked. The genus name means “scraper wing” and the species name means “saw feathers” (DeJong 1996). Rough-winged Swallows are loosely colonial, often with only one or two pairs but occasionally up to five or six pairs at a nesting site, at times nesting within a colony of Bank Swallows. Rough- winged Swallows inhabit a variety of streamside settings in rural, suburban, and forested areas where they fly back and 238 forth over open water catching insects. They nest in burrows in high vertical banks along rivers and streams but have recently adapted to using road-cuts, drainpipes, and holes in bridges as nesting sites. Illinois History The Northern Rough-winged Swallow has been a common to fairly common summer resident in Illinois throughout its recorded history (Cory 1909; Smith and Parmalee 1955; Bohlen 1989). Annual abundance varies, perhaps due to the movement of small colonies to areas supporting better nesting sites. The recent increase in the Illinois population indicated by Breeding Bird Survey data may be a result of additional nesting sites created through the direct and indirect activities of man, which include increased erosion in streams creating more vertical banks and increased availabil- ity of artificial burrows. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Populations of this species increased in Illinois and the upper Midwest from 1966 to 2000. Trend estimates for Illinois for the long-term and the two subinterval periods have been positive and significant, with an estimate of 4.5% per year for 1966-2000 (P < 0.01), 15.3% per year from 1966 to 1979 (P = 0.01), and 3.6% per year from 1980 to 2000 (P = 0.02). The trend estimate for 1966—2000 for the upper Midwest is 1.2% per year (significant, P = 0.04). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 1, Distribution During the atlas project, the Northern Rough-winged Swallow occurred fairly uniformly in priority blocks throughout the state except in the south. The distribution of the atlas records may be a reflection of the accessibility of nesting sites. This species was reported in priority blocks in 100 counties and Confirmed as breeding in 81 of them. Frequency The Northern Rough-winged Swallow was reported from 607 (60.8%) priority blocks and 104 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 274 (27.5%) of the priority blocks. The most frequently used breeding evidence for Confirmed records in priority blocks was occupied nests (151 ON records), fledged young (67 FL records), and adults feeding young (29 FY records). Since this species stays fairly close to its nesting site, it is likely that nesting occurred in most blocks in which it was recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 274 ps te 45.1 ALSO Ee eo) Probable 129 12.9 21.3 140 10.9 Possible 204 20.4 33.6 243 18.9 Totals 607 60.8 100.0 ae 55.3 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ ® Probable he Possible el O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Count 1966 1986 1991 1996 2000 1797658 LO8t Year Upper Midwest 67 4+ e 2 a o e) 2 il . ry < . ° 0+ 19 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 . Year Northern Rough-winged Swallow 239 Bank Swallow Riparia riparia Eric Walters Code: BANS Rangewide Distribution: Europe, Asia, North Africa; Alaska and northern Canada, south to central South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant, fairly common summer resident (locally). Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open areas with cliffs or banks near running water. Nest: an excavated burrow in cliff or bank lined with grass, weed stems, and feathers. Eggs: 4-5, white, unmarked. Incubation: 14—16 days. Fledging: from 18 to 24 days. The Bank Swallow is one of the most widely distributed swallows in the world. In North America its breeding range includes much of Canada and Alaska and the northern half of the U.S. Like the Northern Rough-winged Swallow, the Bank Swallow is a brown-backed bird. Bank Swallows are often seen over open fields and water where they forage for flying insects. It is one of only a few North American bird species that excavates its own nesting burrow. Bank Swal- 240 lows require near-vertical surfaces for nesting. Natural nesting sites are cliffs or banks along rivers, streams, lakes, and oceans, although road cuts, piles of sawdust, and sand and gravel quarries are also used. For protection from predators, Bank Swallows dig their burrows near the top of the vertical surface. They nest singly or in colonies that range from a few to a couple of thousand nests. Colonies may occur at the same site for many years, but are vulnerable to erosion, channelization, and cattle grazing. Illinois History In early accounts, the Bank Swallow was considered a common species wherever appropriate habitat was available (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). Currently it is described as a locally common summer resident with a spotty distribution during the breeding season (Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Because Bank Swallows are colonial and nesting locations are somewhat ephemeral, the Breeding Bird Survey does not provide reliable long-term trend information. The trends are estimated at 0.5% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.85) for Illinois and 0.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.78) for the upper Midwest for the period 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1, Distribution Even though Bank Swallows were reported from priority blocks in 75 counties during the-atlas project, their distribu- tion in the state was spotty because of their specialized nesting requirements. The lack of records in southern counties is somewhat surprising, although Graber et al. (1972) indicated that colonies were less common in the south than in the central and north. Bank Swallows are probably more widely distributed than the data indicate. Frequency The Bank Swallow was reported from 179 (17.9%) priority blocks and 49 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 106 (10.6%) of the priority blocks, most frequently by observations of occupied nests (73 ON records). Even though Bank Swallow nesting sites can be very conspicuous, they may have been missed due to the inaccessibility of river and stream banks. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 106 10.6 59.2 133 10.3 Probable 16 1.6 8.9 pA 1.6 Possible Sy Sy 31.8 74 5.8 Totals 179 17.9 100.0 228 ess * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ ® Probable ai 9 Possible LJ O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 + + : : : : + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year = Upper Midwest 4 - 3 + . Se: a ‘ ° ae 22} e) = 0 + + + + + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 Year Bank Swallow 241 Robert Randall Code: CLSW Rangewide Distribution: most of North America, from Alaska and northern Canada to southern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and (local) summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open country usually near rivers and streams; associates with overhanging cliffs and bridges. Nest: gourd-shaped structure of mud pellets lined with grass and feathers, plastered to the side of cliffs or under the eaves of buildings and bridges. Eggs: 4—5, white, creamy or pinkish white, spotted with brown. Incubation: 14—16 days. Fledging: from 21 to 24 days. Cliff Swallows breed in most of North America from Alaska and northern Canada to Central America, including most of the U.S. except the southeastern region. The Cliff Swallow is similar in appearance to the Barn Swallow but has a squared tail, buffy forehead, and tan rump patch. The species is now found in a variety of habitats, including grasslands, residen- tial areas, open woodland, and forest edge. It is often seen flying over open areas, foraging for insects, which is its primary food source throughout the year. Cliff Swallows build distinctive, nearly enclosed gourd-shaped nests consisting of hundreds of mud pellets. It is a colonial nesting species; nests are built on vertical surfaces near water and are often bunched or plastered together under bridges, overhangs of dams, and eaves of buildings, or in more natural settings, Cliff Swallow Petrochelidon pyrrhonota on bluffs or cliffs with overhanging ledges. Cliff Swallows compete with House Sparrows for nest sites; House Spar- rows may destroy eggs in many nests in order to usurp a nest site (Brown and Brown 1995). In the past 100 years the species range has expanded due to construction of buildings, bridges, and culverts, which provide nesting sites (Brown and Brown 1995). Illinois History A hundred years ago the Cliff Swallow was a common summer resident (Cory 1909) and locally abundant (Ridgway 1889) with the greatest numbers in the northern region of the state. The Cliff Swallow population declined considerably and even disappeared in some areas with the invasion of House Sparrows, which compete with Cliff Swallows for nesting sites (Graber et al. 1972). Breeding Bird Survey Trends According to BBS data, this species was not very abundant during the 1966-1979 period in Illinois and there were not enough data to estimate a trend for that period. In Illinois the trend for 1966—2000 is estimated at 28.3% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.11). In the upper Midwest the BBS data indicate a 2.1% (significant, P = 0.03) annual increase in population from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 1. Distribution Cliff Swallows were formerly distributed throughout the state but most abundant in the northern region. After having disappeared from much of the state for several decades, they now occur statewide. Cliff Swallows were reported most frequently from the priority blocks in the northwestern part of the state and were sparsely distributed in the rest of the state. They were reported in priority blocks in 50 counties. Many remote nesting sites were probably missed during the atlas project. Frequency Of the six species of swallows that breed in Illinois, the Cliff Swallow was reported from the fewest number of priority blocks during the atlas project. It was reported from 115 (11.5%) priority blocks and 20 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 75 (7.5%) of the priority blocks, most commonly by observation of an occupied nest (41 ON records). These swallows are easy to see as they forage over open areas. When present in a block, they could often be Confirmed by their distinctive nests. Breeding Evidence _ Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 75 1S 65.2 89 6.9 Probable 15 bes 13.0 15 it) Possible 25 25 Oh 31 2.4 Totals 115 10 100.0 135 10.5 * 998 priority blocks ** | ,286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) i % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks with records for this species blocks (gray = no records for this species) | Priority Nonpriority | Confirmed & a | Probable | Possible O C Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois + + ss 1981 1986 1991 Year 0 1966 1971 1976 + { 1996 2000 Upper Midwest + + | 0 a + + 1976 1981 1986 199] Year 1966 1971 1996 2000 3 Cliff Swallow 243 Dennis Oehmke Code: BARS Rangewide Distribution: cosmopolitan, including most of North and South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: very common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: agricultural and open country areas, especially near water. Nest: a cup of straw and mud pellets lined with feathers, plastered on ledges and walls of buildings and bridges. Eggs: 4-5, white, spotted with browns. Incubation: 13-17 days. Fledging: from 18 to 23 days. The Barn Swallow is the most abundant and widely distrib- uted swallow in the world. It nests throughout the Northern Hemisphere, including most of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, and is perhaps the only northern temperate breeding species that occasionally nests in South America (Brown and Brown 1999). Its darting flight and forked tail are distin- guishing features. Barn Swallows spend most of the day foraging for flying insects over open areas, such as farms, meadows, or lakes. Nests, which are made of mud pellets, are located on horizontal or rough vertical surfaces sheltered from the rain. In North America, Barn Swallows are much more abundant and widespread now than prior to Euro- American settlement because they have readily adapted to the use of artificial structures, such as buildings, bridges, and 244 st-laamed i eclicedny Hirundo rustica culverts for nesting sites (Brown and Brown 1999). By the mid-1900s, Barn Swallows in North America nested almost exclusively on artificial structures as opposed to their original nesting habitat of caves (Brown and Brown 1999). Illinois History The Barn Swallow was a common and widely distributed species, according to early accounts (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). In the early 1900s there was a dramatic population decline, especially in southern Illinois, when the House Sparrow population was rapidly expanding in Illinois (Ridgway 1915). The breeding population rebounded and in 1957 the population was nearly triple the size of that in 1909, with the greatest numbers occurring in southern Illinois (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends From 1966 to 2000 the population trend for the Barn Swallow is estimated at 0.7% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.17) in Illinois. During the first subinterval (1966-1979), the trend estimate was positive and significant at 4.6% per year (significant, P = 0.01). The upper Midwest trend estimates are significant during both the 1966-1979 and 1980-2000 subintervals at 4.9% per year (P < 0.01) and —1.5% per year (P < 0.01), respectively. From 1966 to 2000 the trend for the upper Midwest is estimated at 0.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.69). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Barn Swallow was found throughout the state during the atlas project. It was found in every county and in nearly all the priority blocks (Table 4). Frequency The Barn Swallow is the most common of the six swallow species that breed in Illinois. This species was reported from 983 (98.5%) priority blocks and 168 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 897 (89.9%) of the priority blocks. Barn Swallows are easy to find, identify, and confirm as nesting. The breeding evidence criteria most frequently used for Confirmed records in priority blocks were occupied nests, fledged young, and nest with young (333 ON, 169 FL, and 158 NY records, respectively). It is likely that this species nested in nearly all atlas blocks in which it was recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 897 89.9 91.3 1,021 79.4 SmensEs Probable 34 3.4 3.5 49 3.8 Possible 52 a2 553 81 6.3 Totals 983 98.5 100.0 1151 89.5 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed Probable a Possible Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 + ——+ ~ - - + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest fl 395 30+ + to 0 + + + + { 1966 =1971 1976 =: 1981 1986 =199] 1996 2000 ail a Barn Swallow 245 Code: CACH Rangewide Distribution: southeastern U.S. ILLINOIS Abundance: very common permanent resident in south and southeast. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous woods, especially riparian, swamps, and parks. Nest: a tree cavity lined with moss, grass, plant down, feathers, and hair; also, nest boxes. Eggs: 6, white, marked with reddish browns. Incubation: | 1—12 days. Fledging: from 13 to 17 days. The Carolina Chickadee is an active woodland bird that breeds mainly in the southeastern U.S. It is nearly identical in appearance and shares the same habitat preferences and nesting behavior as the Black-capped Chickadee. The male Carolina Chickadee’s spring song, “see bee see bay,” helps to distinguish between the two species in areas where their ranges meet. The range of the Carolina is generally south of that of the Black-capped Chickadee. Both chickadees occur in mature and second-growth forests and their associated edges, older residential areas, and parks with plenty of mature shade trees. Carolina Chickadees nest in a variety of cavities, including old woodpecker holes, natural snags, and nest boxes, and on occasion will excavate its own cavity in 246 OF: Tae) |1at-mOval lel, ele (==) Poecile carolinensis the soft, rotting wood of an old stump, post, or snag. They are usually single brooded and nesting begins early in the spring (Mostrom et al. 2002), as early as the first week of March in Illinois. Carolina Chickadees eat insects and spiders that they glean from trees and are frequent visitors to yards with feeders. Illinois History During the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Carolina Chicka- dee was considered a common species limited to southern Illinois (Cory 1909). By the 1950s Carolina Chickadees were estimated to be four times as common as in the early 1900s (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends For the period 1966-2000 the trend estimates for the Carolina Chickadee are —0.8% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.48) for Illinois and —0.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.91) for the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution The Carolina Chickadee is found in the southern and southeastern part of the state; the northern edge of its range begins near St. Louis in southern Madison County, proceeds eastward through northern Clinton County, then diagonals northeastward from Fayette County to southern Ford and northern Vermilion counties. Carolinas were reported in priority blocks in 42 counties. Black-capped Chickadees generally occur to the north and west of the Carolina; there is little overlap of their ranges. Both species were found in 8 counties (St. Clair, Madison, Fayette, Effingham, Coles, Douglas, Champaign, and Ford); some of these may have been hybrids but were not identified as such. Frequency The Carolina Chickadee was reported from 283 (28.4%) priority blocks and 6 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in 176 (17.6%) of the priority blocks. Even though several nests were reported, most Confirmed records in priority blocks were observations of adults feeding young (76 FY records) or fledged young (75 FL records). Since these chickadees have a restricted home range and stay close to their nesting sites year-round, it is likely that nesting occurred in the blocks where they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * ‘All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 176 17.6 62.2 181 14.1 Probable De De 18.4 53 4.1 Possible 55 JJ 19.4 55 4.3 Totals 283 28.4 100.0 PA:s Oa Gt 4 Sa) * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) d % of 998 sampled priority _ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed &@ 8 Probable ie © Possible fe] O OO,“ 8 BE Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 8 Count to +— ~—+ + + 0 + - - - - { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 4, 3 I ——e e A ee m . = . g21 s) + + + == + 0+ + =] 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 os Carolina Chickadee 247 =} F-(oq Crore] 0) ol=1o lal (er ¢-[e[-1- Poecile atricapillus Tr, Dennis Oehmke Code: BCCH Rangewide Distribution: Alaska and the southern half of Canada, south through the northern half of the U.S. ILLINOIS Abundance: very common permanent resident in west and north. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: mature and second-growth woodlands, including edges, residential areas, and parks. Nest: a tree cavity lined with plant down, moss, hair, and feathers; also nest boxes. Eggs: 6-8, white, finely marked with reddish browns. Incubation: | 1—13 days. Fledging: from 14 to 18 days. Like the more southerly Carolina Chickadee, the Black- capped is a permanent resident found in nearly all woodland habitats ranging from dense mature forests and their woody edges to residential areas and parks with plenty of mature shade trees. Its breeding range is generally the northern half of the U.S. and the southern half of Canada. The male’s spring song, a high-pitched “feee-beee,” distinguishes the Black-capped from the nearly identical Carolina where their ranges meet. The Black-capped nests in cavities in dead branches and sometimes in abandoned woodpecker holes or nest boxes. Black-capped Chickadees generally remain near their breeding territory for life (Smith 1993). During the winter, this chickadee is known to store food and lower its 248 body temperature at night to conserve energy (Smith 1993). Black-capped Chickadees forage in trees for insects and spiders, and eat seeds and berries in winter. Illinois History In the 1800s and early 1900s the Black-capped Chickadee was considered a common permanent resident in the north and a very rare and irregular visitor in the south when winters were particularly cold (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). The status of the Black-capped Chickadee is nearly the same today. Breeding Bird Survey Trends In Illinois the trend estimate for 1966—2000 is 2.0% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.18). In the upper Midwest the popula- tion increased during 1966—2000 and both subintervals (1966-1979 and 1980-2000); the annual rate for 1966-2000 was 2.1% (significant, P < 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution Black-capped Chickadees occur in the northern, central, and western portions of the state. During the atlas project, this species was found in priority blocks in 69 counties. Carolina Chickadees occur to the south and southeast of the Black- cappeds, with little overlap of their ranges (see Carolina Chickadee account). In the eastern part of the state (i.e., Ford, Iroquois, Piatt, and Livingston counties) there are few records of either species. Even though this area is highly agricultural, the scarcity of chickadees needs further investi- gation. Brewer (1963) reported gaps of up to several miles from Illinois eastward where there were few, if any, chicka- dees of either species. Hybrids of Black-capped and Carolina chickadees have been known to occur where their ranges meet. Frequency The Black-capped Chickadee was reported from 564 (56.5%) priority blocks and 161 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 362 of the priority blocks, with fledged young and adults feeding young (186 FL and 116 FY records, respectively) as the most frequently used breeding evidence criteria for these records. Since these birds have a restricted home range and stay close to their nesting sites year-round, it is likely that nesting occurred in every block where the species was recorded. Breeding Evidence ‘ Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 362 36.3 64.2 471 36.6 Probable 119 11.9 a Ml 150 Lig Possible 83 8.3 14.7 104 8.1 Totals 564 20.5 100.0 725 56.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ e Probable ee Possible [| O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 6 44 rs| = 6 oO 2+ . ° ei . = use St 0 + + : ' + ' : { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest + 0 + + + + + ' 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Yi = = I=] E Yor exer] ey eye MOlpl(o1, C10 (=) 249 Dennis Oehmke Code: ETTI Rangewide Distribution: eastern U.S. and northeastern WY (hetero 115 File) Abundance: common permanent resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: mature and second-growth woodlands, including edges, residential areas and parks. Nest: a tree cavity lined with moss, fur, bark, leaves and grass. Eggs: 5—7, white to creamy-white, spotted with browns (occasionally wreathed). Incubation: 13—14 days. Fledging: from 15 to 18 days. The Tufted Titmouse breeds in the eastern half of the U.S. and northeastern Mexico. It is a common and active perma- nent resident of woodlands, especially mature deciduous forests in eastern North America. Its “peter-peter” call, whistled notes, and scolding sounds are distinctive indicators of its presence. Titmice are found in a variety of upland and bottomland forests, including parks and residential areas. Nests are usually built in existing cavities but titmice may excavate their own or use nest boxes. The young do not disperse until sometime in their second year (Grubb and Pravosudov 1994) and some yearling titmice stay with their parents and help them raise another brood (Tarbel 1983). Titmice forage for insects and seeds, often with chickadees and nuthatches; and like chickadees, nuthatches, and some woodpeckers, are known to cache large amounts of food Nw Nn => Tufted Titmouse |= ¥-T-Ye) (0) o) 4] ELM o) (ore) (0) g throughout their territories (Sherry 1989). Tufted Titmice have been able to survive farther north than in the past, in part because of the availability of seed at bird feeders in the winter. Because of their small size, they probably have little competition for nesting cavities from larger forest species, but may compete with chickadees and nuthatches. Illinois History During the 1800s, the Tufted Titmouse was considered to be the most abundant woodland bird in southern Illinois (Ridgway 1889) but rare in the northern part of the state (Cory 1909). Cory (1909) noted a single record of its occurrence in Wisconsin. From 1909 to 1957 the population in Illinois increased approximately twofold in numbers, especially in the south, and although not yet common, the Tufted Titmouse was not as rare in the north as it had been in the early 1900s (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Tufted Titmice populations in Illinois increased at an annual rate of 2.0% (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. For the upper Midwest the trend estimate for the same period is 0.9% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.08); for the two sub- intervals the trend estimates are -4.3% per year (significant, P <0.01) for 1966-1979 and 2.1% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for 1980-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, Tufted Titmice were found in priority blocks in 99 counties. They were most frequently reported from priority blocks in the counties along the Mississippi and I[Ilinois rivers and in the southern half of Illinois. Gaps in distribution correspond to areas with limited availability of suitable woodland habitat, such as areas of extensive agricultural land cover. Frequency The Tufted Titmouse was reported from 682 (68.3%) priority blocks and 51 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 356 (35.6%) of the priority blocks, with fledged young (186 FL records) and adults feeding young (135 FY records) the most commonly used breeding evidence criteria. Like the chickadees, these birds have restricted home ranges and stay close to their nesting sites year-round. Therefore, it is likely that nesting occurred in blocks where the species was recorded. Because they are less vocal and conspicuous during the nesting period, it is possible that this species was underrepresented in the atlas data. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 356 chy ape) 381 29.6 Probable 163 16.3 23.9 177 13.8 Possible 163 16.3 23.9 175 13.6 Totals 682 68.3 100.0 FOS) b7.0 * O98 priority blocks ** ],286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & B Probable a) Possible fe O Breeding Bird Survey Trends 8 Illinois B | i + : ‘ + + + i 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest - n +—_+—__+—_+—__+-»-+—_+—_++—_ + . . . ¢ ° . . ° in) ar 1966 197 1 1976 198 1 1986 1 991 1 996 2000 Yex 2 i Witee MEL Uileltcy:) a Red-breasted Nuthatch Sitta canadensis Adam Fikso Code: RBNU Rangewide Distribution: southern half of Canada, northeastern and western U.S. Occasionally winters in southern U.S. 115 Bi (8) Abundance: sporadic; a fairly common migrant and winter resident some years; very rare summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: coniferous forests. Nest: a tree cavity lined with soft bark, grass, and roots. Eggs: 5—6, white to pinkish white, marked with reddish brown. Incubation: 12 days. Fledging: from 14 to 21 days. A common resident in the boreal forests of North America, the Red-breasted Nuthatch breeds primarily in the northern and western U.S. and across the southern half of Canada. Large numbers of individuals can be found outside the normal range when the species undergoes irruptive move- ments, which may be driven by winter food shortages (Ghalambor and Martin 1999). Its preferred nesting habitat is funy dense stands of mature coniferous trees, especially spruce and fir. In addition to its smaller size and reddish underparts, the Red-breasted can be distinguished from the White- breasted Nuthatch by its higher-pitched, more nasal-sound- ing call notes. Both species are cavity nesters. The Red- breasted usually excavates its own cavity in soft or rotting snags and tree limbs but occasionally uses old woodpecker holes or nest boxes. The population appears to have ex- panded to the south and east in recent years (Ghalambor and Martin 1999). Illinois History The Red-breasted Nuthatch is an erratic wanderer and occurs only rarely as a breeding species in Illinois. During the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, the Red-breasted Nuthatch bred sparingly (Ridgway 1889) and was a casual summer resident (Cory 1909) in the extreme northern counties. During the late twentieth century, the species was still a very rare breeder. Isolated nesting occurrences have been reported as far south as Champaign County since the mid-1970s. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The BBS data is not sufficient to estimate population trends for this species in Illinois. The trend estimate for 1966—2000 for the upper Midwest indicates an annual increase in population of 3.0% (significant (P < 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 1. Distribution Two nesting sites were reported during the atlas project. Red- breasted Nuthatches should be sought in the larger conifer- ous forests that occur in the northern counties. Frequency The Red-breasted Nuthatch was reported from one (0.1%) priority block and one nonpriority block. Breeding was Confirmed (three young fledged) in the priority block (at the Morton Arboretum in DuPage County) and the nonpriority block (in Kane County). Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed | 0.1 100.0 2 0.2 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals l 0.1 100.0 2 0.2 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) © © % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ & Probable eo Possible Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 0 + ' — + Year 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 Red-breasted Nuthatch 253 White-breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis Dennis Oehmke Code: WBNU Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada, most of the U.S., and central Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: common permanent resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous woodlands with decaying trees. Nest: a tree cavity lined with soft bark shreds, hair, and feathers, often in dead portion of a live tree. Eggs: 5-8, white to pinkish white, (usually) heavily marked with reddish brown at the larger end. Incubation: 12 days. Fledging: 14 days. The White-breasted Nuthatch is a common resident found in deciduous forests from southern Canada to Mexico, includ- ing most of the U.S. This woodland species prefers large forests, but is occasionally found in towns and parks. A distinctive “yank-yank” call and habit of descending down a tree trunk head-first are identifying features. The White- breasted Nuthatch is a cavity-nesting species that utilizes natural cavities or old woodpecker holes in trees in mature deciduous forests. These nuthatches are monogamous and 254 remain in the same area year-round. They eat seeds, acorns, and insects gleaned from tree bark and also frequent bird feeders. In fall and winter they cache food. White-breasteds are usually found foraging with chickadees, titmice, and woodpeckers. The continued presence of dead or dying trees in mature forests for nesting and foraging is necessary for maintaining the White-breasted Nuthatch population. Illinois History The White-breasted Nuthatch is a permanent resident in Illinois. During the late 1800s, it was considered abundant throughout the state (Ridgway 1889) and in the early 1900s was called ‘“‘a not uncommon resident” (Cory 1909). The White-breasted Nuthatch is still a common species today and is the more abundant of the two nuthatch species that occur in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Over the past three decades the White-breasted Nuthatch population has increased in the state and region. The population increased at a rate of 4.1% per year (significant, P <0.01) in Illinois and at 1.8% per year (P < 0.01) in the upper Midwest from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution White-breasted Nuthatches were widespread during the atlas project. They were reported in priority blocks in all 102 counties. Gaps in distribution, such as in the east-central part of the state, may be a result of the scarcity of large forested tracts. Frequency The White-breasted Nuthatch was reported from 711 (71.2%) priority blocks and 112 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 272 (27.3%) of the priority blocks, with fledged young (156 FL records) and adults feeding young (83 FY records) the most frequently used breeding evidence criteria. As with titmice and chickadees, White-breasted Nuthatches have restricted home ranges and stay close to their nesting sites year-round; therefore, it is likely that nesting occurred in most blocks where they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 272 04 38.3 325 OB | Probable = 225 Peis 31.6 260 820.2 Possible 214 21.4 30.1 238 18.5 Totals 711 rie. 100.0 823 64.0 * 998 priority blocks ** ],286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed e Probable @ Possible ri O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Count 0 + t ' ' + t ' { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest At + + + + 3 + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 4 0 + Year Bie White-breasted Nuthatch Brown Creeper Certhia americana Dennis Oehmke Code: BRCR Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada, all of the U.S., into Central America. 115 Bi (6) Abundance: common migrant, fairly common winter resident and rare local summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: threatened Breeding Habitat: swamps and floodplain forests. Nest: a hammock-like cup under loose bark, made of bark, moss, conifer needles, and silk; lined with shredded bark and feathers. Eggs: 5—6, white, with sparse reddish brown flecks. Incubation: 14—17 days. Fledging: from 13 to 16 days. The Brown Creeper is an inconspicuous tree-climbing species with a wide distribution in the coniferous and mixed coniferous-deciduous forests in North America. The breeding range is complex; generally it includes the northeastern and western U.S., southern Canada, and parts of Mexico and Central America. This species is difficult to detect because of its secretive behavior and cryptic coloration. Its song is soft, pleasant, and warblerlike but its call note is so high-pitched that some people are unable to hear it. Brown Creepers search for insects under the bark of trees by spiraling upward around the trunks and main branches. During migration and the winter months, they occur in almost any wooded area. Brown Creepers prefer closed-canopy forests with dead trees for nesting and live trees for foraging. They nest in moist, mature forests, usually near water. Nests are placed between loose slabs of bark and the tree trunk. The biology and i) Nn ON ecology of the species is poorly known and population trends are difficult to reliably assess due to low breeding densities. Loss of large live trees, dead trees, and old-growth forests negatively affect Brown Creeper populations (Hejl et al. 2002). Illinois History Although a common migrant and winter resident, the Brown Creeper only occasionally breeds in the state (Bohlen 1989). Records of breeding prior to the mid-1900s are scarce. The Brown Creeper was not reported as a breeding species by nineteenth and early twentieth century authors (Cooke 1888; Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909; Smith and Parmalee 1955; Ford 1956) except for the record of nesting by Kennicott (1855) in Cook County. This species was reported in August 1907 near Olive Branch in Alexander County by Ferry (1907) but was not noted in the summer again until the mid-1960s. The first confirmed nest was recorded in 1966 (Greer 1966) and since then the species has been found during the summer months at several locations, some with evidence of nesting. Because of its past history, limited distribution, and small population size, the Brown Creeper was initially listed as an endangered species in Illinois but was upgraded to threatened status in 1989. The current breeding population is small and localized, but this may have always been the case (Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends | Because Brown Creepers are not adequately sampled by the BBS, there are insufficient data to estimate Illinois trends. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest is 4.2% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.12) for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 3. Distribution In Illinois the Brown Creeper habitat is limited to the cypress and tupelo swamps of southern Illinois and floodplain forests in the rest of the state. During the atlas project, Brown Creepers were found infrequently and at scattered locations across the state. Because of its secretive behavior and cryptic plumage, this species may have been missed and therefore may be underrepresented. It is known to occur in several of the cypress/tupelo swamps of southern Illinois and in the floodplain forests of the Mississippi, Illinois, Kankakee, and Sangamon river systems, as well as other sites. Frequency The Brown Creeper was reported from 15 (1.5%) priority blocks and 7 nonpriority blocks. It was Confirmed as breeding in one of the priority blocks (in Adams County) and 2 nonpriority blocks. Brown Creepers are extremely difficult to detect and even more difficult to confirm as a breeding species. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 1 0.1 6.7 3 0.2 Probable SD US SE! 8 0.6 Possible 9 0.9 60.0 11 0.9 Totals 15 if. 100.0 22 7 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & € Probable a @ Possible OC O Brown Creeper pe Carolina Wren Thryothorus ludovicianus Dennis Oehmke Code: CARW Rangewide Distribution: eastern U.S. and eastern Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: common permanent resident in south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open deciduous woodlands especially with brushy cover, farmland and parks with dense undergrowth. Nest: a cavity with twigs, bark strips, leaves, and grass lined with finer materials. Eggs: 5, white, often pinkish or creamy, usually heavily flecked with browns or purples; often wreathed. Incubation: |2—14 days. Fledging: from 12 to 14 days. The Carolina Wren is a year-round resident in much of the eastern half of the U.S., where it is most common in the South, and in eastern Mexico. This species is noted for its loud and clear voice and extensive repertoire of songs and calls that can be heard at great distances. Carolina Wrens inhabit moderate to dense brushy cover, including the understory of upland and bottomland forests, woodlots, and residential areas with shrubs. According to early accounts, it was “rarely found about dwellings and seldom if ever fixes his habitation in close proximity to the abodes of man” (Ridgway 1889). It now regularly associates with human habitation where it can be found nesting in shoes, flowerpots, garages, and barns, in addition to natural situations such as tree cavities, brush piles, and crotches of trees. It is a prolific breeder, producing two or three clutches per year. The range of the Carolina Wren has expanded northward throughout the 1900s, perhaps in response to weather, reforestation, and 258 supplemental food supplied by bird feeders in the winter (Haggerty and Morton 1995). Although northern Carolina Wren populations decline dramatically during severe winters, they often recover within a few years (Haggerty and Morton 1995). Illinois History The Carolina Wren, which is the largest of the five wren species that breed in Illinois, was considered abundant in southern Illinois and uncommon in the northern part of the state during the late 1800s and early 1900s (Cory 1909). Weather plays an important role in the status of Carolina Wren populations in the state. In recent times notable population declines occurred during the severe winters of 1966-1970 and 1977-1978; however, the population recovered after these periods. Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS data for the Carolina Wren population in Illinois indicate a 5.1% per year (significant, P < 0.01) increase from 1966 to 2000. The population in Illinois declined at an annual rate of —14.0% (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 1979 due to a series of severe winters, but increased by 7.7% per year (significant, P < 0.01) from 1980 to 2000. Trend estimates for the upper Midwest follow a similar pattern, with a significant (P < 0.01) increase of 3.2% per year for 1966-2000, a significant decline in the first half of the 35— year sample period, and a significant increase in the second half. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Carolina Wren has always been more common and widespread in southern Illinois than northern Illinois and the atlas project data confirmed that this distribution pattern still holds true. The range of this species has been expanding northward up the river valleys, but it is still sparsely distrib- uted in the northern half of the state. It was reported in priority blocks in 90 counties. Frequency The Carolina Wren was reported from 534 (53.5%) priority blocks and 40 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 193 (19.4%) of the priority blocks, most frequently by observations of fledged young (76 FL records), adults feeding young (56 FY records), or nest with young (30 NY records). Because of their loud, ringing voices, Carolina Wrens were likely detected in most blocks where they were present. Because they establish permanent territories which they defend year-round, they probably nested in most of the blocks in which they were found. Breeding Evidence ___ Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 193 19.3 36.1 210 16.3 Probable 177 i Ae 33.1 194 iM Possible 164 16.4 30.7 170 132 Totals 534 be A) 100.0 574. 44.6 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & e Probable e) Possible ] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 + + t + + + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 8 + 6+ +- 0+ +— + + + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 lees Carolina Wren 259 Bewick’s Wren Thryomanes bewickii 4 Robert Randall Code: BEWR Rangewide Distribution: southern U.S. from western Tennessee to California and the west coast states, south through Mexico. 115 Bin [O) Abundance: very rare migrant, summer and winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: open woodlands, shrublands, farms, and residential areas near woodlands. Nest: a cavity including twigs and grasses lined with finer materials. Eggs: 5—7, white, flecked with browns and purples, occasionally wreathed. Incubation: |2—14 days. Fledging: 14 days. The active and noisy Bewick’s Wren primarily breeds in the south-central and southwest U.S., the west coast states, and Mexico; it is rare in eastern North America. It occurs in a variety of brushy areas in open or semi-open woodlands, woodland edges, thickets, near outbuildings in rural areas, and occasionally in towns. These wrens typically nest in natural cavities but also utilize a nook or cranny in buildings, machinery, or woodpiles. The white-edged tail, which is often flicked side-to-side, and its Song Sparrow-like song help to distinguish the Bewick’s Wren from the similar Carolina Wren. It feeds on insects gleaned from leaves, branches, and trunks in the lower strata. Bewick’s Wrens have virtually disappeared east of the Mississippi River and 260 have declined in the West (Kennedy and White 1997). Suspected reasons for the decline are competition for nesting sites with House Sparrows, Song Sparrows, European Starlings, and especially the House Wren, whose range expansion coincided with the decline in the Bewick’s Wren population (Kennedy and White 1996). Illinois History During the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Bewick’s Wren was a common breeding species in southern Illinois (Ridgway 1889), present but less common in central Illinois, and a straggler in northern Illinois (Cory 1909). At one time it was so common in southern Illinois that Ridgway (1889) noted that a pair took up residency at practically every home with outbuildings. By the 1950s its status had already changed from abundant or common to uncommon even in the heart of its breeding range (Smith and Parmalee 1955). It was still fairly common in Pulaski County during the early 1960s (D. Davis, pers. comm.). By the 1970s the decline in population was so drastic that the Bewick’s Wren was declared a threatened species in 1977 and changed to an endangered species in 1989. Breeding Bird Survey Trends In Illinois the Bewick’s Wren ‘was found on few routes and in such low numbers that confidence in the trend estimate for 1966-2000 of —13.9% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.17) is low. In the upper Midwest, the trend estimate is —2.8% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.32) for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution Once a common species in thickets near farms and wood- lands in southern Illinois, the Bewick’s Wren is now so rare it does not have a discernable distribution pattern. This species was reported from many more atlas blocks (410, or 34%) in Missouri during its atlas project, especially in the central and south-central portions of the state, but that population was also experiencing a rapid decline (Jacobs and Wilson 1997). Frequency The Bewick’s Wren was reported from four (0.4%) priority blocks and one nonpriority block. Breeding was Confirmed in three of the priority blocks and in the nonpriority block. Bewick’s Wrens are easy to detect because of their loud songs and activity around their nesting sites. Breeding Evidence ___ Priority Blocks * ___Alll Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 3 0.3 75.0 4 0.3 Probable | 0.1 25.0 1 0.1 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 4 0.4 100.0 5 0.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of priority blocks with records for this species % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) | Ai oe Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ | Probable _ Possible LO O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 37 pe g ai we ] sea . a a a . ’ + e ee sees O + + + + + + } { 1966 197] 1976 =: 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year \. = Bewick’s Wren 261 Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery LOriys (oe s COMY'A i Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada and most of the U.S., to southern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and common summer resident (except in south), occasional winter resident (mainly in the south). Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open woodlands, shrublands, farmlands, and suburban areas. Nest: in a cavity, made of twigs and grass lined with finer materials; readily accepts nest boxes. Eggs: 6-8, white, marked with browns; occasionally wreathed. Incubation: 13 days. Fledging: from 12 to 18 days. The House Wren breeds from southern Canada to southern South America, which is one of the most extensive latitudi- nal breeding ranges among native passerine species in the New World (Johnson 1998). The “jenny” wren is a common and familiar bird whose bubbling songs and scolding chatter can be heard throughout the U.S. and southern Canada in the summer. House Wrens inhabit a variety of open and semi- open shrubby areas, including woodlands, forest edges, and residential areas with trees. They generally avoid large forested blocks but do utilize forest openings (Robbins et al. 1989). They are cavity nesters that use natural cavities or woodpecker holes in woodlands but are readily attracted to nest boxes in residential areas. The male wrens have an unusual behavior of creating dummy nests by filling several 262 House Wren Troglodytes aedon cavities in their territory with twigs. The female then selects the nesting site, removes the twigs from the cavity, and builds a nest to her satisfaction. The House Wren is an aggressive defender of its territory and is known to puncture other birds’ eggs and destroy their nests when they attempt to nest in the wren’s territories (Sealy 1994). The House Wren’s diet consists of insects and other invertebrates gleaned from vegetation. In North America, the House Wren population expanded southward as the forests were cleared for agricul- ture and human settlements became established (Johnson 1998). In recent decades House Wren populations in North America have increased, according to Breeding Bird Survey data. Illinois History Cory (1909) reported that the House Wren was “a not uncommon summer resident in Illinois” and Ridgway (1889) considered it “very rare in many parts of southern Illinois.” Both accounts still apply, although the House Wren’s range has gradually extended to include more of southern Illinois. The House Wren population has not been adequately monitored in IIlinois except for the Breeding Bird Survey. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The House Wren population has increased in Illinois and the upper Midwest from 1966 to 2000. BBS data indicate an annual increase of 1.6% (significant, P = 0.02) for Illinois and 1.2% (significant, P < 0.01) for the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution The House Wren is a widespread species throughout the state except in the extreme southern tip. It was reported in priority blocks in 101 counties and breeding was Confirmed in 96 of them. While still uncommon in southern Illinois, it is now more common there than just a few years ago. During the atlas project, the House Wren was among the most frequently reported and widely distributed species in priority blocks. Frequency The House Wren was reported from 891 (89.3%) priority blocks and 162 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 594 (59.5%) of the priority blocks. The House Wren was easily detected by its familiar and persistent singing. The most frequently used breeding evidence criteria for Con- firmed records in priority blocks were occupied nest (207 ON records) and adults feeding young (146 FY records), followed by fledged young (95 FL records) and nest with young (95 NY records). It is likely that nesting occurred in most blocks in which this species was reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 594 39:5 66.7 706 = 554.9 Probable 188 18.8 OA bal 224 17.4 Possible 109 10.9 122 125 9.6 Totals 891 89.3 100.0 1033 aL. * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed 8 Probable ® Possible 4 O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Llinois + =i + + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest + . 0 + + + + { | 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 ‘hes House Wren 263 Robert Randall Code: SEWR Rangewide Distribution: south-central Canada and eastern U.S., to southern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: wet meadows, drier marshes, and weedy fields. Nest: sphere of dry and green grasses interwoven with growing grass lined with finer materials; hidden entrance on side. Eggs: 7, white, unmarked. Incubation: 12-16 days. Fledging: from 12 to 14 days. The Sedge Wren has traditionally inhabited wet meadows and vegetation along the margins of marshes and ponds, but with the decline in availability of these habitats these birds have accepted hayfields, brushy fields, and overgrown pastures with an abundance of thick cover as a substitute. Its breeding range is mainly the eastern half of the U.S. north of the Ohio River to southern Canada. Sedge Wrens are opportunistic and erratic nesters (Jackson et al. 1996). They have two periods of breeding (May—June and July—Septem- ber) and may move to widely different locations to breed later in the year (Herkert et al. 2001). Nests are well- concealed in dense grasses and sedges in wet prairies or 264 Sedge Wren Cistothorus platensis meadows where the ground is saturated or the water is very shallow. They often build dummy nests to confuse potential predators. The loss and degradation of shallow wetlands and prairies to agriculture has undoubtedly resulted in a decline in the population in the last century (Herkert et al. 2001). Sedge Wren populations may benefit from the creation of new grassland habitat such as that created by the Conserva- tion Reserve Program (Herkert et al. 2001). This program encourages farmers to retire crop fields that are subject to excessive soil erosion and plant them in permanent cover, with an emphasis on grasses. Illinois History During the mid-1800s, the Sedge Wren was a “common summer resident and generally distributed in suitable places” (Nelson 1876). The status remained unchanged through the early 1900s (Cory 1909). However, with the widespread disappearance of wetlands and native grasslands in Illinois, the population has certainly declined in the past century. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Sedge Wrens are found in low numbers in the state. The trend is estimated at 2.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.67) for 1966-2000 in Illinois. In the upper Midwest the popula- tion increased at 1.8% per year (significant, P = 0.02) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project Sedge Wrens occurred in five loose clusters in the northeastern, northwestern, western, east- central, and southeastern parts of the state. The distribution of the Sedge Wren is probably greater than the atlas data indicate. Although birds arrive in late April and early May, many do not begin their breeding cycle until July and August, which is after most atlasers had completed surveying their blocks. Frequency The Sedge Wren was reported from 68 (6.8%) priority blocks and 46 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 9 of the priority blocks, 6 of which were confirmed by observa- tion of feeding of young. The species is detected primarily by its song and maintenance of territories because nests and other evidence of breeding are difficult to find. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 9 0.9 132 15 12 Probable 34 3.4 50.0 62 4.8 Possible 25 aS 36.8 37 2.9 Totals 68 6.8 100.0 114 8.9 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed 8 Probable @ Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 0 + . : + + + 1) 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Sedge Wren 265 Marsh Wren Cistothorus palustris D. Robert Franz / Cornell Lab of Ornithology Code: MAWR Rangewide Distribution: central and southern Canada to central Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant, uncommon summer resident, and rare winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: marshes with heavy stands of reeds or cattails over standing water. Nest: a sphere of reeds and grasses lined with finer materials, attached to reeds with entrance near top. Eggs: 4-6, dull brown, usually marked with darker browns, occasionally wreathed. Incubation: |2—16 days. Fledging: from 13 to 16 days. During the breeding season, Marsh Wrens inhabit marshes, especially those with dense stands of cattails or sedges. The Marsh Wren is very difficult to observe because it stays well hidden in a habitat that is difficult to penetrate. The best way to detect the presence of a Marsh Wren is by its clattering song. Nests are usually attached to cattails, sedges, or grasses over water. Males are polygamous, simultaneously mating with multiple females, and construct a number of dummy nests in a season. The female may select one of these nests or build one of her own. Like many wren species, Marsh Wrens 266 destroy nests of other birds by puncturing their eggs, thereby eliminating potential competition. They feed mainly on insects and other invertebrates gleaned in tall marsh vegeta- tion. The breeding range of the Marsh Wren includes much of the northern and western U.S., the coasts of the southeast- ern U.S., and southwestern Canada. Throughout its range, marsh habitat has greatly declined since Euro-American settlement. Wetland restoration and protection are important for the conservation of this species. Illinois History The Marsh Wren was described as an “abundant bird in suitable localities” during the late 1800s (Ridgway 1889) and “a common summer resident in. . . at least eastern Illinois” in the early 1900s (Cory 1909). Marsh Wrens are undoubt- edly less abundant now than prior to the large-scale loss and modification of wetland habitat in Illinois that began in the mid-1800s. Breeding Bird Survey Trends As with many wetland-dependent species, the Marsh Wren population is not adequately sampled by the BBS. In Illinois the trend estimate for 1966-2000 is -4.0 % per year (signifi- cant, P = 0.05), but this species is found on few routes and in low relative abundance. For the upper Midwest the trend estimate is —1.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.51) for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution Atlas records were concentrated in priority blocks in the northeastern part of the state in part because the large marshy areas they require are found there. This species probably occurs in other parts of the state where there is suitable habitat. Frequency The Marsh Wren was reported from 43 (4.3%) priority blocks and 57 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 15 (1.5%) of the priority blocks. Because of the difficulty in reaching and thoroughly searching their habitat and because of their late nesting season, Marsh Wrens may have gone undetected. Confirmation of nesting was difficult. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks* AI Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 15 1 34.9 32 2 Probable 18 1.8 41.9 45 35 Possible 10 1.0 23.3 23 1.8 Totals 43 43 100.0 100 7.8 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& r Probable 3) Possible C] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest ine) 7 0 + + + + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 Y a . Marsh Wren 267 Peter Dring Code: GCKI Rangewide Distribution: southern Alaska and the southern half of Canada, south through all of the U.S. to WeyudaterstitouM\y (o.eleen ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and winter resident; very rare summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open coniferous forests. Nest: a pendant of moss, lichens, spider webs, and plant down lined with finer materials; open near the top with an oblong cavity. Eggs: 8-9, creamy white to muddy cream, variably spotted with browns; usually wreathed. Incubation: 14—15 days. Fledging: from 14 to 19 days. The Golden-crowned Kinglet is a tiny woodland species that breeds mainly in boreal and subalpine spruce and fir forests in the southern half of Canada and in the western U.S., but its breeding range has expanded southward into mature spruce plantings in the northern and eastern parts of the U.S. (Ingold and Galati 1997). It nests mainly in mature conifer- To) (ol-Vabrerge\ Vial-tom @lale|(-11 Regulus satrapa ous forests and edges of clearings, usually high in conifer trees where nests are well protected by overhanging foliage. In winter these kinglets are often seen in small flocks with chickadees, creepers, nuthatches, and warblers. The Golden- crowned Kinglet eats mostly insects and spiders gleaned from conifers. Extremely cold or snowy winters cause mortality and result in population declines. Illinois History The Golden-crowned Kinglet was and is known in Illinois as a common migrant and winter resident. In the late 1800s, a few were thought to occur all summer in the dense swamps near Polo (Ogle County) even though nests were never located (Cooke 1888). In 1988 the first recorded nest in Illinois was found at the Morton Arboretum in DuPage County (Walters and Brown 1989). A second nesting attempt occurred there in 1989 (Kleen 1990) but there are no subsequent reports. Breeding Bird Survey Trends There are no BBS trend estimates for this species is Illinois. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest is 0.8% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.74) for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution Because coniferous forest habitat is rare in the state, the Golden-crowned Kinglet’s breeding distribution in Illinois is very limited and still being determined. Golden-crowned Kinglets breed in Illinois where plantings of coniferous trees (i.e., in arboretums, reforestation projects) have now ma- tured. Morton Arboretum is the only Confirmed site thus far, but nesting may occur at Lowden-Miller State Forest in Ogle County, where a territorial male was reported in 1994 (Kleen LOD Se Frequency The Golden-crowned Kinglet was reported from one (0.1%) priority block, where it was Confirmed, and an adjacent nonpriority block, where it was reported as a Probable breeder. Breeding Evidence —a _ Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed | 0.1 100.0 | 0.1 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 | 0.1 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 1 0.1 100.0 2; 0.2 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& & Probable A © Possible C] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 23 1.5+ iz elt | O . va or . y ee eee te 0.5+ . 3 . . e oe Md s . 0 + + + t + + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 ibe Golden-crowned Kinglet 269 SJ [O(=mre le: Wm Clat-icerzi coral =) lade) (0) 0) i] F- Mer- (=) 4g 0] [=F] et Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: BGGN Rangewide Distribution: eastern and southwestern U.S., to Nicaragua and the West Indies. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and common summer resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: forests, woodlands, shrublands, and swamps. Nest: a cup of plant down and lichens held together with spider silk, covered with lichens, and lined with finer materials, on a horizontal branch of a tree. Eggs: 4-5, pale blue to bluish white, flecked with browns, occasionally wreathed. Incubation: 13 days. Fledging: from 10 to 12 days. The Blue-gray Gnatcatcher is a small, active bird with a thin wheezy song and chatter. It inhabits a wide range of wooded habitats, preferring bottomland forests or riparian woodlands, and is often found near the forest edge. Gnatcatchers have an early nesting season; they arrive in late March or early April and fledglings often appear before the end of May in Illinois. Nests are usually placed high in a tree on a horizontal branch and are relatively easy to locate. Gnatcatchers may produce two broods per year (Ellison 1992). They are insectivores, usually gleaning insects from vegetation in the canopy or understory. Its breeding range includes most of the eastern, central, and the southwestern U.S. and Mexico, with the highest densities being found in the southern U.S. during the breeding season (Ellison 1992). Recently its range has expanded northward, particularly into the northeastern U.S. and southeastern Canada (Ellison 1992). Illinois History A century ago the Blue-gray Gnatcatcher was “not an uncommon summer resident” in Illinois (Cory 1909). More recently, Graber et al. (1979) stated that “Gnatcatcher populations in central and northern Illinois are now generally low” compared to what they were 75 years earlier. Breeding Bird Survey Trends For 1966-2000, the trend estimate is 1.6% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.43) for Illinois. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest is -0.4% (nonsignificant, P = 0.71) for the 1966-2000 period. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project, the Blue-gray Gnatcatcher was reported in priority blocks in 95 counties. It was most frequently reported from priority blocks in the southern half of the state. Its distribution in the northern part of the state is probably a reflection of the location of the larger forested areas, such as along the major river corridors, in conserva- tion areas, and in forest preserve districts. According to Graber et al. (1979), the gnatcatcher should occupy appropri- ate habitat in every county. Frequency The Blue-gray Gnatcatcher was reported from 408 (40.9%) priority blocks and 56 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 163 (16.3%) of the priority blocks. Blue-grays were easy to find, often in pairs, by their thin, wheezy calls and their activity. The breeding evidence criteria used most frequently to Confirm breeding in priority blocks were adults feeding young (61 FY records), fledged young (34 FL records), and occupied nest (34 ON records). It is likely that gnatcatchers bred in the majority of blocks in which they were reported. Breeding Evidence _____ Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 163 16.3 40.0 196 15.2 Probable 131 133 32.1 146 11.4 Possible 114 11.4 27.9 122 25 Totals 408 40.9 100.0 464 36.1 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ Probable . © Possible at O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois ) - : + : + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest in) + Count + + + 0: 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Yi < sa Blue-gray Gnatcatcher 9g! Eastern Bluebird SEVERED Dennis Oehmke Code: EABL Rangewide Distribution: southeastern Canada, U.S. east of the Rockies, south to Honduras. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident, uncommon winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: forest edge, orchards, pastures, and open country with scattered trees. Nest: a loose cup of twigs, grasses, and weed stems, in a cavity or nest box. Eggs: 4—5, pale blue (sometimes white), unmarked. Incubation: |2—14 days. Fledging: from 15 to 20 days. The popular and easily recognized Eastern Bluebird breeds in the eastern half of North America from southern Canada to the Gulf coast and in parts of Mexico and Central America. This small thrush is most often found in open and semi-open rural habitats with scattered trees, where it is often seen perching on fences and utility lines. Bluebirds are cavity nesters that utilize natural cavities or woodpecker holes in trees, as well as man-made nest boxes. They compete with House Sparrows, House Wrens, chickadees, starlings, and many other species for nesting cavities. The availability of bluebird nest boxes set up and maintained by bluebird enthusiasts has increased the numbers of this species (Gowaty and Plissner 1998). They forage on the ground in open habitats and their diet consists of mostly insects and small fruits. The conversion of forests to agricultural lands in the 1800s and early 1900s increased the availability of suitable habitat and bluebirds became more abundant during the 1900s (Gowaty and Plissner 1998). In recent decades the v4 9: U.S. population has increased, according to Breeding Bird Survey data. During harsh winters and springs, bluebird populations experience crashes, especially in the northern part of its range. Illinois History The Eastern Bluebird was a very common and well-known species in Illinois, according to early accounts (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909) and continued as such through the 1950s except for a few winter population crashes. In summer, bluebirds were most abundant in the southern third of the state in the first half of the 1900s (Graber and Graber 1963). The population level in 1957 was half of what it had been in 1909, and after the severe winter of 1958, the bluebird population declined to about one-tenth of its 1909 level (Graber and Graber 1963). In subsequent years the popula- tion slowly recovered but setbacks occurred in the late 1970s due to two severe winters (Bohlen 1989; Graber and Graber 1979). Nest boxes are used by a large percentage of blue- birds in the state (Bohlen 1989) and have significantly contributed to the current level of the bluebird population in Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS trend estimates for the bluebird population indicate increases of 3.8% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the state and 2.9% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the upper Midwest for the 1966-2000 period. In both the state and region, significant population declines during the 1966-1979 period were followed by significant recoveries during 1980- 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Eastern Bluebird was widely distributed throughout the state and reported in priority blocks in all 102 counties. It was reported less frequently from priority blocks in the intensively cropped or developed areas. If nest boxes were available and properly maintained, the Eastern Bluebird would probably occur in nearly every Illinois township, except perhaps the highly urbanized areas. Frequency The Eastern Bluebird was reported from 756 (75.8%) priority blocks and 86 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 585 (58.6%) of the priority blocks, with fledged young, adults feeding young, occupied nest, and nest with young (205 FL, 118 FY, 105 ON, and 95 NY records, respectively) the most frequently used breeding evidence criteria. The bluebird was one of the easiest species to find, identify, and confirm. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 585 58.6 7714 654 ~—- 50.9 Probable 97 9.7 12.8 103 8.0 Possible 74 74 9.8 85 6.6 Totals 756 75.8 100.0 842 3865.5 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed #& r) Probable © Possible C] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Year ~- a + 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Upper Midwest Year $4} 4 + + + + + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Eastern Bluebird vA) Veery Catharus fuscescens Code: VEER Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada, south through the U.S. except the southwest and far west, to northern Brazil. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and rare to uncommon summer resident in north, decreasing southward to the central part of the state. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: shaded, moist woodlands with understory. Nest: a cup of twigs, bark strips, grass, and weed stems lined with soft bark and leaves; on or near the ground. Eggs: 4, pale blue, usually unmarked. Incubation: 10—12 days. Fledging: about 10 days. This woodland species breeds mainly across the northern U.S. and southern Canada. The Veery occurs in moist deciduous forests with dense, herbaceous understories, especially disturbed and early successional forests (Moskoff 1995), and prefer larger forest tracts (Morss 1999). It is most readily recognized by its flute-like song “veer, veer, veer.” Insects and fruit are the main food items and it primarily forages on the ground and to a lesser extent in shrubs and trees. Veeries nest on or near the ground in small shrubs, such as gooseberry, or small trees. Forest fragmentation, 274 ae, tng os Richard Graber which increases parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds, and loss of second-growth woodland habitat are threats to the Veery population. Preservation of large blocks of mesic forests is an important conservation measure for this species. Illinois History The Veery, the least spotted of the spot-breasted brown thrushes that occur in Illinois, is primarily a migrant through Illinois. However, in the past it was considered “a summer resident from northern Illinois northward” (Cory 1909) and an uncommon summer resident in the Chicago region (Ford 1956). According to Bohlen (1989), a “thin and local nesting population is found mostly in northern Illinois, although some appear to be moving into central Illinois.” Because of its tenuous status as a breeding species in Illinois, the Veery was declared a threatened species in 1977. It was delisted in 1999 and is not currently considered a threatened or endan- gered species in the state, but remains a rare breeding species. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Veery population in [Illinois is too small and localized to be adequately sampled by the BBS. In the upper Midwest BBS data indicate a decline in population at an annual rate of —1.5% (significant, P < 0.01) during the 1966-2000 period. Credibility Index: IL = none.and UM = 2. Distribution Illinois is at the southern edge of the Veery’s breeding range. During the atlas project, it was most frequently encountered in the northern part of the state and not at all in the southern half. The most southerly Confirmed record was from Vermilion County. A relatively large nesting population of this species was found in the 1990s at Lowden-Miller State Forest in Ogle County (S. Bailey, pers. comm.). Frequency The Veery was reported from 24 (2.4%) priority blocks and 38 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 7 (0.7%) of the priority blocks, with 2 records of fledged young (FY), 2 records of nest building (NB), 1 record of adults feeding young (FY), 1 record of occupied nest (ON), and 1 record of nest with young (NY). Because of its breeding habits and well-hidden nest, evidence for Confirmed status may not have been detected, and therefore it is possible Veeries may have nested in the blocks recorded as Probable and Possible. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 7 Oy 29.2 ile* le Probable i 0.7 29.2 26 2.0 Possible 10 1.0 41.7 21 1.6 Totals 24 2.4 100.0 62 4.8 * 998 priority blocks ** ]286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed S Probable Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest + 0 + ' + t + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Veery Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina Richard Graber Code: WOTH Rangewide Distribution: far southeastern Canada and the eastern U.S., south along the east coast of Central America to Panama. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous forests. Nest: a bulky, compact cup of weed stalks and grass on a base of leaves followed by a layer of mud and lined with fine dark rootlets; in a tree. Eggs: 3-4, greenish blue, unmarked. Incubation: |3—14 days. Fledging: about 12 days. The Wood Thrush is a familiar species in the forests of the eastern half of North America where it breeds from southern Canada to the Gulf coast. This spot-breasted brown thrush has one of the most melodious songs of North American songbirds. The Wood Thrush is a primary example of a forest interior species. Although it nests in a variety of wooded bottomland habitats, it prefers dense forest interiors, espe- cially forests with well-developed subcanopies and shrub layers and an open forest floor. Wood Thrush nests are placed at low or medium height on horizontal branches of trees. It feeds mostly on invertebrates on the ground and on fruits. As a result of loss and fragmentation of forests along with heavy cowbird parasitism, the Wood Thrush is not 276 nearly as common as it once was. The Wood Thrush popula- tion has declined significantly throughout its range in recent decades, according to Breeding Bird Survey data. Protection and restoration of large, contiguous forest tracts would benefit the Wood Thrush. Illinois History The Wood Thrush, the largest spotted thrush in Illinois, was a common breeding species throughout Illinois in the 1800s and early 1900s (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). Early concerns about the rapid clearing of bottomland forests and its effect on the Wood Thrush population were expressed by Ridgway (1915). The problem was considered even more critical by the 1970s (Graber et al. 1971). Wood Thrush offspring in Illinois rarely fledge from nests any more (Robinson 1992). At present its population is greatly diminished (Robinson et al. 1995). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimates for Wood Thrush populations are —1.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.29) for Illinois and —0.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.70) for the upper Midwest for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 1. Distribution Atlas data indicate that the Wood Thrush attempted to breed throughout the state but there were relatively few records of successfully fledged young. It was reported in priority blocks in 101 counties, but Confirmed as breeding in only 40 counties. Wood Thrushes were most frequently encountered in, and most likely bred in, the larger and less fragmented forested tracts. Frequency The Wood Thrush was reported from 508 (50.9%) priority blocks and 102 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 85 (8.5%) of the priority blocks throughout the state. Wood Thrushes were readily detected by the sound of their resonant, flute-like songs but were difficult to confirm as breeding. The confirmation rate was relatively low (85 of 805 priority blocks). This species was most often Confirmed in priority blocks by observation of adults feeding young (25 FY records), nest with eggs (18 NE records), and fledged young (15 FL records). It is likely that Wood Thrushes attempted to breed in most of the blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** OO@UmS8BO00) gem, Ca Bog No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled OoOsmesle@ocoslm® og a oe! Blocks — with records blocks e 3) ° O 8 @ ol, ji eo be “ie Confirmed 85 8.5 16.7 11] 8.6 Os S o oe eeo Probable 190 19.0 37.4 238 18.5 | z i £ @O Oo Possible 233 23:3 45.9 261 20.3 0 e DO} ome be a i on. Totals 508 50.9 100.0 610 47.4 °.” Le ns te O.mbt5 em * 998 priority blocks . : 3 sea but O ie) ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) = os ye te is O O e C eal a ow @ BU O O O OO @e | oO B fy oer be 0 (| mt mo Hos % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks - = ~ blocks (gray = no records with records for a O/@ O a sc) for this species this species Oo ro me eso wm |oO 8 ote. io Oo Priority Nonpriority % a° = i a Confirmed @& ® Oo a peyeble O Cl Cye 5a @ Ooesgeeg Possible O a m|o a =e O a @ ay Breeding Bird Survey Trends O o o O Illinois aoue pg le oO $7 i w mem geo @ is a i | [lpia a , @ | 7) a * Kew . ab iB) E + ei O ca i o) GA Bh ts Ee) Es) =F DyO oO ] . ce a ° . “ i e . e ee ee. . ; : . é . 2 oO oO f | ] [ ] } Bl fat i | ee | ie) Ge \ | i O QO +— + - - ~ - + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 a i @ ia) = OO Year Upper Midwest & a 0 3 = Oo a = ua io a ae OBOB 1o : SS ee e. as of °. e . mn aoe: e bl T we a ex 2 + os [| @ Ss ‘S z + fel 0 & 1+ & 5 ra 0 + + : ~ + + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Wood Thrush PN iit=\a(erzlamacelelia Turdus migratorius = _ . 7 é Fe ge So Set B at Soe WS v4 Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: AMRO Rangewide Distribution: nearly all of North America, from northern Alaska and Canada through Mexico. 115 Bi (e) te Abundance: abundant migrant and summer resident, uncommon winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open woods, parks, fields with scattered trees, edges, and residential areas. Nest: a cup of mud with mixed twigs and grass lined with fine grasses, in a tree or on buildings or other structures offering support and protection. Eggs: 4, pale blue, unmarked. Incubation: 12-14 days. Fledging: from 14 to 16 days. The American Robin, the largest thrush in North America, is one of the most common and familiar birds throughout the continent, where it breeds in nearly all of Canada and the U.S. and in parts of Mexico. It occurs in a wide variety of habitats, including open woodlands, fields, forest edges, parks, and especially residential areas. Like other thrushes, it has a pleasant melodic song. Robins have benefited from habitats created or modified by man, especially short grassy fields and lawns where they forage primarily for inverte- brates, especially earthworms in spring and summer; their 278 diet in autumn and winter also includes fruit. Shade trees and shrubs provide nesting sites, but building ledges and other structures are often used. Robins have reportedly always been abundant in North America. During the 1950s and 1960s, the widespread use of pesticides such as DDT was believed to have caused major die-offs (Hickey and Hunt 1960; Sallabanks and James 1999). Because of their adapt- ability to a wide range of habitats and tolerance of human alterations to the landscape, robins have benefited from settlement and will probably remain a common species. Illinois History The American Robin was an abundant summer resident in the late 1800s and early 1900s (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). The population was estimated at 1.9 million birds in 1909 and 1.5 million in 1957, with a shift in abundance to residen- tial areas (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS data for the robin indicate significant positive trends in both Illinois and the upper Midwest for the period 1966— 2000 and for both subinterval periods. The population increased at an annual rate of 2.9% in Illinois (significant, P <0.01) and 1.8% (significant, P < 0.01) in the upper Midwest from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project, the American Robin was found and Confirmed in nearly every priority block. It was one of the most frequently reported and widely distributed species in priority blocks (Table 4). Robins likely bred in every atlas block in Illinois. Frequency The American Robin was reported from 990 (99.2%) priority blocks and 186 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 949 (95.1%) of the priority blocks, most frequently by observation of adults feeding young (302 FY records), fledged young (266 FL records), and nest with young (125 NY records). Robins were among the easiest species to find, identify, and confirm. It usually took only a few minutes to confirm breeding. No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * Blocks with records All Blocks * blocks Confirmed 949 95.1 Probable 29 2.9 Possible 12 1.2 959° «1,114 86.6 pa 40 a1 LZ 22 1 Totals 990 99.2 100.0 1,176 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority ) % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) % of priority blocks with records for this species Confirmed @& Probable ai Possible L] Priority Nonpriority ® O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Count ns oo + + ‘5 + + + 4 1966" 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 965 84+ 72+ 60) : are 5 4s. pon tae gan s) wee . eesawe*, 6b ee 24+ | 124 0 + + + +— + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Yex . 7 : ace | American Robin 279 Peter Dring Code: GRCA Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada, most of the U.S. except far western and southwestern regions, south to Panama. 115 (0) te Abundance: common migrant and summer resident; occasional winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: shrubby woodlands, dense brushy forest, and wetland edges. Nest: a bulky cup of twigs, grass, forbs, and leaves lined with finer materials, in dense thicket. Eggs: 4, blue-green, unmarked although occasionally spotted with red. Incubation: |2—13 days. Fledging: from 10 to 11 days. Gray Catbirds breed primarily in southern Canada and much of the U.S. except for the far western and southwestern regions. The genus name, Dumetella, means small thicket (Cimprich and Moore 1995). Although singing males can be quite conspicuous, the Gray Catbird is for the most part a fairly secretive bird of dense shrubby areas, thickets, fencerows, and woodland edges, especially in rural or 280 Cle: WV Or-lielige, Dumetella carolinensis riparian settings. It also nests in shrubs and hedges in residential areas (Graber et al. 1970). Catbirds have an easily identified song and a catlike “mew.” They are inquisitive, adaptable, and relatively tolerant of humans. Nests are well- hidden in impenetrable thickets, bushes, and tangles close to the ground. Two broods per season are normal for this species. Their diet in spring consists of mostly insects—ants, caterpillars, and beetles—and includes fruit and berries in the fall. Catbird nests are parasitized by Brown-headed Cow- birds, but cowbird eggs are quickly removed. Human settlement has increased available habitat, such as early successional habitat, forest edge, parks, and yards. Illinois History A century ago the Gray Catbird was considered a very common summer resident in Illinois (Cory 1909) and “one of our most familiar birds” (Ridgway 1889). Data from surveys in 1909 and 1957 indicated that a considerable population decline occurred during that half-century period (Graber and Graber 1963), perhaps due to loss of shrubby successional habitat, fencerows, hedgerows, and pastures. Breeding Bird Survey Trends From 1966 to 2000 the estimates are 0.7% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.12) for Illinois and 0.2% per year (nonsignifi- cant, P = 0.53) for the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 1. Distribution The Gray Catbird was reported throughout the state and from priority blocks in all 102 counties. It was one of the most frequently reported and widely distributed species in priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4). Frequency The Gray Catbird was reported from 906 (90.8%) priority blocks and 171 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 476 (47.7%) of the priority blocks. Catbirds were easily detected by their songs or catlike “mews.” Two-thirds of the Confirmed records in priority blocks were observations of adults feeding young (215 FY records) and fledged young (104 FL records). It is likely that catbirds bred in the major- ity of blocks where they were reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 476 47.7 a WH 44.9 Probable 282 28.3 311 BAI P RASA. Possible 148 14.8 16.3 L73 13.5 Totals 906 90.8 100.0 1,077 83.7 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) NN ANS % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & & Probable © Possible C] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 6 @ 8/8 BD a 5 6 @ BU ia & @ @ G ) Bol Uu B/ a a @ | G@ 04+ + n ; + + + 4 00mg i 1976) 1981" 1986 ~ 199155 199652000 Year Upper Midwest Te 3 6 iF : ¥ . e UW ; » . @ Je FS Sol ee E ; ; a47 Oo 2 0 + + +- + 1 Year + fi + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 (| @ S @|8 @ i G@ Bo @ Gray Catbird 281 Col atat-veamiuCorer dlalelelige| Mimus polyglottos Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Os (TOY (0) Rangewide Distribution: far southern Canada to oleae ui My (o.e(een ILLINOIS Abundance: permanent resident, common in the south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: wide range of open to semi-open habitats, especially hedgerows and thickets. Nest: a cup of twigs lined with grass and rootlets, in a dense shrub or tree or in vines. Eggs: 3-5, blue-green, usually marked with browns. Incubation: |2—13 days. Fledging: from 11 to 13 days. The Northern Mockingbird is a year-round resident primarily in the southern half and the northeastern region of the U.S. and in Mexico. It is known for its mimicking of songs of other birds as well as other sounds, and persistent singing that often continues through the night. This conspicuous species inhabits open areas with hedges, shrubby edges, and farms, and is common in suburban areas. The nest is usually placed low in the dense foliage of a tree or shrub. Mocking- birds are normally monogamous but occasionally bigamous or polyandrous mating occurs (Derrickson and Breitwisch 1992). Two to three broods per season are common, with broods frequently overlapping; in such cases the male cares for the fledglings while the female incubates the next clutch (Zaias and Breitwisch 1989). Nesting attempts later in the season (June—August) are often more successful than earlier attempts (Graber et al. 1970). They eat invertebrates, fruits, i) (oe) i) and berries. The mockingbird is generally a southern species but its range has expanded northward during the past century. Birds that remain through the winter in the northern part of the range must cope with extreme weather conditions and be resourceful in finding food. During severe winters, the mockingbird population in the north often declines and is rather slow in recovering. Illinois History At the turn of the twentieth century the Northern Mocking- bird was deemed to be “a common summer resident in portions of southern Illinois, but quite rare in northern Illinois” (Cory 1909). The state’s summer population, which was mostly in the south, declined between 1909 and 1957 (Graber and Graber 1963). This corresponds with changes in farming methods, which eliminated shrubby borders around fields. Although the state population declined overall, mockingbirds significantly increased in central Illinois between 1909 and 1957 (Graber and Graber 1963). In southern Illinois Graber et al. (1970) noted a seasonally fluctuating population, which suggested some migration may occur. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Populations of the Northern Mockingbird in both the state and region have declined over the period 1966—2000. The trend estimates are —2.6% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for Illinois and —2.0% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the upper Midwest for 1966-2000. Loss of early successional and hedge habitat may have contributed to these declines. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, Northern Mockingbirds were found mostly in the southern half and west-central parts of the state. They were sporadic and local in distribution in northern and east-central Illinois. This species was found in priority blocks in 93 counties. Frequency The Northern Mockingbird was reported from 577 (57.8%) priority blocks and 24 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 290 (29.1%) of the priority blocks, primarily by observation of fledged young or adults feeding young (75 FL and 68 FY records). Because mockingbirds tend to be both visually and vocally conspicuous, they were probably detected when present in the block. Since they are generally permanent residents, it is likely that nesting occurred in the blocks in which they were reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks Blocks with records No. % Sampled blocks Confirmed 290 29.1 50.3 299 823.3 Probable 150 15.0 26.0 153 11.9 Possible 137 13.7 23.7 149 11.6 Totals 577 57.8 100.0 601 46.7 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) = Bw A % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & & Probable Possible LJ O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 + 4 ' t + ' t { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 10+ a+ 0 7 + + + - 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 Year + 199] 1996 2000 J Northern Mockingbird 283 Joe Milosevich Code: BRTH Rangewide Distribution: eastern two-thirds of the U.S. and adjacent southern Canada, south to Florida and Texas. 105 Bi (8) Abundance: common migrant and summer resident; occasional winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: brushy areas, shrublands, forest edges and clearings; some residential areas. Nest: a cup of twigs, dead leaves, and grasses lined with grass and rootlets, in low shrub or tree. Eggs: 4—5, pale bluish white (occasionally greenish), spotted with reddish brown. Incubation: | 1—14 days. Fledging: from 9 to 13 days. The Brown Thrasher breeds in the U.S. and southern Canada from east of the Rocky Mountains to the Atlantic Ocean. This bird is named for its noisy thrashing about in the dense undergrowth. The Brown Thrasher’s singing is limited primarily to early spring, and its repertoire, although large, is not as elaborate or extensive as that of its relative, the mockingbird. The song includes a series of warbled phrases, which are usually repeated in pairs. The Brown Thrasher can be found mostly in thickets, brushy areas, and woodland edges in rural settings and occasionally in residential areas. It is a ground-foraging bird that feeds mainly on invertebrates, fruits, berries, and seeds. Nests are hidden close to the 284 Brown Thrasher Toxostoma rufum ground in the dense cover of shrubs or tangles. Thrashers are generally thought to be single-brooded with later nests being a second attempt after the loss of the first nest (Graber et al. 1970; Cavitt and Haas 2000). The clearing of the forests for agriculture and settlement of the Great Plains supported breeding range expansions in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Habitat for Brown Thrashers has declined since the mid- 1950s with the removal of fencerows, hedgerows, and other shrubby habitat in rural areas. Early successional habitat is also less abundant. Illinois History A century ago the Brown Thrasher was a common summer resident in Illinois (Cory 1909). The state’s summer thrasher population declined drastically between the early and mid- 1900s; the population level in 1957 was about one-fourth that of 1909, perhaps due to the loss of orchards and hedgerow habitats (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Brown Thrasher populations in Illinois and the upper Midwest experienced declines from 1966 to 2000. In the state the trend estimate is —-0.9% per year (significant, P = 0.01) and in the upper Midwest it is —1.8% per year (signifi- Cali ba OL, Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 2. Distribution The Brown Thrasher was widely distributed throughout the state during the atlas project. It was reported in priority blocks in all 102 counties and Confirmed as breeding in 100 of them. The lack of records in some areas may be due to inadequate searches rather than their absence. It was one of the most frequently reported species in priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4). Frequency The Brown Thrasher was reported from 958 (96.0%) priority blocks and 125 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 633 (63.4%) of the priority blocks. The Brown Thrasher was an easy species to find and confirm. The most frequently used breeding evidence criteria for Confirmed records in priority blocks were adults feeding young (240 FY records) and fledged young (171 FL records). Brown Thrashers probably bred in all the priority blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 633 63.4 66.1 692 _53.8 Probable = 209 20.9 21.8 251 19.5 Possible 116 11.6 a | 140 10.9 Totals 958 96.0 100.0 1,083 84.2 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) ti i IN % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & ® Probable Possible rt O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 10+ 2+ + + + + + + -- 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 10+ a 6? . ~ ~ ra Le ° 3 | een O ef hl 4+ ae 7; 2+ 0 + + + + + + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year 8 BS @ Oo 8|Ba BEB Brown Thrasher 285 LUT go) ol=F-Tameiclaliale Sturnus vulgaris Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: EUST Rangewide Distribution: native to Europe and western Asia; in North America now includes southern Alaska, most of Canada, and the entire U.S., south into Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: abundant year-round resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open fields, woodland, suburbia, and cities. . Nest: a slovenly cup of grass, twigs, forbs, or straw lined with finer materials, in cavities. Eggs: 4—6, pale bluish or greenish white, marked with browns. Incubation: 12-14 days. Fledging: from 18 to 21 days. The European Starling had a modest beginning in North America when about 100 birds were released in New York City in the 1890s. In North America it is now one of the most abundant birds (Cabe 1993). It breeds throughout the U.S. and Canada. Starlings are found in nearly every habitat except dense forest. These birds are extremely adaptable and thrive in even the most heavily urbanized areas. At the expense of nearly all other cavity-nesting species, starlings utilize any sort of cavity for nesting, from natural cavities in trees to nooks and crannies in city, residential, and farm buildings. Many times they outcompete native species for nesting sites, including usurping woodpeckers from their cavities and bluebirds from nest boxes. Starlings have a diverse and adaptive diet that includes fruits, berries, grain, seeds, and invertebrates. Although many populations are sedentary, those of the Midwest and Great Lakes regions may be migratory (Dolbeer 1982; Cabe 1993). Starlings are often present in large numbers year-round and winter roosts may contain several million birds (Bohlen 1989). The tremendous success of the European Starling in North America is due to the conversion of the native landscape to urban and agricultural land uses and the starling’s ability to utilize a wide variety of nesting sites and food sources (Cabe 1993); Illinois History The first record of European Starlings in Illinois was from Champaign County in the winter of 1922 (Ford 1956). The species spread rapidly in the state, as evidenced by a summer population roughly estimated at 3.1 million in 1957 (Graber and Graber 1963). The European Starling is now one of the most abundant permanent residents in the state. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for the European Starling population in Illinois from 1966 to 2000 is 0.0% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.96). The trend estimate for the upper Midwest is —0.5 per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.05) over the 35-year period. Sample size and relative abundance for this species are among the highest in the state and the region. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution The European Starling was found and Confirmed as breeding in priority blocks in every county during the atlas project. It was one of the most frequently reported and widely distrib- uted species in priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4) and probably occurred in every township as well. Frequency The European Starling was reported from 972 (97.4%) priority blocks and 180 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 890 (89.2%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observations of fledged young, adults feeding young, and occupied nests (356 FL, 283 FY, and 147 ON records, respectively). Starlings likely nested in every atlas block. Breeding Evidence ry Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 890 89.2 91.6 1,038 80.7 Probable 33 oh 3.4 46 3.6 Possible 49 49 5.0 68 3)5) Totals 972 97.4 100.0 1152 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & @ Probable is © Possible ry O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Count z + + +— + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 128; 0 + . . + + + + = 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year European Starling 287 Cedar Waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum Joe Milosevich Code: CEDW Rangewide Distribution: southern half of Canada and the entire U.S., south through Central America to Panama. 1B Hie) Abundance: common migrant and summer resident, uncommon winter resident; erratic at all seasons. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: woodlands, forest edges, parks, and residential areas. Nest: a bulky and compact cup of twigs, grass, and moss lined with finer materials, in a medium to large tree. Eggs: 3-5, pale bluish gray, dotted with black or brown. Incubation: 10-16 days. Fledging: from 14 to 18 days. Cedar Waxwings are gregarious songbirds, often found in flocks in fruiting trees. They breed across the northern half of the U.S. and the southern half of Canada (Witmer 1996). Their sleek, tawny-colored plumage is enhanced with touches of red, yellow, and black. Waxwings are found in a variety of open or semi-open woodlands and inhabited areas with shrubs and small trees, including residential areas, parks, cemeteries, and farmsteads. Cedar Waxwings eat primarily fruit (mulberry, cherry, crabapple, cedar berries, etc.). In mid-to-late spring, while still feeding young, Waxwings switch from a diet of fruit to insects, which they capture by flycatching from a perch or by gleaning from vegetation. Nesting occurs later in the spring than for most 288 species. Nests are usually placed at wooded edges or in isolated trees or shrubs in old fields. They are secretive during the nesting season and do not establish territories (Saunders 1911). Waxwings may raise two broods per year (Mountjoy 1987). Their numbers at any particular location may fluctuate dramatically from year to year because they wander widely, apparently driven by the availability of fruit. Cedar Waxwing populations have increased in numbers and range in the past few decades. Illinois History Cedar Waxwings in the late 1800s were considered “an abundant species throughout the State, but it is so capricious in its movements that its presence or absence appears to bear no relation to season or weather” (Ridgway 1889). Cory (1909) addresses its erratic behavior by saying it was “a common summer resident . . . varying in numbers according to the severity of the season.” Breeding Bird Survey Trends From 1966 to 2000 the Cedar Waxwing population in [Illinois increased at an annual rate of 10.3% (significant, P < 0.01). The rate of increase in the upper Midwest population for the same period was less dramatic at 1.5% per year (significant, Pe O01): Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project, Cedar Waxwings were found in priority blocks in 97 counties. They were less frequently reported from priority blocks in the southern third of the state. Bohlen (1989) states that, while not common, they probably nest in all Illinois counties. Frequency The Cedar Waxwing was reported from 501 (50.2%) priority blocks and 134 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 146 (14.6%) of the priority blocks, with the most fre- quently used breeding evidence criteria being adults feeding young (41 FY records), fledged young (31 FL records), and nest building (30 NB records). Because these birds are quiet during the breeding season and may not have been detected, it is possible that Cedar Waxwings bred more commonly than the atlas data indicate. Occasional flocks observed during the breeding season were most likely nonbreeding birds. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 146 14.6 29.1 211 16.4 Probable 168 16.8 2a.) 203 15.8 Possible 187 18.7 SUES, 221 17.2 Totals 501 50.2 100.0 635 49.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ r Probable Possible CO O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 + + + + + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest QO + t + + + + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year J Cedar Waxwing 289 Eric Walters Code: BWWA Rangewide Distribution: eastern half of the U.S., south along the eastern coast of Central America. 115 File) Abundance: uncommon migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: brushy hillsides, successional fields, and second-growth woods. Nest: a deep, narrow, bulky cup of grass strips, dead leaves, and grapevine bark lined with fibers, hidden in grass or vines on or near the ground. Eggs: 5, white, finely spotted with brown, mostly at large end. Incubation: |0—11 days. Fledging: from 8 to 10 days. The Blue-winged Warbler, a bright yellow warbler with bluish wings, occupies open habitats, such as early to mid- successional and brushy areas and forest openings and edges. It forages for insects in the lower and mid-levels of vegeta- tion. Its familiar “bee-buzz” song betrays its presence but the density of the habitat in which it lives makes it difficult to observe. Nests are difficult to find because they occur in very dense cover on or near the ground. Blue-winged Warblers breed mainly in the eastern U.S. north of the Gulf states. Over the past century their range has expanded to the east and north in response to the increased availability of their preferred habitat, but populations in some areas have declined with loss of shrublands through natural succession and conversion to other land uses (Gill et al. 2001). As the Blue-winged Warbler range expanded, nesting Golden- winged Warblers have gradually disappeared from those areas (Jackson et al. 1996). Whether this is a result of direct 290 Blue-winged Warbler Vermivora pinus competition or a response to changes in habitat or other factors is not known. Two identifiable hybrids, Brewster’s and Lawrence’s Warblers, result from the interbreeding of Blue-winged and Golden-winged Warblers. A pure cross between the two species produces the Brewster’s Warbler, and the much rarer Lawrence’s Warbler is a backcross between a Brewster’s and Blue-winged Warbler. Illinois History Around 1900 the Blue-winged Warbler was considered to be ‘‘a rather common summer resident in southern Illinois and a casual summer resident in northern II]linois” (Cory 1909). Prior to that, however, neither Ridgway (1874) nor Nelson (1876) indicated that it occurred at all in northern Illinois. In the early decades of the 1900s the species began appearing more regularly in the northeastern part of the state (Ford 1956). It has been suggested that Blue-winged Warblers gradually displaced the few Golden-winged Warblers that nested in the area. Although still rare, the Blue-winged Warbler is now a much more common breeding species than the Golden-winged Warbler in northern Illinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Blue-winged Warbler is found in low numbers and on few routes in Illinois. For the period 1966-2000, the trend estimate is 42.2% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for Illinois and 0.2% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.89) for the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution The Blue-winged Warbler was infrequently found during the atlas project; however, it was reported in priority blocks in 23 counties and Confirmed as breeding in 5 of them. Counties with Confirmed breeding included Cook, Lake, and Winnebago in the north and Pope and Union in the south. Frequency The Blue-winged Warbler was reported from 39 (3.9%) priority blocks and 30 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 7 (0.7%) of the priority blocks. Because the male’s song is soft and difficult to hear and nesting occurs in dense habitat, the Blue-winged Warbler may have been underreported. It is likely that breeding may have occurred in many of the blocks where Probable or Possible breeding was recorded. Brewster’s and Lawrence’s Warblers During the atlas project, a Lawrence’s Warbler was Con- firmed as breeding in Cook County and a Brewster’s Warbler was considered a Probable breeder in Jackson County. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled P mek Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 7 0.7 17.9 11 0.9 Probable 11 1.1 28.2 25 1.9 Possible 21 . el 53.8 33 2.6 0 69 5.4 Totals 39 3.9 100. * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority | | Confirmed @ e | Probable 6) Possible C] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 27 1.57 5 elt e) 0.5 —s aa oa ye ® = O+ + + + + + ' { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Blue-winged Warbler 291 eTo)(ol-TaraWilale(-remulclge) (sls Vermivora chrysoptera Vern Kleen Oli (CANAL YAN Rangewide Distribution: far southeastern Canada, south through the eastern U.S. to the northwestern tip of South America. tH Hie) fh Abundance: uncommon migrant and very rare summer resident in the north. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: early successional habitats of old fields. Nest: an unkempt cup of long grass strips and grapevine bark lined with fine grapevine fibers, hidden in grassy clump on ground. Eggs: 4—5, white, marked with browns (often wreathed). Incubation: 10 days. Fledging: from 9 to 10 days. The Golden-winged Warbler occurs in early successional habitats and forest edges where there is an abundance of shrubs and small saplings intermixed with dense, herbaceous ground cover. Areas undergoing regeneration, such as clear- cuts, old fields, and strip mines, provide some of the most suitable habitats. The male often sings his “bee, buzz, buzz, buzz” song from a tall tree. The secretive Golden-winged Warbler generally nests in the dense undergrowth, building its nest on or near the ground in vegetation near the base of a shrub or small tree. Golden-winged nests are parasitized by 252 Brown-headed Cowbirds, which reduces their reproductive success. The current breeding range of Golden-winged Warblers includes the northeastern and north-central U.S. and adjacent areas of far southern Canada, and the Appala- chian Mountains. The population expanded in the late 1800s and the 1900s but is now declining in many areas as succes- sional habitat matures and areas become reforested or are converted to other land use (Confer 1992). Blue-wingeds have expanded into the breeding range of Golden-winged Warblers and may be found in similar habitats, although the Golden-winged tends to inhabit more open areas with fewer trees. The range expansion may be contributing to the displacement and reduction of the Golden-winged popula- tion; however, the amount of direct competition, if any, between these species is not well understood (Confer 1992). These two species also interbreed, creating fertile hybrids (see Blue-winged Warbler account). Illinois History The Golden-winged Warbler was “a more or less common summer resident in parts of Illinois” around 1900 (Cory 1909). However, Graber et al. (1983) found little evidence to support that claim, especially for nesting birds. The Golden- winged Warbler is still a very rare breeder and apparently breeds only in the counties adjacent to Lake Michigan. Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS data are not adequate for estimating population trends for the Golden-winged Warbler in Illinois. In the upper Midwest, the trend is estimated at —1.4% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.06) between 1966 and 2000. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution Illinois is at the southwestern edge of the Golden-winged Warbler’s breeding range. During the atlas project, it was rare and reported in only Lake and Cook counties. Frequency The Golden-winged Warbler was reported from 2 (0.2%) priority blocks and one nonpriority block (in northern Cook County). Breeding was Confirmed in a single priority block located in southwestern Cook County. Although rare, Golden-wingeds may have been overlooked because of their secretive habits. Breeding Evidence ____ Priority Blocks * | All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed | 0.1 50.0 0.1 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible l 0.1 50.0 2 0.2 Totals 2, 0.2 100.0 3 0.2 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) / ? = Fee 4 % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority | Confirmed 8 | Probable | Possible il O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 35 2 + alt = 2 + ev 4 Oem See 0 + + + + + : - 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year . _ , Golden-winged Warbler 293 Northern Parula Parula americana Vern Kleen OFT: (CO) 7% Rangewide Distribution: eastern U.S. and adjacent southern Canada, south to Honduras, and the Caribbean Islands. 115 Bie) fe Abundance: fairly common migrant and common summer resident in southern Illinois, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous bottomlands and along streams in upland ravines. Nest: a pendant or pocket hollowed in hanging lichens lined with fine materials, in a tree. Eggs: 4—5, white to creamy, marked with brown or reddish brown (variable). Incubation: 12—14 days. Fledging: from 10 to 11 days. This riparian woodland species breeds throughout southeast- ern Canada and most of the eastern half of the U.S., with gaps from Iowa through northern Ohio and parts of the northeast. The Northern Parula, one of the smallest birds that breeds in North America, inhabits bottomland forests and swamps where it has an affinity for sycamore, cottonwood, and bald cypress trees (Graber et al. 1983). It spends its time high in deciduous trees, feeding on insects and spiders. Nests are typically built in hanging epiphytes (e.g., Spanish moss in the South, beard moss in the North) or constructed with 294 epiphytes and other vegetation (Moldenhauer and Regelski 1996) and are usually placed in the upper tree canopy over or near water. Parula populations have been impacted by forest destruction and fragmentation, and the loss of epiphytes due to air pollution (Moldenhauer and Regelski 1996). Forestry practices and the availability of epiphytes are critical factors affecting the Northern Parula population in North America (Moldenhauer and Regelski 1996). Illinois History In the late 1800s and early 1900s the Northern Parula in Illinois was considered “not uncommon . . . during summer” (Ridgway 1889) and a common summer resident (Cory 1909). Ford (1956) stated that there are few historical records, even of migrants, in the Chicago region. Graber et al. (1983) noted a distinct gap in the breeding range between central [linois and central Wisconsin. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for the Northern Parula population in Illinois for the period 1966-2000 is 2.7% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.31). A population increase of 2.3% per year (significant, P < 0.01) is estimated for the upper Midwest for the same period. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, Northern Parulas were reported in priority blocks in 65 counties, including 14 counties where breeding was Confirmed. Because of their affinity for bottomland and riparian forests, their distribution is largely confined to the major river valleys and southern Illinois. The distribution pattern of the atlas data is similar to that reported by Graber et al. (1983). Frequency The Northern Parula was reported from 197 (19.7%) priority blocks and 11 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 19 (1.9%) of the priority blocks. Northern Parulas were easy to detect by their loud and distinctive song but finding nests and confirming breeding was more difficult. It was Confirmed in only 10% of the 197 priority blocks in which it was recorded, which is among the lowest rates of confirma- tion for species reported in more the 10 priority blocks. Because its preferred habitat of riparian forests was not well sampled during the atlas project, it is likely that the Northern Parula occurred in more blocks than the atlas data indicate. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 19 1.9 9.6 23 1.8 Probable 60 6.0 30.5 65 5.1 Possible 118 11.8 59.9 120 9.3 16.2 Totals 197 1 100.0 208 * 998 priority blocks ** 1,286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) > | ie % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & & Probable Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois + + + + { 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year 0 + 1966 1971 1976 Upper Midwest Count + 0+ + + = + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 ace lela ee 295 Yellow Warbler Dendroica petechia LA€A Chicago Academy of Sciences Ory: (a ALYY te Rangewide Distribution: northern Alaska and Canada oltiaamernoltred emp ouCey) a0) Mi tilom OMe Mes rilcomeleyunounmereltian America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: wet second-growth woodlands, scrub, gardens, and riparian thickets. Nest: a neat, compact cup of weed stalks, plant fiber, shredded bark, and grass lined with fine materials, in a tree. Eggs: 4-5, off-white, occasionally pale green, marked with browns, olive or gray, barely spotted to strongly So) Colca teen Incubation: | 1—12 days. Fledging: from 9 to 12 days. The Yellow Warbler, the most widespread breeding warbler in North America, breeds throughout much of the continent north of the southern states to northern Canada, and in parts of Mexico. The Yellow Warbler occurs in a variety of habitats, such as woodlands and parks, but most often it inhabits riparian areas with young woody growth, such as dense stands of willows next to a stream or pond (Graber et al. 1983). Nests are built in an upright fork of a small or medium-height tree or shrub, generally 3 to 12 feet above 296 ground and usually along streams. Yellow Warbler nests are often parasitized by Brown-headed Cowbirds; however, this species responds by building a new nest on top of the old one containing cowbird eggs. Illinois History In the late 1800s and early 1900s the Yellow Warbler was “one of the most abundant of our summer birds” (Ridgway 1889) and a very common summer resident (Cory 1909). It was still considered a common summer resident in the mid- 1900s (Smith and Parmalee 1955). A major population decline was noted beginning in the early 1900s. Graber et al. (1983) compared data from the same area for three time periods (1904-1910, 1957-1969, and 1979-1980) and found a consistent decline in abundance. Counts in the latter period were down 94% from 1904-1910 levels. Cowbird parasitism has been suggested as a cause of the decline; parasitism rates increased after 1900 (from 6% prior to 1900 to 40% after 1900) (Graber et al. 1983). Breeding Bird Survey Trends During the period 1966-2000, the Yellow Warbler population in Illinois increased at an estimated rate of 6.3% per year (significant, P < 0.01). The increase in the upper Midwest population is estimated at 1.8% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Yellow Warbler population was widely distributed throughout the state during the atlas project and it was reported in priority blocks in 99 counties. It was most frequently reported from priority blocks in the north. Graber et al. (1983) believed that the Yellow Warbler should occur as a breeding species in every IIlinois township. Frequency The Yellow Warbler was second only to the Common Yellowthroat as the most common nesting warbler in Illinois. It was reported from 492 (49.3%) priority blocks and 130 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 131 (13.1%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observations of adults feeding young (62 FY records) followed by occupied nests (22 ON records). It is likely that nesting occurred in most blocks in which the species was reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 131 13.1 26.6 187 14.5 Probable 151 15.1 30.7 201 15.6 Possible 210 21.0 42.7 234 18.2 Totals 492 49.3 100.0 622 48.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed e Probable a © Possible fe] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 6 = 4+ S| ° O a) all a 0 + = +. + + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 6 an = =! ° Oo , 2 Bt OQ + ~ ~ + + +———_—++ 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Yellow Warbler Chestnut-sided Warbler Dendroica pensylvanica Todd Fink / Daybreak Imagery Code: CSWA Rangewide Distribution: south-central and southeastern Canada and the eastern half of the U.S., south to Panama. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and rare to locally uncommon summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: second-growth, brushy thickets, deciduous woodland edges, and regenerating clearcuts. Nest: a loosely constructed cup of fine plant material lined with finer materials, in a shrub. Eggs: 4, white to off-white, marked with browns. Incubation: 12—13 days. Fledging: from 10 to 12 days. The Chestnut-sided Warbler is a colorful and active bird of second-growth woodlands, dense brushy areas, and forest edge. The breeding range is eastern North America and includes southern Canada, the northern states from Minne- sota to Pennsylvania, and the Appalachian Mountains. The male’s song has been described as “pleased, pleased, pleased to meetcha.” Nests are usually built in thickets or shrubs within four feet of the ground and are difficult to locate. This warbler’s population and range increased since the early 1800s, coinciding with the clearing of forests and the subsequent availability of early successional habitat. Since the early 1960s the rangewide population has slowly declined (Richardson and Brauning 1995). The population of Chestnut-sided Warblers is vulnerable to habitat loss as successional habitat matures into forests (Askins 2000) and 298 to brood parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds. Early successional habitat specialists, including the Chestnut-sided Warbler, benefit from management practices that maintain the vegetative structure of this habitat. Illinois History Illinois is at the southern edge of the Chestnut-sided Warbler’s breeding range, and it is primarily a migrant in the state. During the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Chestnut- sided Warbler was known to breed in the northern portion of Illinois, but how far south it occurred was not known (Ridgway 1889). It was described as a more or less common summer resident in northern Illinois in the early 1900s (Cory 1909). Although there are early historical breeding records in Missouri around St. Louis (Gault 1892; Graber et al. 1983), their appearance in extreme southern Illinois is either relatively recent or previously undetected. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The population of Chestnut-sided Warblers in Illinois is too small and localized to be adequately sampled by the BBS. For 1966-2000 the trend estimate for the upper Midwest is —0.2% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.69). Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 1. Distribution Two small, disjunct populations, one in the northeast and the other at the southern tip of the state, were found during the atlas project. Birds were not common at either location, but probably more common than the data indicate. The Chestnut- sided Warbler was reported from priority blocks in six counties, but is suspected to breed in other northern and southern counties as well. A moderate population has been found breeding in clearcuts at Lowden-Miller State Forest since the atlas project (S. Bailey, pers. comm.). More information about the distribution of this warbler in the state is needed. Frequency The Chestnut-sided Warbler was reported from 9 (0.9%) priority blocks and 9 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in | of the 18 blocks in which it was found, a priority block in southern Illinois. Because of its easily recognized song, the Chestnut-sided is easy to detect; therefore, the scarcity of records implies that it is rare in the state. Although the only Confirmed nesting was found in extreme southern Illinois, the species may have bred in the other blocks in which it was reported. Breeding Evidence _Priority Blocks * ___Al Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled i 7 Blocks with records blocks Confirmed =| 0.1 11.1 | 0.1 Probable o 0.4 44.4 9 0.7 Possible 4 0.4 44.4 8 0.6 Totals 9 0.9 100.0 18 1.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) La % of 998 sampled priority _—_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& e _ Probable # @ Possible Es O ae ae ac L - ae ie 1 ee eee Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest Re 8 f 6 ih ° . e ° . in ° 2 6 . ° . = ; j ee | 0 0 -+ +—— + + + 4 { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Chestnut-sided Warbler 299 4 Dennis Oehmke Code: BTINW Rangewide Distribution: central and eastern Canada, south through the eastern half of the U.S. to northern South America, and the Caribbean Islands. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant, very rare summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open coniferous and mixed coniferous-deciduous forests. Nest: a deep, compact cup of grass, moss, bark, and plant fibers lined with fine materials, in a tree. Eggs: 4—5, off-white, marked with browns; usually wreathed. Incubation: 12 days. Fledging: from 8 to 10 days. The Black-throated Green Warbler is common in the coniferous forests of southern Canada, the north-central and northeastern states, and the Appalachian Mountains. It is also found in mixed coniferous-deciduous and deciduous forests in the southern part of its range (Morse 1993). The Black- throated Green Warbler has one of the most prolonged migrations among northern warbler species; the first mi- grants routinely appear in early April and the last migrants 300 Sisley, qidalgeysiicvemCia-(=)amleclae) (=) Dendroica virens linger well into June in Illinois (Graber et al. 1983). This species mainly eats insects, especially caterpillars, which it gleans from small branches. Black-throated Greens usually nest in conifers where a small branch forks from the trunk. Parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds is known to occur, probably mostly in nests near the forest edge (Morse 1993). Illinois History The first confirmed breeding of the Black-throated Green Warbler in Illinois was found at Lowden-Miller State Forest in Ogle County in 1994 (Robinson 1995). Nests were found in a plantation of white pines and were placed relatively high in the trees (Robinson 1995). Prior to that siting, the closest known nesting population was in central Wisconsin. Graber et al. (1983) noted that “Of the northern warblers, the Black- throated Green may be the most inclined to linger late in the spring—singing males are present well into June, which may account for the references to breeding in Illinois.” Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS data are not adequate for estimating population trends for the Black-throated Green Warbler in Illinois. In the upper Midwest the trend estimate for 1966—2000 is 0.8% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.48). Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, Black-throated Green Warblers were primarily found in appropriate habitat in the northern part of the state. Since the atlas project ended, nests of these warblers have been found at Lowden-Miller State Forest in Ogle County and birds have been observed at other northern Illinois locations. Frequency The Black-throated Green Warbler was reported from | (0.1%) priority block and 3 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was not Confirmed in any block and was classified as Possible at all four sites where it was reported (two in Lake and one each in Winnebago and Kankakee counties). Males are persistent singers, even during the spring migration. Because they have a prolonged migration period, birds reported during the atlas project may have been migrants. Breeding Evidence _ Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible l 0.1 100.0 4 0.3 Totals l 0.1 100.0 4 0.3 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) en % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority | Confirmed a Probable ' Possible Oo O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 3+ i) . « ° . . «wt . . Count 1 + 0 + + + + — 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 a Black-throated Green Warbler 301 Yellow-throated Warbler DY =Valo| ge) lor- mele) iii ny er: Eric Walters Code: YTWA Rangewide Distribution: eastern U.S. south of the northern tier of states through eastern Mexico to Costa Rica, and the Caribbean Islands. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident in the south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: pine-oak woodlands, river corridors, and cypress swamps. Nest: a cup of fine grass, bark strips, weed stems, and plant down lined with down and feathers, in a tree; where available, uses Spanish moss. Eggs: 4, dull greenish gray-white, marked with purples, reds or browns; occasionally wreathed. Incubation: 12—13 days. Fledging: not currently known. The Yellow-throated Warbler is a common bird in the southeastern U.S.; its breeding range extends north to northern Illinois and east to Pennsylvania. The breeding range is currently expanding northward (Hall 1996). In most of its range it is a species of mature bottomland forests and sometimes upland mixed deciduous-coniferous forests. In early literature the Yellow-throated Warbler was aptly named the Sycamore Warbler because of its affinity for sycamore 302 trees. Yellow-throated Warblers inhabit the upper canopy and forage for insects under the bark of trees in a manner similar to Brown Creepers. Their nests are rarely observed because they are built high in a tree, generally in a fork or at the tip of a horizontal branch, and are well hidden from below. Illinois History Ridgway (1889) was unclear as to the status of the Yellow- throated Warbler, indicating that it was “a common summer resident in the bottom-lands, where . . . it lives chiefly in the large sycamore trees along or near water courses” but that the distribution was not well known. Cory (1909) indicated that it was a common summer resident in the south and rare in the north. Both noted that it was associated with sycamore trees. Yellow-throated Warblers are also found in the cypress swamps, mixed coniferous-deciduous forests, and pine plantations in southern Illinois (Graber et al. 1983; Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for the Yellow-throated Warbler popula- tion in Illinois, which is based on a small sample size and low relative abundance, is 2.5% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.63) for 1966-2000. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest is 3.4% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.07) for the same time period. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, Yellow-throated Warblers were found in priority blocks scattered throughout the state in a total of 48 counties, but were most frequently reported from priority blocks in the south. Nearly all were associated with swamps, floodplain forests, or riparian habitats. In the northern part of the state the population is either increasing slightly or is being detected more frequently. Frequency The Yellow-throated Warbler was reported from 95 (9.5%) priority blocks and 11 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 11 (1.1%) of the priority blocks, mostly as a result of observing adults carrying food for young (6 FY records). It is possible that nesting occurred in the majority of blocks in which it was recorded. Breeding Evidence "Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 11 ik 11.6 18 1.4 Probable 30 3.0 31.6 33 2.6 Possible 54 5.4 56.8 aD 4.3 Totals 95 9.5 100.0 106 8.2 * O98 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed #& @ Probable @ Possible Lal O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest i) OQ + + + + | + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 eg Yellow-throated Warbler 303 Pine Warbler By -VaTo (ge) [or-M eA] Jim Wedge / Cornell Lab of Ornithology Code: PIWA Rangewide Distribution: southeastern Canada and eastern U.S., south to Texas, and in some Caribbean Islands. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant, uncommon summer resident in southern IJlinois (rare elsewhere), and very rare winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: pine forests. Nest: a compact cup of needles and lined with feathers, far out on a limb in a pine tree. Eggs: 4, white to off-white, marked with browns (mostly near the larger end). Incubation: about 10 days. Fledging: about 10 days. The Pine Warbler generally associates with mature pines but also occurs in mixed coniferous-hardwood forests. It is a common breeder and permanent resident in the southeastern U.S. and breeds as far north as southeastern Canada. It forages slowly through the upper parts of trees and is easily overlooked. Its song is similar to that of the Chipping Sparrow and it often responds to the playing of a Chipping Sparrow recording. Like other wood warblers, Pine Warblers are primarily insectivores, but also regularly eat seeds, such as seeds of pines and seeds at bird feeders (Rodewald et al. 1999). Generally they forage on the foliage and bark of 304 pines. Nests are well hidden high in pine trees in a dense clump of pine needles near the end of a branch (Rodewald et al. 1999). Because Pine Warblers are dependent on pine forests, commercial logging and fire suppression with a resultant increase in deciduous vegetation can have negative effects on their populations (Rodewald et al. 1999). Over the past thirty years, the Pine Warbler population in the U.S. appears to have increased, according to Breeding Bird Survey data. Illinois History The primary reference for the early status of Pine Warblers in Illinois comes from Cory (1909), who states that it is “a summer resident in suitable localities.” Graber et al. (1983) report that these warblers “have adapted as breeding birds to the extensive pine plantations of southern Illinois” and that “recent breeding records are lacking for north and central Illinois, notwithstanding extensive pine plantations in some areas (e.g., Mason, Henderson, and Ogle counties).” Breeding Bird Survey Trends For 1966-2000 the trend estimate for the Pine Warbler population in Illinois is 6.9% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.30), but this species is localized and occurs in small numbers in the state. The data for the upper Midwest indicate an increase in population over the same period of 5.8% per year (significant, P < 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project, the Pine Warbler was reported in priority blocks in 11 counties primarily in southern Illinois. The six records in Hamilton, St. Clair, Wabash, LaSalle, and Winnebago counties are outside of the expected nesting range. Adults with young were reported in the 2002 breeding season in mature pines at Sand Ridge State Forest in Mason County (S. Bailey, pers. comm.). Frequency The Pine Warbler was reported from 17 (1.7%) priority blocks and | nonpriority block. Breeding was Confirmed in 3 of the priority blocks; adults feeding young was the evidence for all 3 Confirmed records. Pine Warblers can be hard to find even when known to be present and confirma- tion of breeding for this species requires extreme patience. It is likely that the species bred in most of the southern Illinois blocks in which it was recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled All Blocks ** Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 3 0.3 17.6 4 0.3 Probable 4 0.4 fa te 4 0.3 Possible 10 1.0 58.8 10 0.8 Totals 7 Ry 100.0 18 1.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ a Probable e) Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois ie 31 t S Ps 87] ] ats 0 +—< a 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 L Year Upper Midwest Aes 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 Year 1996 2000 Pine Warbler 305 ad ec lig(=Mulelae) (se By=Vale| ge) lor: Mel Eiexe) (0) g Joe Milosevich Code: PRAW Rangewide Distribution: eastern North America from extreme southern Ontario, south to the Gulf Coast, eastern Central America, and the Caribbean Islands. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident in southern Illinois, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: dry brushy clearings, second-growth forests, and abandoned upland fields. Nest: a compact cup of closely felted plant materials, in small tree. Eggs: 4, white to off-white, marked with brown, usually wreathed. Incubation: |2 days. Fledging: from 9 to 10 days. The Prairie Warbler is a specialist of dry upland shrubby and early successional habitats. These birds are attracted to abandoned fields, pine plantations, forest edges, and hillsides with a scattering of red cedar trees. Areas with poorer soil may provide better long-term benefits for the population than sites with better soils because forest regeneration rates are slower (Graber et al. 1983). They typically nest in shrubs and small trees within 10 feet of the ground. Prairie Warblers are 306 usually single-brooded. Nests are parasitized by Brown- headed Cowbirds; Nolan (1978) found that 27% (of 336 nests) in a study in Indiana were parasitized. Parasitized nests are often abandoned (Ehrlich et al. 1988). Prairie Warblers breed primarily in the eastern half of the U.S. Their breeding range expanded when former crop fields were abandoned and early successional habitat developed. Prairie Warblers were widespread by the mid-1900s but the popula- tion has declined since then in parts of their range (Nolan et al. 1999). Reforestation and decreasing availability of early successional habitat may be factors. Illinois History In the late 1800s and early 1900s the Prairie Warbler was considered rather rare in Illinois (Cory 1909); however, occasional nests with eggs were found in Cook and adjacent counties during those years. Nolan (1978) stated that breeding Prairie Warblers have been found in 26 Illinois counties. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for the Prairie Warbler is —6.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.50) for Illinois for 1966—2000, but the estimate is based on a small sample size. The population in the upper Midwest declined at an estimated rate of —3.0% per year (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project, Prairie Warblers were reported in priority blocks in 11 counties. They were mainly found in extreme southern Illinois, with a few records in central Illinois. Immediately prior to the atlas project breeding birds were recorded in at least five central Illinois counties as far north as Peoria and McLean counties. There is currently a very small but regular breeding population in Vermilion County (S. Bailey, pers. comm. ). Frequency The Prairie Warbler was reported from 26 (2.6%) priority blocks and 2 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 4 of the priority blocks. Nesting probably occurred in the majority of blocks in which these warblers were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 4 0.4 15.4 5 0.4 Probable 5 0.5 19.2 6 0.5 Possible 17 17 65.4 17 1.3 Totals 26 2.6 100.0 28 22 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ ® Probable [ @ Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Count 0 + + + + — + + 1 1966 =1971 1976 =: 1981 1986 =199] 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 6a: 44 = = ed fo) 'S) Q + + + + + + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 | — Prairie Warbler 307 Vern Kleen Code: CERW Rangewide Distribution: extreme southern Ontario, the eastern half of the U.S., south to northwestern South America. 10) O) te Abundance: uncommon migrant and summer resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: mature, deciduous bottomland forests. Nest: a small, compact cup of bark, weed stalks, moss, and lichens lined with moss and hair, in a tree. Eggs: 4, grayish, creamy or greenish white, marked with browns, finely spotted or blotched, usually wreathed. Incubation: | 1-12 days. Fledging: not currently known. The Cerulean Warbler forages for insects high in the canopy of large mature deciduous forests, especially bottomlands. Ceruleans primarily breed in the eastern U.S. north of the southern tier of states. Although the range has remained much the same, the numbers of this species have declined since the early 1900s (Hamel 2000). They were once common in the Mississippi and Ohio River Valleys. In the past three decades the U.S. population has declined, accord- ing to Breeding Bird Survey data. The Cerulean Warbler migrates earlier and farther than many other warbler species (Hamel 2000). They nest in the mid-to-upperstory levels. Loss of large unfragmented mature forests, especially along streams, and parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds are important factors in the decline of this species (Hamel 2000). 308 Cerulean Warbler By-Vale ge) lor: Mer=) a0] (=¥:) Illinois History In the 1800s the Cerulean Warbler was “by far the most abundant of the summer-resident members of the family in Illinois” (Ridgway 1889). In the early 1900s it was deemed “common in the southern part of the state, but casual or rare in northern Illinois” (Cory 1909). Robinson and Vanderah (Cornell Lab of Ornithology 2000) described the species as currently rare, patchy in distribution, extremely area sensi- tive, and absent or very rare in most Illinois forests. In this study, Ceruleans were found in only half of the forest stands with at least 500 contiguous acres. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for Illinois is —12.6% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.35) for 1966-2000; however, the species was found on few routes. In the upper Midwest the Cerulean Warbler population declined at —5.7% per year (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000; trend estimates were also negative and significant for the two subinterval time periods of 1966-1979 and 1980-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution Cerulean Warblers were reported in priority blocks in 27 counties and Confirmed in eight of those during the atlas project. The southern and southwestern portions of the state were the main areas where Ceruleans were found, with scattered occurrences in the east-central and northern parts of the state. Data from the Cerulean Warbler Atlas Project (Cornell Lab of Ornithology 2000) indicate a similar distribution, but that project also found moderate populations in Jo Daviess and Ogle counties and small populations in the forests adjacent to the Illinois and Little Wabash rivers. Cerulean Warblers found in White and Hamilton counties during the atlas project were not relocated during surveys conducted from 1992 to 1997 by Robinson and Vanderah (Cornell Lab of Ornithology 2000). Frequency The Cerulean Warbler was reported from 63 (6.3%) priority blocks and 23 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 10 (1.0%) of the priority blocks. Because it inhabits the treetops and is difficult to spot, the Cerulean Warbler is mostly detected by its song; however, its song can be confused with that of other warblers. Nesting may have occurred in the majority of the blocks in which these warblers were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * ; All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 10 1.0 15.9 11 0.9 Probable 23 23 36.5 34 2.6 Possible 30 3.0 47.6 4] 3.2 Totals 63 6.3 100.0 86 6.7 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) eg esyeat % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ © Probable id Possible Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 2 ae 15+ 5 fe) Lier oO i. 0 + + + 4 + + + 1 1966 1971 1976 =1981 1986 =-199] 1996 2000 Year Cerulean Warbler 309 si fslorer-lalemaualiccomuycclge) (=) We iER Ele. Peter Dring Code: BAWW Rangewide Distribution: central and southeastern Canada and the U.S. east of the Rockies, south through Central America to northwestern South America, and the Caribbean Islands. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and very rare summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous and mixed forests, especially hillsides and ravines. Nest: a concealed cup of leaves and coarse grass lined with finer materials, usually on the ground. Eggs: 5, white to creamy, entirely flecked with brown markings, occasionally wreathed. Incubation: 10 days. Fledging: from 8 to 12 days. The bold black and white stripes of the Black-and-white Warbler make it hard to confuse with any other species. Its creeper-like behavior of foraging for insects under bark on tree trunks and limbs is unique among North American wood warblers (Kricher 1995). Black-and-white Warblers breed in central and southeastern Canada and east of the Rockies in the U.S. They generally inhabit mature and second-growth deciduous and mixed deciduous-coniferous forests (Kricher 310 1995). Although common in most wooded habitats during migration, they prefer large tracts of riverine forest with mature trees near swamps or backwater lakes for nesting (Kricher 1995; Noon et al. 1980). They mostly frequent the mid-to-understory levels. Nests are hidden beneath vegeta- tion on the ground next to a shrub, log, or tree, often on a hillside or in a ravine. The male’s song is distinctive but high pitched and weak. This species is affected by forest fragmen- tation and nest parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds (Kricher 1995). Illinois History In the late 1800s and early 1900s the Black-and-white Warbler was considered very common in dry woods (Ridgway 1889) and “may occasionally nest in northern Illinois, but I find no record of its having done so” (Cory 1909). Graber et al. (1983) described the breeding population as very spotty, consistently low, and mostly in the south. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The scattered and small population of Black-and-white Warblers in Illinois is not adequately sampled by the BBS. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest population is 0.7% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.20) for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 1, Distribution During the atlas project, Black-and-white Warblers were found in priority blocks in 18 counties. Because of their preference for large forested tracts, they were primarily found in southern Illinois, especially in the Shawnee Na- tional Forest and along the Kaskaskia River. They were also found at a few locations in northern Illinois. Frequency The Black-and-white Warbler was reported from 21 (2.1%) priority blocks and 4 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 3 of the blocks in which it was reported. When present, Black-and-white Warblers were easy to detect and identify by their song and foraging behavior. However, many may have been overlooked because their weak, high-pitched songs are hard to hear. Breeding for this species may also be underreported because nesting occurs at the same time migrants are passing through, especially in southern Illinois. Nesting was difficult to confirm. It is likely that nesting occurred in many of the blocks in which it was recorded, especially in southern Illinois. Breeding Evidence - Priority Blocks * : . All Blocks a No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 3 0.3 14.3 3 0:2 Probable 4 0.4 19.0 5 0.4 Possible 14 1.4 66.7 17 le Totals 21 Ball 100.0 25 1.9 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) & % of 998 sampled priority _ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority | Confirmed & e _ Probable Es ) _ Possible O O Breeding Bird Survey Trends | Upper Midwest Brie, a 2+ B | | = a 5 ee | 0 - +— + —+- pt —j- --——1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 - ae La oe Black-and-white Warbler 31] ANaat=)aler-lamatsyeyee lat Setophaga ruticilla Joe Milosevich Code: AMRE Rangewide Distribution: western and southern half of Canada, south through the U.S. to northwestern South America, and the Caribbean Islands. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and fairly common summer resident (locally). Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open deciduous and mixed forests, and second-growth, especially in vine-covered trees. Nest: a compact cup of plant fibers, grass, and rootlets ornamented with lichen, birch bark, and feathers and lined with finer materials, in a tree. Eggs: 4, white to off-white, marked with browns, usually wreathed. Incubation: 12 days. Fledging: about 9 days. The male American Redstart, with its bright orange and black plumage, is easily distinguished from other species. This Neotropical migrant breeds throughout the eastern and northern U.S. and southern and western Canada. Redstarts are inhabitants of open wooded areas, especially moist deciduous second-growth forests with dense, shrubby understories, and prefer large tracts of habitat. Redstarts are insectivores and, like flycatchers, have physical characteris- tics (i.e., a flattened bill with well-developed rictal bristles, proportionately large wings and tail) that enable them to pursue insects in flight. The redstart’s flashy wing and tail patches appear to flush insect prey (Sherry and Holmes Sal 1997). The male’s song is a clue to its presence but is often variable and indistinct, sometimes resembling the song of other warbler species. For nesting, redstarts select an upright fork in the upper portion of a shrub or small tree, especially willows, in well-vegetated areas. Brown-headed Cowbirds parasitize redstart nests where they occur together such as in fragmented forests. American Redstart populations have declined in the last half of the 1900s because of the loss of habitat, although not enough to cause changes in overall range (Sherry and Holmes 1997). Illinois History The American Redstart was described by Cory (1909) as an abundant summer resident in Illinois. However, Ridgway (1889) indicated that it was “by no means a well-known bird to the general observer.’ Although there are no definitive population data for Illinois to which comparisons can be made, Graber et al. (1983) believed that in recent years the population in Illinois had surely decreased due to loss of riparian forest habitat. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate is —8.1% per year (significant, P = 0.03) for the American Redstart population in Illinois over the sample period 1966 to 2000; however, the sample size is small and the relative abundance is low. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest population for the same period is estimated at 0.5% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.44). Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution Atlas data indicate that American Redstarts occurred throughout the state, but most notably along major river corridors (especially the Mississippi, Illinois, and Kaskaskia), the northern part of the state, and the southern bottomlands. Redstarts were found in priority blocks in 57 counties and Confirmed in 20 of them. The concentration of records in Hamilton and White counties was unexpected. Frequency The American Redstart was reported from 124 (12.4%) priority blocks and 38 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 27 (2.7%) of the priority blocks, most fre- quently by observation of adults feeding young (16 FY records) followed by fledged young (5 FL records). It is likely that breeding occurred in most blocks in which the species was present. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 27 a7, 21.8 38 3.0 Probable 34 3.4 27.4 48 3.7 Possible 63 6.3 50.8 76 ee, Totals 124 12.4 100.0 162 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ r) Probable Possible L] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 0 + + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year American Redstart 313 Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea Joe Milosevich tits (es od (COM Rangewide Distribution: eastern half of the U.S., from south of the northern tier of states to northern South America and the Caribbean Islands. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: swamps and flooded bottomland forests with snags for nesting. Nest: a tree cavity filled with moss, dry leaves, twigs, and bark lined with finer materials; also, nest boxes. Eggs: 4—6, creamy, blotched with browns. Incubation: |2—14 days. Fledging: about 11 days. The Prothonotary Warbler breeds in the eastern half of the U.S., primarily in the southeastern U.S. This species is named for its bright yellow plumage that resembles the yellow robes of papal clerks (prothonotaries) in the Roman Catholic Church (Petit 1999). It also has a fitting alternate name, the golden swamp warbler, as the Prothonotary is an inhabitant of swamps and bottomland forests. This insecti- vore spends most of its time foraging in the lower stratum. It usually nests in tree cavities in wooded areas near water, but also regularly utilizes nest boxes placed in appropriate habitat. The Prothonotary is the only wood warbler species in eastern North America that nests in cavities (Jackson et al. 1996). A pair mated in one season may or may not pair with the same mate in the same territory in subsequent seasons (Kleen 1973b). Prothonotary Warblers compete with other cavity-nesting species, such as House Sparrows, European 314 Starlings, and House Wrens, and nests are frequently parasitized by Brown-headed Cowbirds (Jackson et al. 1996; Petit 1999). The greatest threat on its breeding ground is the loss and degradation of bottomland forests through logging or conversion to agricultural land (Petit 1999). Illinois History Cory (1909) stated that the Prothonotary Warbler was a “common summer resident in Illinois south of the Kankakee River and of irregular occurrence” farther north. Ridgway (1889) noted that it was one of the most abundant birds in the southern half of the state where there were swamps bordered by willow trees. In the late 1800s and early 1900s Prothonotaries were considered common and abundant along the Kankakee River (Graber et al. 1983). They were prob- ably more widespread and numerous prior to settlement when natural bottomlands and swamps were more abundant and less fragmented (Graber et al. 1983). The construction of large reservoirs has affected the Prothonotary population on one hand by destroying natural bottomlands and on the other hand by creating new habitat. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The BBS trend estimate for the Prothonotary Warbler popula- tion in Illinois is 0.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.79) for 1966-2000. The trend estimate for the upper Midwest is 2.0% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.09) for the same period. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Prothonotary Warbler is strongly associated with the swamps, river corridors, and flooded bottomland forests of Illinois. It is common in the cypress swamps in southern Illinois. During the atlas project, it was most prevalent in the south and recorded only sparingly in the northern half of the state, usually along streams and rivers. It probably occurred at more sites than indicated by the atlas data. It was Con- firmed in 33 counties and reported in priority blocks in 58 counties. Frequency The Prothonotary Warbler was reported from 152 (15.2%) priority blocks and 15 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 54 (5.4%) of the priority blocks, a relatively high percentage for a warbler. Eighty percent of the Con- firmed records in priority blocks were observations of adults feeding young (26 FY records) or occupied nests (17 ON records). It is likely that Prothonotary Warblers nested in most of the blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 54 5.4 35.5 64 5.0 Probable 47 4.7 30.9 49 3.8 Possible 51 =e 33.6 54 4.2 Totals 152 15.2 100.0 167 ~—- 13.0 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) PP % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & 8 Probable © Possible -z O Prothonotary Warbler 315 Worm-eating Warbler Helmitheros vermivorus x Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: WEWA Rangewide Distribution: eastern half of the U.S. south of the northernmost states to Panama, and the Caribbean Islands. 115 Bile) Abundance: common migrant and summer resident in south, uncommon in central and rare in north. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: extensive, mature, undisturbed deciduous forests with hillsides and ravines. Nest: a cup of skeletonized leaves lined with finer materials and mycelia of fungi, on ground. Eggs: 4—5, white, marked with browns in weak spots to heavy blotches, usually wreathed. Incubation: 13 days. Fledging: 10 days. The Worm-eating Warbler, named for its habit of eating caterpillars, is an inconspicuous bird found in large tracts of forest on hillsides and ravines with dense shrub understories. It breeds in the eastern U.S., generally locally where suitable habitat is found. Among North American songbirds, this warbler is probably one of the most sensitive to forest fragmentation (Hanners and Patton 1998). It sings a Chip- ping Sparrow-like song from the midstory level and forages 316 for insects on leaves on or near the ground. Worm-eating Warbler nests are built on the ground, usually on a hillside, and are well hidden under dead leaves. Destruction and fragmentation of large tracts of forest in both its breeding and wintering ranges are the main threats to this species (Hanners and Patton 1998). Illinois History Ridgway (1889) stated that in “suitable localities in southern Illinois, the Worm-eating Warbler is a common species; but in the northern portion of the state it appears to be very rare.” Cory (1909) reiterates Ridgway’s evaluation of this species. Graber et al. (1983) indicated that there were no available data to judge whether the population is changing or not. This species, which is highly dependent on large contiguous blocks of unfragmented forest (Robbins et al. 1989), must be less common now than prior to the clearing of the forests by settlers in the 1800s. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Worm-eating Warbler is found on so few BBS routes in the state and the region that the reliability of the trend estimates is low. The trend estimates for 1966—2000 for Illinois and the upper Midwest are 4.6% per year (nonsignifi- cant, P = 0.66) and 3.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.16), respectively. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 3. Distribution The Worm-eating Warbler had'a very limited distribution during the atlas project. Because of its habitat requirements, this warbler is limited to the larger hillside areas of the Shawnee National Forest, and a few of the larger forested sites farther north, such as Forest Glen in Vermilion County, Siloam Springs State Park in Adams and Brown counties, and Pere Marquette State Park in Jersey County, though it was not reported at the latter site during the atlas project. It was found in priority blocks in 18 counties, with Confirmed breeding in 8. Frequency The Worm-eating Warbler was reported from 31 (3.1%) priority blocks and 3 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 10 (1.0%) of the priority blocks. It is difficult to confirm breeding; Worm-eating Warblers likely nested in most of the blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 10 1.0 Bas 10 0.8 Probable 8 0.8 25.8 11 0.9 Possible i)s} ile: 41.9 13 1.0 Totals 31 Sul 100.0 34 2.6 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & ® Probable Oh Possible Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois o s 1.57 5 aly S) 0.5+ Q)-- 2———- + $$ $$ p++ 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest Pe = 1.57 0.5+ 0 + - + + + ' + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year . Worm-eating Warbler 317 SLE Tate) amomulelae) (-16 Limnothlypis swainsonii Vern Kleen Code: SWWA Rangewide Distribution: southeastern U.S., south to southeastern Mexico, and the Caribbean islands. 115 TO) te Abundance: very rare migrant and summer resident in the southern tip of Illinois. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: moist bottomland forests with canebrakes and dense thickets. Nest: a bulky cup of leaves lined with finer materials, in dense cane or shrub. Eggs: 3, white with occasional (faint) speckling. Incubation: 13-15 days. Fledging: from 10 to 12 days. The Swainson’s Warbler is a medium-sized brown warbler with a long, heavy bill. It breeds primarily in the southeast- ern U.S. where it inhabits swamps and bottomland forests along rivers and streams, preferring shaded areas with fairly dense understory. It is associated with dense stands of giant cane (Eddleman 1978; Eddleman et al. 1980). Nests are concealed at the edge of dense stands of cane or in vines, often near water. Swainson’s Warblers are difficult to observe because of the dense habitat and their secretive behavior. The decline in availability and quality of bottom- land hardwood forests and the loss of large areas of cane threaten the future of this species. 318 Illinois History The Swainson’s Warbler has apparently always been rare in Illinois. Neither Ridgway (1889) nor Cory (1909) knew much about it; however, Cory felt that it “undoubtedly occurs in the southern portion of the state.” The first evi- dence of nesting was reported in southern Jackson County during the early 1950s (Hardy 1955) and formally docu- mented in 1966 (George 1972). During the spring of 1973, this species was found in breeding habitat at four new sites in southern Illinois (Kleen and Bush 1973). With the harvesting of bottomland forests and loss of giant cane stands during the severe winters of the late 1970s, breeding Swainson’s Warblers disappeared from the state by the early 1990s. Because of a low population level and its specialized habitat requirements, the Swainson’s Warbler was initially listed as a threatened species in Illinois in 1977; it was reclassified to endangered in 1989 because of its diminished habitat and nearly extirpated population. It has not been reliably reported from any of its former breeding sites or in any other potential breeding habitat since the late 1980s. Regeneration of the southern Illinois canebrakes and preservation of large bottomland forests tracts are necessary for this species to breed again in Illinois (Herkert 1992). Breeding Bird Survey Trends There are no trend estimates for this species in Illinois or the upper Midwest. The Swainson’s Warbler is more typically found in the southeastern states, where the trend for 1966— 2000 is estimated at 2.6% (nonsignificant, P = 0.15). Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = none. Distribution The Swainson’s Warbler occurred in the large contiguous stands of bottomland forest in southern Illinois that are moist, shady, close to water, and support large dense stands of giant cane. Southern Illinois is at the northernmost edge of its breeding range and is the only known breeding area in the state. The lone atlas record was in Jackson County, its last known breeding site. Frequency The Swainson’s Warbler was reported from a single block (0.1%), a priority block in Jackson County where it was reported as a Possible breeder. Although the male Swainson’s Warbler has a loud, ringing song, other species (e.g., Hooded Warbler) have songs so similar that they are often mistaken for the Swainson’s Warbler. The most reliable records are those where the bird is visually observed. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible l 0.1 100.0 | 0.1 Totals l 0.1 100.0 l 0.1 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & e Probable a | Possible ay O Swainson’s Warbler 319 OM {=Taleli ge! Seiurus aurocapilla Code: OVEN Rangewide Distribution: central and eastern regions of Novi ou mOrlircerMaxeluinmenuelurdsmecilseclerielenertitcet Oren to northwestern South America, and the Caribbean islands. 115 ile) fe Abundance: common migrant, uncommon summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: large, mature deciduous forests; occasionally mixed forests. Nest: oven-shaped consisting of dry grass, leaves, and moss lined with hair, in open on ground. Eggs: 4-5, white, marked with browns or gray, usually wreathed. Incubation: | 1—13 days. Fledging: from 8 to 10 days. The Ovenbird is a forest interior species and, like many species of wood warblers, requires large, contiguous decidu- ous forests; it is also very sensitive to forest fragmentation. The breeding range of the Ovenbird is generally east of the Rockies and includes southern Canada and the U.S. north of the southernmost states. Its primary song is a loud “Teacher, TEAcher, TEACHER.” Ovenbirds spend most of their time on or near the forest floor foraging in the leaf litter for insects and other invertebrates. The name Ovenbird is derived from its dome shaped nest of grass and leaves that resembles a Dutch oven. Their nests are placed on the Todd Fink / Daybreak Imagery ground and are often parasitized by Brown-headed Cow- birds. Reproductive success has been found to be lower in nests closer to forest edges (Van Horn and Donovan 1994) and males with territories near edges are frequently not successful in attracting mates (Van Horn 1990). Populations are negatively impacted by forest fragmentation, which results in increased nest parasitism and predation (Van Horn and Donovan 1994). Over the past three decades the North American population has increased, according to Breeding Bird Survey data. Illinois History The Ovenbird was considered by both Ridgway (1889) and Cory (1909) to be a common summer resident in Illinois woodlands. There is little historical information about the breeding population in Illinois except that they were believed to be more common in northern than southern Illinois. In southern IIlinois, Ovenbirds were likely present throughout the 1900s but the population in most years was well below that reported by Ridgway in the late 1800s (Graber et al. 1983). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend for the Ovenbird population in Illinois is estimated at -16.5% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.16) for 1966—2000; sample size and relative abundance are low. The upper Midwest population increased at a rate of 0.9% per year (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 1. Distribution Although Ovenbirds are known to breed throughout the state, their distribution has always been spotty and this was the case during the atlas project. This species was reported in priority blocks in 41 counties and Confirmed as breeding in 7 of them. Graber et al. (1983) expected Ovenbirds to breed in every Illinois county. However, the absence of large contiguous forests may preclude breeding in some counties. Frequency The Ovenbird was reported from 81 (8.1%) priority blocks and 41 nonpriority blocks. It is difficult to confirm breeding for this species. Of the eight Confirmed records in priority blocks, there were two records each for fledged young, adults feeding young, and nest with young (FL, FY, and NY, respectively). It is likely that Ovenbirds were present but not found in several blocks. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 8 0.8 9.9 18 1.4 Probable 30 3.0 37.0 47 ou Possible 43 4.3 ee | Si 4.4 Totals 81 8.1 100.0 122 95 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed #& 8 Probable Possible J O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 16 14 12 10 g a 8 e) 6 4 Z + + —————————} + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year 321 Louisiana Waterthrush Seiurus motacilla Joe Milosevich Code: LOWA Rangewide Distribution: eastern half of the U.S., south through Mexico to Panama, and on the Caribbean islands. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and summer resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: forested streamsides. Nest: a cup of leaves, moss, twigs, and inner bark lined with finer materials, on ground amidst roots by streambank. Eggs: 5, white to creamy, marked with light to heavy splotches of browns or purplish gray. Incubation: 13 days. Fledging: about 10 days. The Louisiana Waterthrush is a riparian wood warbler typically associated with the southeastern U.S., although it breeds in much of the eastern U.S. The breeding range has expanded into the northeastern U.S., perhaps in response to reforestation of former agricultural fields since the early 1900s (Robinson 1995). The Louisiana Waterthrush is a timid species found in or along small streams in large forests and occasionally in swamps. The male’s loud, clear, and ringing song emanating from the understory is the best way to detect the bird’s presence. This species spends much of its time walking on the ground along the water’s edge or on rocks in the water in a manner similar to the Spotted Sand- piper in search of invertebrates; it also shares the sandpiper’s head- and tail-bobbing behavior. It usually selects a hollow in the dense root system of a windblown tree or a log along a 322 stream bank for nesting (Eaton 1958; Robinson 1990); nests are vulnerable to flooding. Louisiana Waterthrushes are frequent victims of parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds; parasitism rates ranging from 33 to 81% have been found in southern [Illinois (Robinson 1995). Like most other Neotropi- cal migrants, this species raises a single brood per season. Illinois History The Louisiana Waterthrush was considered by Ridgway (1889) to be “an abundant bird in all swampy wooded locations throughout the State, although much less numerous in the extreme northern than in the more southern counties.” Two decades later it was reported to be “a common summer resident in southern Illinois, and of casual occurrence in parts of northern Illinois” (Cory 1909). Breeding Bird Survey Trends In Illinois the population trend is estimated at 24.2% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.07) for the Louisiana Waterthrush, but the BBS does not adequately sample this forest interior species. For the upper Midwest the data indicate a population increase of 5.1% per year (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 2. Distribution The distribution pattern of the Louisiana Waterthrush during the atlas project was similar to that reported a century ago (Cory 1909), that is, they were most frequently encountered in the southern zone and less.frequently northward. It was reported in priority blocks in 49 counties and Confirmed as breeding in 23. It is not common anywhere, except possibly the Shawnee Hills region in far southern Illinois. This species is known to occur at Mississippi Palisades State Park in Carroll County but was not found as part of the atlas project at that site. Frequency The Louisiana Waterthrush was reported from 111 (11.1%) priority blocks and 18 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 33 (3.3%) of the priority blocks. Like other difficult-to-observe warblers, the Louisiana Waterthrush was not an easy species to confirm. Breeding evidence for two- thirds of the Confirmed records in priority blocks was observation of adults feeding young (22 FY records). It is likely that Louisiana Waterthrushes nested in most blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Piafned 33 Ma 29.J 38 3.0 Probable 31 3.1 27.9 40 Possible 47 4.7 42.3 51 Totals 111 Wale! 100.0 129 os 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed ® Probable A @ Possible C O Louisiana Waterthrush 323 Joe Milosevich Code: KEWA Rangewide Distribution: eastern half of the U.S. except northernmost states, south through Central America to northern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident in southern Illinois, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous and mixed forests with dense undergrowth. Nest: a cup of weed stems, leaves, and grass lined with rootlets and hair, on or very near the ground. Eggs: 4-5, white to creamy, marked with spots or blotches of browns. Incubation: |2—13 days. Fledging: from 8 to 10 days. Kentucky Warblers breed primarily in the southeastern U.S. but their range expanded northward in the 1900s (McDonald 1998). This warbler is a forest interior species that requires large, unfragmented blocks of deciduous forests. Its pre- ferred habitat is forests with a dense understory and well- developed ground cover layer (McDonald 1998). In Missouri Gibbs and Faaborg (1990) found that a forest block with a minimum of approximately 1,200 acres and a dense under- story is essential for successful breeding. The male’s loud song is similar to that of the Carolina Wren; even singing birds are difficult to locate. Nests, which are placed on the 324 Kentucky Warbler Oporornis formosus ground, are commonly parasitized by Brown-headed Cowbirds (Bohlen 1989). Fragmented forests, with their increased edge, benefit Brown-headed Cowbirds at the expense of Kentucky Warblers as well as many other forest species. The North American population has declined over the past three decades, according to Breeding Bird Survey data. Illinois History A century ago Ridgway (1889) stated that the Kentucky Warbler was “one of the most abundant of birds in the rich woods of southern Illinois.” Cory (1909) considered this species a common summer resident in southern Illinois, but rare in the northern part of the state. Its breeding range may have slowly expanded northward since the late 1800s (Graber et al. 1983). In southern Illinois, Graber et al. (1983) found the highest densities in upland forests. Breeding Bird Survey Trends From 1966 to 2000 the population trend estimates are 0.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.73) and 0.9% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.16) for Illinois and the upper Midwest, respectively. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project, Kentucky Warblers were Confirmed as breeding in priority blocks in 27 counties and reported in priority blocks in a total of 74 counties. They were most frequently encountered in the more heavily forested south. Outside of the southern part af the state, Kentucky Warblers were concentrated along the larger rivers, that is, the lower Illinois, Kaskaskia, and Vermilion. Frequency The Kentucky Warbler was reported from 207 (20.7%) priority blocks and 17 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 40 (4.0%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observations of adults feeding young (22 FY records) and fledged young (10 FL records). This species was Confirmed in 19% of the 207 priority blocks in which it was reported, which is a relatively low rate of confirmation. While the Kentucky Warbler is vocal, it is secretive and remains hidden in vegetation near the ground. It is likely that these warblers nested in most blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 40 4.0 19.3 46 3.6 Probable 64 6.4 30.9 73 SY Possible 103 10.3 49.8 105 8.2 Totals 207 20.7 100.0 224 174 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species | Confirmed © _ Probable ES Possible Priority Nonpriority Breeding Bird Survey Trends 0+ Illinois 27 1.5+ 21 31+ ) 0.5+ ‘ : [ewe = ae e e of Ld . 0 + + “+ + + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 24 1966 t 197] + + + +— + 4 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Kentucky Warbler 325 Vern Kleen Code: MOWA Rangewide Distribution: south-central and southeastern Canada, south through the eastern U.S. to northwestern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant and very rare summer resident in the northeast. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: wet, dense shrubbery in open deciduous woods, bogs, marsh edges, and regenerating clearcuts in forests. Nest: a cup of weed stems, grass, and leaves lined with fine plant material, on or near the ground. Eggs: 3-4, white to creamy, marked in browns from fine spots to strong blotches. Incubation: 12 days. Fledging: not currently known. The Mourning Warbler breeds in the northeastern U.S. and the central and eastern regions of southern Canada. It is a secre- tive species of dense shrubbery and thickets that stays hidden and close to the ground. Preferred habitat is moist brushy wood- lands and disturbed second-growth areas. Mourning Warblers benefit from alterations to the environment that open up for- 326 WMColei gallate mcclael(=1g Oporornis philadelphia ests and create areas of brushy second-growth, such as logging and road building (Pitochelli 1993). Nests are built on or near the ground in dense vegetation and are difficult to find. Mourn- ing Warblers are among the latest migrants to return to their nesting grounds each spring and therefore get a late start on the breeding season. The male’s territorial song is a loud and distinctive “churee, churee, churee.” On the breeding grounds Mourning Warblers are primarily insectivores, usually forag- ing on shrubs close to the ground. Illinois History Neither Ridgway (1889) nor Cory (1909) reference nesting for the Mourning Warbler. The first published record was of a nesting pair feeding a young cowbird in the Chicago area in 1935 (Pitelka 1939). In Illinois the current distribution of breeding Mourning Warblers is spotty and irregular. Small populations (4 territories and 5 nesting pairs) were found in widely separated locations in Lake County a few years prior to the atlas project (Kleen 1977; Kleen 1982). Breeding birds have also recently been found at Lowden-Miller State Forest in Ogle County in dense blackberry thickets in recent forest clearcuts (S. Bailey, pers. comm..). Breeding Bird Survey Trends In Illinois the Mourning Warbler population is very small and not adequately sampled by the BBS. In the upper Midwest the trend for 1966-2000 is estimated at 0.5% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.42). Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 1. Distribution Illinois is at the extreme southwestern edge of the Mourning Warbler’s breeding range. During the atlas project, this species was found in priority blocks in three counties in the northeastern part of the state. Graber et al. (1983) suggested that it could occur in all the northern counties. Frequency The Mourning Warbler was reported from 3 (0.3%) priority blocks and 5 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was not Con- firmed in any priority or nonpriority block. The 3 priority block records were of singing males. Mourning Warblers are late migrants, often not arriving until June. Some of the records for this species may have been late migrants. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * AIL Blocks ***_ No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 | 0.1 Possible 2 0.3 100.0 7 0.5 Totals 3 0.3 100.0 8 0.6 * 998 priority blocks ** ] 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) wee % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& 8 _ Probable esa ® Possible a O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest i) o+—— — a 1966 197] 1976 =1981 1986 199] 1996 2000 Year . —___—— a Mourning Warbler 327 Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas oS TY de Code: COYE Rangewide Distribution: southern half of Canada, south through all of the U.S. to northern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: very common migrant and summer resident; rare winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: overgrown fields, hedgerows, forest edges, and marshes. Nest: a bulky cup of weed stems, grass, and bark lined with finer materials, in a shrub. Eggs: 3—5, white to creamy, marked with browns or blacks, occasionally wreathed. Incubation: 12 days. Fledging: about 10 days. The Common Yellowthroat breeds throughout much of North America, including the southern half of Canada and practi- cally all of the U.S., and is one of the most widespread warblers on the continent. The “witchity, witchity, witchity” of the male is a familiar sound during the spring and summer months. The yellowthroat occupies a wide variety of habitats with thick vegetation, including marshes, brushy ditches, forest edges, hedgerows, brushy fields, and grasslands composed of red clover, alfalfa, mixed hay, or native grasses. It is generally single-brooded. Nests are concealed in dense 328 Isidor Jeklin / Cornell Lab of Ornithology vegetation on or near the ground and are frequently parasit- ized by Brown-headed Cowbirds; Graber et al. (1983) found that approximately one-fourth of the nests were parasitized in Illinois. Illinois History In the late 1800s and early 1900s the Common Yellowthroat was “one of the most conspicuous members of the [warbler] family ... being both abundant and familiar” (Ridgway 1889) and a very common summer resident in Illinois (Cory 1909). Population size and distribution remained unchanged from 1909 to 1957 and most of the population occurred in the southern part of the state in the early to mid-1900s (Graber and Graber 1963). The Common Yellowthroat is the most conspicuous, widespread, and common warbler that breeds in Illinois (Graber and Graber 1963). This species probably breeds in every county (Graber et al. 1983). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimates for the Common Yellowthroat popula- tions are —0.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.16) for Illinois and —0.2% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.30) for the upper Midwest for the period 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 2. Distribution It was unusual to find a block where the Common Yel- lowthroat did not occur during the atlas project. It was found in priority blocks in all 102 counties and Confirmed in 89 of them. It was one of the most frequently reported species and the most frequently reported warbler in priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4). Frequency The Common Yellowthroat was reported from 954 (95.6%) priority blocks and 165 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 320 (32.1%) of the priority blocks, with the most frequently used breeding evidence criteria for these records being adults feeding young (166 FY records), fledged young (56 FL records), and occupied nest (56 ON records). Their dense brushy habitat is difficult to survey, and it is likely that Common Yellowthroats nested in most of the blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 320 a2.1 33.) 394 = 30.6 Probable 466 46.7 48.8 538 = 41.8 Possible 168 16.8 17.6 187 14.5 Totals 954 95.6 100.0 1,119 87.0 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) a ff @ mer I % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for a for this species) this species [J & Priority Nonpriority ® Confirmed @ e ie Probable ® mS ¥ Possible C] O @ ad Eo] Breeding Bird Survey Trends Fz) 4 A | Illinois 8 B - 3 CJ 8 | 6 > if 4 I pipe ] (0) + : : . ' . { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 & Year ia Upper Midwest at = QO + + + + - + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Common Yellowthroat Lys (He CON Rangewide Distribution: eastern U.S, south through eastern Central America to Costa Rica. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon to rare migrant and summer resident in south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: undergrowth in mature deciduous forests, especially ravines and treefall gaps. Nest: a compact cup of dead leaves, bark, and dried plant fibers lined with finer materials, in a shrub. Eggs: 3-4, creamy white, variably marked with browns, occasionally wreathed. Incubation: 12 days. Fledging: from 8 to 9 days. The Hooded Warbler, a shy and reclusive species of deep woods, is more often heard than seen. This forest interior species breeds in the eastern U.S. except in the northeast and Florida; it is rare throughout the Midwest. Its primary habitat is moist deciduous woods, such as bottomland and riparian areas with dense undergrowth. It has also been found nesting in mesic upland oak-hickory forests with a dense sapling- shrub understory in [Illinois (Graber et al. 1983). Hooded Warblers are area sensitive and need large forested tracts. Hooded Warbler nests are placed fairly close to the ground in an understory shrub, often at the forest edge, and can be 330 Dennis Oehmke im (olele(=lom'i'c-1 ge) (=) 4 Wilsonia citrina easily found. This species is routinely parasitized by Brown- headed Cowbirds; three-fourths of the nests were parasitized in a study in Illinois (Ogden and Stutchbury 1994). Because of its need for large forests, this species is threatened by forest fragmentation, which reduces available habitat and increases cowbird parasitism (Ogden and Stutchbury 1994). Illinois History The Hooded Warbler in the late 1800s was a more or less common species in all rich damp woods (Ridgway 1889). In the early 1900s it was “an abundant summer resident in southern Illinois, but occurs casually in northern Illinois” (Cory 1909). The population changed from the early to late 1900s; Graber et al. (1983) stated it is “not a common bird in Illinois, and populations are spotty even in Southern IIli- nois.” Currently few Hooded Warblers are present in the state even in prime habitat. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Hooded Warbler is a localized breeder in Illinois and the sample size is insufficient to estimate trends for the state. Data for the upper Midwest indicate a 3.2% per year (signifi- cant, P = 0.03) increase in population during the 35—year sample period from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, Hooded Warblers were uncommon and localized. They were found in priority blocks in 16 counties and confirmed as breeding in 4—Cook, Union, Hardin, and Vermilion. Hooded Warblers were found mostly in the south and northeast, which is similar to the distribution pattern described in the early 1900s (Cory 1909). They are also known to occur in several forested valleys in central and northern Illinois. Frequency The Hooded Warbler was reported from 19 (1.9%) priority blocks and 11 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 4 blocks, all priority blocks, with single records for nest with eggs, adults feeding young, fledged young, and occu- pied nest (NE, FY, FL, and ON, respectively). Like many forest interior species, the Hooded Warbler is best detected by its song. It is likely that these warblers nested in many of the blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence : Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** _ No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 4 0.4 21.1 4 0.3 Probable 7 0.7 36.8 14 1.1 Possible amen 42.1 12 9 Totals {GeeoMp'g 100.0 30 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ e Probable Possible Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest Count . 0+ + + + + + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Hooded Warbler 331 ‘Or-Tar-\er-Miicclae)(sys Wilsonia canadensis ui, Vern Kleen Code: CAWA Rangewide Distribution: south-central and southeastern Canada, through the central and eastern U.S., south to northwestern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and very rare summer resident in north. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous woodlands and riparian thickets. Nest: a bulky cup of dead leaves, grass, and dried plant fibers lined with finer materials, on or near the ground. Eggs: 4, white to creamy, variably marked with browns, often wreathed. Incubation: about 12 days. Fledging: not currently known. The shy and secretive Canada Warbler is identified by its “spectacles” and black “necklace.” This wood warbler breeds primarily in the northeastern U.S. and south-central and southeastern Canada. Canada Warblers prefer moist decidu- ous or mixed deciduous-coniferous forests with dense understory, especially bottomland forests near open water. They forage for insects and spiders on foliage, the ground, and by flycatching. Canada Warblers have a short breeding season due to a late arrival in the spring and early departure 332 in the fall. Their well-concealed nests are built on or near the ground, often under overhanging vegetation. Canada Warblers are not abundant in most of their breeding range and populations in recent decades have declined, according to Breeding Bird Survey data (Conway 1999). This species benefits from an increase in the density of forest understory vegetation created by forest regeneration, succession, and fire-induced changes (Conway 1999). Illinois History During the 1800s and early 1900s, the Canada Warbler was not known to nest in Illinois. The closest known breeding area at that time was northern Wisconsin (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). The state’s first confirmed breeding was a nest with young near Joliet in Will County in June of 1980 (Milosevich and Olson 1981). The Canada Warbler is a sporadic and very rare breeder in Illinois. A few pairs were known to regularly breed at Lowden-Miller State Forest in Ogle County in the mid-1990s (S. Bailey, pers. comm.). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Canada Warbler, a localized breeder at the southern end of its range in Illinois, is not adequately sampled by the BBS. The long-term trend estimate for the upper Midwest is a —0.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.81). Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution Like the Mourning Warbler, the primary breeding range of the Canada Warbler is considerably north of Illinois and those individuals that nest or attempt to nest here are well south of the normal limits of their range. The few records obtained during the atlas project were limited to the extreme northeastern corner of the state. Canada Warblers were found in three counties—Lake, Cook, and Will. Frequency The Canada Warbler was reported from 4 (0.4%) priority blocks and 2 nonpriority blocks; all records were from the northeastern counties. Breeding was not Confirmed in any priority or nonpriority block. Since Canada Warblers are known to be late-spring migrants, it is possible that records from the first half of June may have been migrants. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 0 0.0 0.0 0 Probable l 0.1 25.0 2 Possible 3 0.3 75.0 4 Totals 4 0.4 100.0 6 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & & Probable Possible OC] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 2+ Ibe 5 l + ° 3 ies : pee ore — Se el = a ee el 0.5+ O + —+- + - - + + 4 19 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 ten Canada Warbler 333 Yellow-breasted Chat Icteria virens Vern Kleen Code: YBCH Rangewide Distribution: southwestern Canada and most of the U.S., south through Central America to Panama. 105 Bi 8) Abundance: common migrant and summer resident in south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: dense brush or scrub, especially along streams. Nest: large, concealed cup of dead leaves, straw, weeds, and vine bark lined with fine weed stems and grass, in a shrub. Eggs: 3-4, white to creamy, with sharply defined brown marks near the large end. Incubation: 11 days. Fledging: about 8 days. The Yellow-breasted Chat is an unusual warbler in that it looks, acts, and sings more like a mockingbird than a warbler. It has been suggested that it may be a member of the tanager family (Sibley and Ahlquist 1982) or the blackbird family and closely related to the Bobolink (Lovette and Bermingham 2002). Yellow-breasted Chats breed throughout much of the U.S., but these secretive and elusive birds are seldom seen (Eckerle and Thompson 2001). They inhabit and nest in low dense vegetation with open tree canopy, such as thickets, briar patches, early second-growth forest, and forest edges, that is, the types of habitats that develop shortly after oe) et) ns timber harvest, fire, or abandonment of fields and pastures. Nests are well hidden on or near the ground and protected in the dense vegetation, but are frequently parasitized by Brown-headed Cowbirds. In the eastern U.S. the population probably benefited from deforestation and fragmentation that occurred in the 1800s and early 1900s. As the open brushy habitat became reforested, populations declined in some areas. Creation and maintenance of early successional habitat by fire, timber harvest, and agricultural set-asides would benefit this species (Eckerle and Thompson 2001). Illinois History In the late 1800s and early 1900s the Yellow-breasted Chat was an abundant bird in suitable locations in most parts of Illinois (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). Declines in chat numbers were noted beginning in the early 1900s (Graber et al. 1983). Population densities in shrub habitat in southern Illinois dropped from 25.0 birds per 100 acres in 1907—1909 to 6.7 in 1979-1980 (Graber et al. 1983). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The population of Yellow-breasted Chats in Illinois declined significantly at a rate of —3.4% per year (P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. In the upper Midwest the trend is estimated at —1.8% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the same period. Credibility Index: IL = I and UM = 2. Distribution Yellow-breasted Chats occurred throughout the state during the atlas project, with priority block records in 89 counties. They were most frequently reported from priority blocks in the southern half of the state. The species is known to occur at several locations that were not surveyed by the atlas project. Frequency The Yellow-breasted Chat was reported from 369 (37.0%) priority blocks and 47 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 63 (6.3%) of the priority blocks, most com- monly by observation of adults feeding young (24 FY records) and occupied nest (13 ON records). It was Con- firmed in 17% of the 369 priority blocks in which it was reported, which is a relatively low rate of confirmation. With its relatively conspicuous behavior of singing loudly from exposed perches, the chat was probably found during the atlas project if it was present. Because chats are territorial, it is likely that they nested in most blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence 4 al Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled w Blocks with records blocks r i A Om L Confirmed 63 6.3 ell 81 6.3 q = _ i) Probable 138 13.8 37.4 156 12a] _ B @0 Possible 168 16.8 45.5 179 13.9 (| a bg i Co Totals 369 37.0 100.0 416 323 @ = Je on * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) AES a om f= oO ; w & NG (| @ % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks % blocks (gray = no records with records for wl a. D for thi i thi i or this species) S species Ne 4 oO mle oO aa os 6 Priority Nonpriority og i a O Confirmed a gS m i Bo B Probable ii q = Jon Possible O [ El [J | {i ( N iy [sl Breeding Bird Survey Trends @oOoo 0 O CO Illinois a & ei g B ao [eal Ga L) O @ Oo a — & ] Of a fal Of eal © 88 @ ea yf B Be B|s @ a @ & Sel wait Oog Ogo i + + + + + + 4 1966 1971 1976 =: 1981 1986 =199]1 1996 2000 AN Mod B O By) Year : ‘ i Upper Midwest me Bo re] : My a oO 6 a |_| SB Sie sa i fi ial NY ( OQ + t ' + + + + 1 1966 =1971 1976 =: 1981 1986 =1991 1996 2000 Year Yellow-breasted Chat 335 Bee“ oi O oO Joe Milosevich Code: SUTA Rangewide Distribution: southeastern and far southwestern U.S., south into northwestern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident in south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous and mixed forests, open and riparian woodlands, parks. Nest: a loosely built cup of grass, forbs, and Spanish moss lined with fine grass, on horizontal branch of a tree. Eggs: 4, pale blue or pale green, marked with browns, occasionally wreathed. Incubation: | 1—12 days. Fledging: about 10 days. The Summer Tanager breeds in the eastern U.S. from Nebraska to Pennsylvania and south to the Gulf of Mexico, and in parts of the southwestern U.S. and northern Mexico. In the East, the Summer Tanager is a bird of open forests and forest edges and is commonly found in upland deciduous or mixed deciduous-coniferous forests with openings (Robinson 1996). This secretive species is most often detected by the sound of its distinctive “kitty-tuck-tuck-tuck” call. Summer Tanagers are less dependent on the forest interior and are found in a greater variety of forested habitats than Scarlet 336 Summer Tanager Piranga rubra Tanagers. In the East, nests are usually built in a cluster of leaves near the outer portion of a long branch in a large tree, usually over an opening or near the forest edge. Summer Tanagers are insectivores, and noted for being bee and wasp specialists (Robinson 1996). The male Summer Tanager is the only all-red bird that occurs in Illinois. Illinois History In the late 1800s and early 1900s the Summer Tanager was considered an abundant species in dry upland woods in the southern half of Illinois and a rare summer visitant in the north (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). In southern Illinois the Summer Tanager was recorded in the 1907—1909 and 1957— 1958 censuses but did not occur in great enough numbers to allow a comparison of the data (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends For 1966-2000 the trend estimates for the Summer Tanager are 3.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.18) for Illinois and 0.4% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.71) for the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 1. Distribution Illinois is at the northern edge of the Summer Tanager’s breeding range. During the atlas project, it was found in priority blocks in 47 counties. The atlas distribution was similar to that described 100 years ago. Confirmed breeding was reported in 15 counties, mostly in the south. Small populations of Summer Tanagers are known to occur at scattered sites in northern Illinois that were not sampled during the atlas project Frequency The Summer Tanager was reported from 129 (12.9%) priority blocks and 14 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 20 (2.0%) of the priority blocks, and adults feeding young (7 FY records) was the most frequently used breeding evidence for these records. It was Confirmed in 15% of the 129 priority blocks in which it was recorded, which is a relatively low rate of confirmation among species reported in more the 10 priority blocks. It is likely that nesting occurred in most blocks where these tanagers were reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 20 2.0 155 25 1.9 Probable 52 ae 40.3 Sy 44 Possible 57 avy 44.2 61 47 Totals 129 12.9 100.0 |e a * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & ® Probable ae Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 37 2+ e | ° O l a8 0 + + + + +++ 1 19 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 0 + 19 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Summer Tanager aah 1 Scarlet Tanager Piranga olivacea Peter Dring Code: SCTA Rangewide Distribution: extreme southeastern Canada, south through the eastern U.S. to northwestern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: deciduous and mixed forests and woodlands. Nest: loosely built saucer of grass, rootlets, forbs, and twigs lined with finer materials, in a tree. Eggs: 4, greenish to bluish, marked with browns, often wreathed. Incubation: 13-14 days. Fledging: from 9 to 11 days. Despite the male’s colorful red and black plumage, the Scarlet Tanager is a difficult bird to spot. Because it spends much of its time in the upper canopy, this species is more often heard than seen. Scarlet Tanagers breed in the eastern U.S. north of the Gulf states to southeastern Canada. They are found most frequently in large mature upland and bottomland forests. In small forest blocks this species has high rates of predation and brood parasitism, which lower reproductive success (Mowbray 1999). Scarlet Tanagers are 338 monogamous and aggressively defend territories, the size of which varies depending on the amount of forest area, location, and vegetation type (Robinson 1992; Mowbray 1999). Nests are usually placed at the distal portion of a large branch of a large tree in the mid-story level of the canopy and often in a clump of leaves that provides some screening from above (Prescott 1965). Throughout their range, nests are parasitized by Brown-headed Cowbirds. In woodlots studied in Illinois parasitism rates ranged from 75 to 100% (Brawn and Robinson 1996). In the past three decades the population overall seems to be stable (Mowbray 1999). Illinois History A century ago, the Scarlet Tanager was a common summer resident of Illinois (Cory 1909). Ridgway (1889) noted “In the southern half of Illinois . . . while not an uncommon summer resident . . . [it] is decidedly a less abundant bird than the Summer [Tanager] Redbird.” Breeding Bird Survey Trends During the sample period 1966 to 2000, the trend estimate for the Scarlet Tanager population in Illinois 1s —2.5% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.40). In the upper Midwest the trend estimate indicates an increase in popula- tion at a rate of 1.2% per year (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Scarlet Tanager was distributed throughout Illinois during the atlas project and was reported in priority blocks in 93 counties and Confirmed as breeding in 31 of them. It may have bred in most of the counties in which it was reported. This species was most often found in the larger, contiguous forests. Frequency The Scarlet Tanager was reported from 275 (27.6%) priority blocks and 77 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 40 (4.0%) of the priority blocks, with the most frequently reported breeding evidence criteria being adults feeding young (17 FY records) and fledged young (12 FL records). Nests were difficult to find in the dense foliage. The Scarlet Tanager was Confirmed in 14% of the 275 priority blocks in which it was recorded, which is among the lowest rates of confirmation for species reported in more the 10 priority blocks. It is likely that nesting occurred in most blocks where these birds were reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 40 4.0 14.5 58 4.5 Probable 94 9.4 34.2 132 10.3 Possible 141 14.1 Syl 3) 162 12.6 Totals PH be) 27.6 100.0 Soe) 2a * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed © Probable ie Possible La O & ww we Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest Count 0+ : + 4 + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 = Scarlet Tanager 339 Eastern Towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus Robert Randall Code: EATO Rangewide Distribution: extreme southeastern Canada, south through the eastern U.S. to southern Texas. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and summer resident, uncommon winter resident in south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: forest and woodland edges, thickets. Nest: a cup of leaves, grass, bark, twigs, and rootlets lined with fine grass and hair, on or near the ground. Eggs: 3-4, grayish to creamy white, spotted with browns, often wreathed. Incubation: |2—13 days. Fledging: from 10 to 12 days. Until recently the Eastern Towhee was known as the Rufous- sided or Red-eyed Towhee; earlier names included chewink and ground robin. Its breeding range is primarily in the eastern half of the U.S. Towhees spend most of their time on or near the ground in dense cover searching for seeds, fruits, and invertebrates. The male sings his “drink-your-teeeeee”’ song from the taller trees in its territory. Eastern Towhees prefer forest edges, overgrown fields, and other dense shrubby areas with a well-developed litter layer. Their nests, which are placed on the ground at the base of a shrub, small 340 tree, or clump of grass, are commonly parasitized by Brown- headed Cowbirds (Greenlaw 1996). The shrubby succes- sional habitats that followed the clearing of forests and abandonment of agricultural fields and pastures increased the amount of habitat available for towhees and other scrub- dwelling species, but more recently habitat loss has resulted in a decline in the population nationally (Irland 1982; Jackson et al. 1996; Askins 2000). Illinois History The Eastern Towhee was considered a common summer resident (Cory 1909) and a permanent resident in the southern portion of the state a century ago (Ridgway 1889). Information on population size and change during the first half of the 1900s is lacking. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The BBS trend estimate for the Illinois population of Eastern Towhees is —1.2% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.33) from 1966 to 2000. In the upper Midwest the rate of decline over the same period is —1.3% per year (significant, P < 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Eastern Towhee was found in priority blocks in 101 counties during the atlas project. It was most frequently reported from priority blocks in the southern part of the state. The Eastern Towhee probably occurs in every Illinois township. Frequency The Eastern Towhee was reported from 639 (64.0%) priority blocks and 97 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 119 (11.9%) of the priority blocks. The most frequently used breeding evidence criteria for Confirmed records in priority blocks were adults feeding young and fledged young (57 FY and 41 FL records, respectively). Nests were difficult to find in the dense, brushy habitat they prefer and other evidence of Confirmed breeding was also difficult to obtain. This species was Confirmed in 19% of the 639 priority blocks in which it was reported, which is a relatively low rate of confirmation considering the large number of records. It is likely that nesting occurred in most blocks where Eastern Towhees were reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks Blocks with records No. % Sampled blocks Confirmed 119 11.9 18.6 149 11.6 Probable 296 29.1 46.3 S37) 262 Possible 224 22.4 Sa) 250 19.4 Totals 639 64.0 100.0 To) aro le * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @&@ ® Probable Es © Possible L] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois A= eae rs A 2 Te © ° . O) « ee ‘ eS 2 “9 = . 15 Me ae * Ewe ] ah e 0 + ~ + - - : - 4 196651971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest Aa Count _ + 0 + + + + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 ‘ios Eastern Towhee 34] Ol alle) e)i ave me) ey-la cen y' Spizella passerina Dennis Oehmke Code: CHSP Rangewide Distribution: eastern Alaska and northern Canada south through most of the U.S. into Central America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident; very rare winter resident in south. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: edges, open and residential areas with small evergreen trees. Nest: a compact cup of grass, forb stalks, and rootlets lined with hair or fur, in a small tree or vine. Eggs: 4, bluish green, marked with browns or blacks, often wreathed. Incubation: | |—14 days. Fledging: from 8 to 12 days. Chipping Sparrows are one of North America’s most widely distributed and abundant migratory songbirds. They breed throughout much of North American from Alaska to Central America, including most of the U.S. These sparrows inhabit open forests, forest edges, river and lake shores, and brushy fields. They are found around rural residences and are common in suburban areas where they find shrubby habitats with adjacent open grassy areas and ornamental conifers (Middleton 1998). They feed on or near the ground in open areas. This sparrow is named for its song, a series of dry, single pitched chips in the form of a trill; in locations where it occurs with the Pine Warbler, both species respond to each other’s song. Although generally considered to be monoga- mous, recent studies in Ontario found that males may move through adjacent territories mating with several females (Middleton and Prescott 1989), suggesting that polygamous 342 behavior may be more common than previously thought. Chipping Sparrows nest in small trees and shrubs with a preference for conifers. Most nests are placed 3 to 9 feet above the ground. The population and range expanded as forests were cleared in the 1800s but then declined in abundance due to reforestation and competition from the introduced House Sparrow. Deforestation and habitat fragmentation have increased their exposure to Brown- headed Cowbird parasitism (DeSante and George 1994). Because they have adapted to man-made habitats, Chipping Sparrows may be more abundant today than prior to Euro- American settlement (Middleton 1998). Illinois History In the late 1800s and early 1900s the Chipping Sparrow was a common summer resident (Cory 1909). Ridgway (1889) stated that it was so well known that “a particular account of its habits is hardly necessary.” Graber and Graber (1963) estimated that the number of birds during 1957-1958 was about 80% lower than in 1909 but noted the population in a given area is highly variable from year to year. A shift in population from southern to northern Illinois also occurred during the first half of the 1900s (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Chipping Sparrow populations in the state and region have experienced increases over the 35—year period from 1966 to 2000. The rates of increase are 8.0% per year (significant, P <0.01) for Illinois and 2.0% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution The Chipping Sparrow was found in all 102 counties during the atlas project. It was reported in nearly every priority block in the northern two-thirds of the state and less fre- quently in the southern third. The Chipping Sparrow un- doubtedly nests in every Illinois township. During the atlas project, it was among the most frequently reported species in priority blocks. Frequency The Chipping Sparrow was reported from 867 (86.9%) priority blocks and 144 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 531 (53.2%) of the priority blocks. Evidence of breeding was relatively easy to obtain for the Chipping Sparrow because of its affinity for easily accessible habitats. The most frequently used breeding evidence criteria for Confirmed records in priority blocks were adults feeding young (224 FY records) and fledged young (143 FL records). Chipping Sparrows likely nested in the majority of the other blocks in which they were reported but not Confirmed. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 531 53:2 61.2 621 48.3 Probable 184 18.4 oii2 211 16.4 Possible 152 oz 17.5 179 13.9 Totals 867 86.9 100.0 1011 28.65 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority ) % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) % of priority blocks with records for this species Confirmed & g Probable Possible [| O Priority Nonpriority Breeding Bird Survey Trends 0 + Illinois 1966 aL 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year + + 1971 1976 0 Upper Midwest 1966 + + + + + =i 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year XAG @ oe a 8 ® Oo @ a @ a Chipping Sparrow ‘Ww rs ue) @4 F: \VErere) (o) ¢-To Mn) ey-la gel) Spizella pallida Joe Milosevich Code: CCSP Rangewide Distribution: north-central Canada, south through the central U.S. to southern Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: rare migrant and very rare summer resident (in north). Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: fields with scattered shrubs and Christmas tree plantations. Nest: a compact cup of grass, forb stalks, twigs, and rootlets lined with finer materials, on or near the ground. Eggs: 3—4, bluish green, marked with browns or blacks, often wreathed. Incubation: 10-12 days. Fledging: from 8 to 9 days. The Clay-colored Sparrow breeds primarily in the northern Great Plains and Canadian prairie region. Throughout the first half of the 1900s its range expanded eastward through the northern states to New York as early successional habitat was created by logging and abandonment of farms (Knapton 1994). This drab, inconspicuous sparrow is easily overlooked and often misidentified. Its buzzy, insect-like song may be the best clue to its identity and presence. Clay-colored Sparrows occur in brushy and weedy areas, open shrubland, second-growth areas, and fencerows. Nests are hidden at the 344 base of grasses or in low shrubs. In the last three decades the North American population may be declining due to the loss of early successional habitats to natural maturation, conver- sion to agriculture, and urbanization (Knapton 1994). Illinois History The Clay-colored Sparrow was not that well known in Illinois in the 1800s. Ridgway (1889) stated that it was “known with certainty to occur only in the more northern portions of the State, although it no doubt inhabits the prairie districts well southward, especially in the more western counties.” Cory (1909) wrote that it “may be considered a summer resident in northern Illinois.” Following these accounts, the species was scarcely reported until the 1970s; the first nest was found in evergreens at a Christmas tree farm in northern Winnebago County in 1983 (Pucelik and Pucelik 1984). The species was initially listed as an endan- gered species in Illinois in 1989. However, since Illinois is at the southern edge of its breeding range and the species was not in jeopardy in its primary range, the Clay-colored Sparrow was delisted in 1994. Breeding Bird Survey Trends In Illinois the Clay-colored Sparrow population is so small and localized that population trend estimates cannot be determined. For the upper Midwest the long-term trend is estimated at —0.3% per year (nonsignificant (P = 0.58). Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 1. Distribution The sole atlas record for the,Clay-colored Sparrow was in Winnebago County in northern Illinois. This was very close to the site where nesting was Confirmed for the first time three years prior to the initiation of the atlas project. Some references indicate it may also occur as a breeding species in western Illinois but that has not been documented. Frequency The Clay-colored Sparrow was reported from | (0.1%) priority block, where it was a Probable breeder, and none of the nonpriority blocks. The Clay-colored Sparrow may be a regular breeder in appropriate habitat in northern Illinois but it is seldom located. Breeding Evidence , Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Probable | 0.1 100.0 l 0.1 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals l 0.1 100.0 ] 0.1 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed &@ & Probable i Possible Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 8 — 6+ oO a eee ot ew ears 2 + O + + + + : + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Ls _ Clay-colored Sparrow 345 Field Sparrow Spizella pusilla Peter Dring OTs (a Oy he) Rangewide Distribution: extreme southeastern Canada, south through the eastern half of the U.S. to northeastern NY (op eteron 115 Bi [e) Abundance: common migrant and summer resident, fairly common winter resident in south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open fields, forest edges, brushy areas, and old field habitat. Nest: a somewhat flimsy cup of grasses and forbs lined with finer materials, on the ground or low to the ground in a shrub. Eggs: 3-5, creamy or pale greenish to bluish white, marked with browns, occasionally wreathed. Incubation: 12 days. Fledging: from 7 to 8 days. The Field Sparrow is a common bird in the eastern U.S. This easily recognized sparrow with a distinctive pinkish bill is found in brushy fields, early successional habitats, hedgerows, and woodland edges and openings. Field Sparrows thrive in disturbed habitats but avoid close association with human habitations. Early season nests are built on or near the ground in a clump of grass or at the base of a small tree or shrub; later in the breeding season nests are placed above ground in low, thick shrubs or small trees (Walkinshaw 1968; Best 1978; Carey et al. 1994). This sparrow is a regular victim of Brown-headed Cowbird parasitism; Best (1978) reported that 11% of nests were parasitized and 63% were then deserted in a study in Illinois. Having benefited from the clearing of forests and subsequent increased availability of early successional habitat, Field Sparrows may have been most abundant in the late 1800s (Carey et al. 1994). Although still abundant, Field Sparrow numbers are declining (Carey et al. 1994). The maturation of early successional habitat, loss of old fields to other land uses, such as agriculture and urban growth, and their susceptibility to parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds are factors that have contributed to the decline of Field Sparrow populations (Askins 2000). Illinois History The Field Sparrow of a century ago was considered “equally common with the Chipping Sparrow, and in many localities even more abundant” but “far less known on account of its more secluded habits” (Ridgway 1889). Cory (1909) described it as a common summer resident in Illinois. Graber and Graber (1963) reported that most of the summer popula- tion occurred in the southern part of the state in 1909 (75%) and in 1957 (62%) and that the statewide population declined during that interval. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Field Sparrow is experiencing population declines in both Illinois and the upper Midwest. Trend estimates for both the state and region are significant and negative for 1966— 2000 as well as both subintervals (1966-1979 and 1980- 2000). Trends for 1966-2000 are estimated at —3.0% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for both Illinois and the upper Mid- west. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 2. Distribution Field Sparrows were reported in priority blocks in all 102 counties during the atlas project. It was confirmed as breeding in 95 counties and may occur as a breeding species in most Illinois townships. This sparrow was among the most frequently reported species from priority blocks. Frequency The Field Sparrow was reported from 854 (85.6%) priority blocks and 128 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 372 (37.3%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observations of adults feeding young (161 FY records) and fledged young (110 FL records). Nests for this species are not difficult to locate. It is likely that Field Sparrows bred in most blocks in which they were reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 372 37.3 43.6 438 34.1 Probable = 295 29.6 34.5 S345) 126.0 Possible 187 18.7 219 210 16.3 Totals 854 85.6 100.0 93255= 164 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ @ Probable is Possible [| e ( Breeding Bird Survey Trends U @ B A He B Bo i B | | | A A @ Illinois Heme & Year + + + + + + + 4 OOO ove SOTO OS 1986) 1991 199682000 Upper Midwest 0 4 Year a + + + so + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 a OQ B 8 a Field Sparrow 347 AV(=X-J oJ =) aes) of- 1a cen Pooecetes gramineus Chicago Academy of Sciences Code: VESP Rangewide Distribution: southern half of Canada, south through much of the U.S. to central Mexico. 115 Fil 6) Abundance: common migrant and summer resident in north, decreasing southward; very rare winter resident in south. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: grasslands, prairies, old fields, and mainly agricultural fields. Nest: a bulky, loose cup of grass, forbs, and rootlets lined with finer materials and concealed by a mat of dead vegetation, on the ground. Eggs: 3-4, creamy-white or pale greenish white, marked with browns. Incubation: | 1—13 days. Fledging: from 7 to 14 days. The Vesper Sparrow’s breeding range includes much of the northern half of the U.S. and southern half of Canada. The common name “Vesper” refers to this species’ habit of singing in the evening. Males are often seen singing from an elevated perch, such as a fence post or utility wire. The Vesper Sparrow is a medium to large sparrow with brown streaks and white outer tail feathers. It is a ground-dwelling species found in dry, open habitats with short, sparse, and patchy herbaceous vegetation, such as grasslands, old fields, pastures, and crop fields (Jones and Cornely 2002). Vesper Sparrows usually nest in a small hollow on the ground at the base of nonwoody vegetation, shrubs, and small trees, or beside dead branches or logs. Despite having well-hidden nests, Brown-headed Cowbirds regularly parasitize Vesper 348 Sparrow nests. During the 1800s its range expanded east- ward with the clearing of the forests which created suitable nesting habitat but its breeding range and numbers have declined since the mid-1900s partly as a result of reforesta- tion (Jones and Cornely 2002). The U.S. population has declined over the past three decades, as measured by the Breeding Bird Survey. Intensive farming practices that eliminate grassy habitats needed for nesting and agricultural practices that destroy ground nests negatively impact Vesper Sparrow populations (Jackson et al. 1996). Illinois History In the late 1800s the Vesper Sparrow was found throughout the state as a summer resident but was only common as a breeding species in the north (Ridgway 1889). Cory (1909) in the early 1900s referred to it as an abundant summer resident throughout the state. Despite changes to the land- scape which should have benefited this species, such as creation of more open land and edge by agricultural develop- ment, the Vesper Sparrow population remained fairly constant in numbers and distribution in Illinois during the first half of the 1900s (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends For the period from 1966 to 2000 the trend for the Vesper Sparrow is estimated at -0.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.19) for Illinois. BBS data indicate the decline in the Vesper Sparrow populations is —2.1% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the upper Midwest for the period 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution The Vesper Sparrow was found in priority blocks in 81 counties and mostly in the northern half of the state. Con- firmed breeding was reported in 45 counties and was particularly concentrated in the east-central region (e.g., Champaign, Iroquois, McLean, and Vermilion). The number of occurrences in far southern Illinois (White, Hamilton, Gallatin, Madison, St. Clair and Jackson counties) was unexpected. Frequency The Vesper Sparrow was reported from 518 (51.9%) priority blocks and 46 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 145 (14.5%) of the priority blocks, most frequently by observation of fledged young (94 FL records) and adults feeding young (33 FY records). It is likely that Vesper Sparrows bred in most blocks in which they were reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 145 14.5 28.0 156 Wea Probable 168 16.8 32.4 194 Possible 205 20.5 39.6 214 Totals 518 51.9 100.0 564 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) % of priority blocks with records for this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ Probable Possible Breeding Bird Survey Trends @ O U Count R Qa © —+—++- + +—_+ + + + + NO | Illinois + + + + WoO ml o7 ie 1976) 31981 91986 19911 Year + 4 1996 2000 Count ich. Go + + + + + + + + + tN 0 + Upper Midwest + + + + + 19 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 Year tr 4 De 8 8 &|B B B 1996 2000 Vesper Sparrow 349 Lark Sparrow Chondestes grammacus Joe Milosevich Code: LASP Rangewide Distribution: south-central Canada, south through central and western U.S. (from Ohio to the west coast) to southern Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant and local summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: cultivated and sandy-soil fields, and strip-mined areas with scattered trees and shrubs. Nest: a bulky cup of twigs, grass, and forbs lined with fine grass, on the ground or in a low shrub. Eggs: 4—5, creamy to grayish white, marked with dark browns or blacks, often wreathed. Incubation: | 1—12 days. Fledging: from 9 to 10 days. The bold facial pattern of the Lark Sparrow makes it one of the most distinctive sparrows. It is widespread in open habitats with sparse ground cover and scattered shrubs and trees, including grasslands, farmland, pastures, fallow fields, roadsides, and sites disturbed by grazing or fire. Its breeding range is primarily the central and western U.S., adjacent parts of southern Canada, and northern Mexico. Lark Sparrows are ground feeders that forage for insects and seeds in the litter on the ground. Their courtship display is unique among passerine birds; the male struts turkey-like with its wings dragging the ground while holding its long tail erect and flashing the white tips to the female (Barlow 1960). Their well-concealed nests are built in a depression on the ground or in a shrub low to the ground. Lark Sparrows seem 350 to prefer sites with poor or sandy soil for nesting (Martin and Parrish 2000). Having benefited from the clearing of the eastern forests during the 19th century, the Lark Sparrow’s breeding range expanded to the northern and central Atlantic states. The range is now receding from the East as forest regeneration and urbanization take place; its current range is probably more like that of presettlement times (Martin and Parrish 2000). Loss of habitat caused in part by intensive agricultural production has contributed to the recent decline in eastern populations (Jackson et al. 1996). Illinois History Ridgway (1889) reported that the Lark Sparrow could be “found abundantly in all suitable localities” and especially favored cornfields in the late 1800s. Cory (1909) stated that it was a more or less common summer resident, more numerous in the western than in the eastern part of the state, and rather local in distribution. The estimated population dropped from 500,000 in 1909 to 80,000 in 1957, and had shifted from the south to central part of the state (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The long-term (1966—2000) trend estimates for the Lark Sparrow population are —6.9% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.06) for Illinois and —3.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.09) for the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Lark Sparrows are closely associated with sandy and poor soil areas in the state (Bohlen 1989). During the atlas project Lark Sparrows were reported in priority blocks in 59 counties, with Confirmed breeding records in 32 of them. They were concentrated in the west-central part of the state and found to a lesser extent in the southeast. The records in White and Hamilton counties were not expected and perhaps represent an expansion into the sandy soils associated with the Wabash River. Frequency The Lark Sparrow was reported from 154 (15.4%) priority blocks and 16 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 59 (5.9%) of the priority blocks, with the most frequently used breeding evidence being fledged young or adults feeding young (23 FL and 22 FY records, respectively). It is likely that the Lark Sparrow bred in many of the blocks in which it was reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 59 5.9 38.3 68 3),5) Probable 38° 3.3 21.4 38 3.0 Possible 62 6.2 40.3 64 5.0 Totals 154 15.4 100.0 jj ae ee * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed ® Probable eo @ Possible C] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 0+ + + + + + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 a Lark Sparrow 351 Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis Eric Walters Code: SASP Rangewide Distribution: from northern Alaska and Canada to Honduras. 115 Bie) Abundance: common migrant and fairly common summer resident in north, decreasing southward; uncommon winter resident in south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open grassy areas, meadows, airports, and pastures. Nest: a cup of coarse grass lined with finer materials, in a depression on the ground. Eggs: 3-5, pale greenish blue or off-white, marked with brown, occasionally wreathed. Incubation: |2—13 days. Fledging: from 7 to 10 or more days. The Savannah Sparrow is an inconspicuous, secretive bird that stays hidden in the grass and runs instead of flying away. It is often difficult to find and observe. The Savannah Sparrow looks like a slender Song Sparrow but has pinker legs and a proportionally shorter tail. Its breeding range, one of the most extensive among North American sparrow species, extends throughout the continent from the tundra above the Arctic Circle to the southern tier of states. The Savannah Sparrow is a grassland species that is found in open habitats, such as agricultural fields, grasslands, road- sides, meadows, and marshes. This species is generally a 352 ground feeder, eating invertebrates in the breeding season and seeds in the winter. Males utilize an elevated perch, such as a fence post, tall shrub, or utility wire, from which to sing their weak, buzzy song. Nests are placed on the ground, typically in grassy areas away from woody vegetation; many are completely covered with grasses and have an entrance hole (Wheelwright and Rising 1993). Open habitat created by forest clearing in the 1800s and the early 1900s probably supported historically high abundances in the East, but reforestation and urbanization in more recent times have led to declines in the Northeast and Great Lakes region (Wheel- wright and Rising 1993). Illinois History The Savannah Sparrow was a common summer resident in northern Illinois in the late 1800s and early 1900s (Cory 1909). Graber and Graber (1963) reported that the numbers of this species increased between 1909 and 1957 despite a loss in pasture land; the greatest portion of the population for both periods was in the northern third of the state. Densities during 1957-1958 were generally greater than those found in the early part of the century (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The populations of the Savannah Sparrow experienced declines in both Illinois and the upper Midwest from 1966 to 2000. Trends estimates are —6.0% per year (significant, P = 0.01) and -1.1% per year (significant, P = 0.03) for Illinois and the upper Midwest, respectively. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 1. Distribution The Savannah Sparrow population was concentrated in northern and east-central Illinois, with scattered records in the western and southern parts of the state. This sparrow was reported in priority blocks in 66 counties and Confirmed in 33 during the atlas project. The Confirmed records in White and Hamilton counties were farther south than expected. Frequency The Savannah Sparrow was reported from 326 (32.7%) priority blocks and 88 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 95 (9.5%) of the priority blocks; nearly half the Confirmed records in priority blocks were observations of adults feeding young (47 FY records). It is likely that the Savannah Sparrow nested in many of the blocks in which it was reported. It is also likely that because of its similarity to the Song Sparrow and the weakness of its song, the Savan- nah Sparrow may have been misidentified or overlooked. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** a a{jie i No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 95 9.5 29.1 125 9.7 Probable 116 LEG 35.6 154 12.0 Possible 115 eS SDS 135) 10.5 Totals 326 S24 100.0 414 = 32.2 * 998 priority blocks ** ],286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ 6 Probable Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Count oo On - — — — = oO N de lo) wht} 4+. 4+ 4-44 + +++ 4+ 41 tN + + + . le le Q +———_—+ + : + ' ' { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest Count L QD o + + + + + + + + + nN 0+ a | 19 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 ai anal) Savannah Sparrow Bim, OT g- 11>) ale) e) of=1 aes) oy-la gel) Ammodramus savannarum Robert Randall Code: GRSP Rangewide Distribution: far southern Canada and most of the U.S. except the southwest, south to northwestern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: grasslands, prairies, old fields, airports, and savannas. Nest: a cup of dried grass lined with finer materials, in a depression on the ground (often with overhanging grass and forbs). Eggs: 4-5, creamy white, marked with reddish brown, occasionally wreathed. Incubation: | 1—12 days. Fledging: about 9 days. The Grasshopper Sparrow has an extensive range that includes much of the eastern, central, and northwestern U.S. and extreme southern Canada, but its distribution 1s local- ized. This species inhabits open grasslands and prairies with patches of bare ground and without extensive shrub cover. It prefers larger tracts of habitat; Herkert (1994a) estimated the minimum required area at about 75 acres in Illinois. Males vigorously defend their territories by singing their buzzy, insect-like songs from conspicuous perches, flight displays, and chasing intruding males. Unlike most North American sparrows, Grasshopper Sparrows sing completely different songs—a primary song for establishing territory and a sustained song for attracting a mate and maintaining the pair bond (Vickery 1996). Grasshopper Sparrows build domed nests on the ground covered by overhanging grasses and are 354 multibrooded. Extensive loss of native prairies contributed to population declines in the 1800s and early 1900s. Since the mid-1900s, populations have drastically declined in the U.S. (Vickery 1996). Conversion of grasslands to row crop agriculture, loss of hayfields and pastures, and lack of disturbance factors (e.g., moderate grazing or fire) in grasslands that help maintain the vegetative structure that they require have contributed to population declines in the past half century (Vickery 1996). Illinois History In the late 1800s the Grasshopper Sparrow was “abundant in all cultivated portions of the State, as well as on the open prairies” (Ridgway 1889). During the early 1900s, it was still a common summer resident (Cory 1909). Graber and Graber (1963) found that the Grasshopper Sparrow population was higher in 1957 than in 1909, with the majority of birds occurring in the central portion of the state during both census periods. Breeding Bird Survey Trends BBS data indicate that the Grasshopper Sparrow is experi- encing a significant long-term decline in Illinois and the upper Midwest. The trend estimates for 1966-2000 and for both subinterval periods (1966-1979 and 1980-2000) are negative and significant for both the state and the region. From 1966 to 2000 the trends are estimated at —7.0% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for Illinois and -5.6% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution The Grasshopper Sparrow was found in priority blocks in 100 counties and Confirmed as breeding in 63 of them during the atlas project. It was reported most frequently from priority blocks in the central portion of the state and less frequently in both the northern and southern portions. Grasshopper Sparrows probably nest in all Illinois counties. Frequency The Grasshopper Sparrow was reported from 716 (71.7%) priority blocks and 60 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 171 (17.1%) of the priority blocks. These birds were readily detected by their buzzy songs, but confirmation of breeding was difficult to achieve. About one-fourth of the records were Confirmed; however, they probably nested in most of the blocks in which they were reported. Breeding evidence criteria most frequently used for Confirmed records in priority blocks were adults feeding young (74 FY records), fledged young (44 FL records), and occupied nest (28 ON records). Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** @ OO OOO Gaon es BBB Of @ No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled a oo re os |o Blocks with records blocks : eo — i a ay @ @ mB \ O O®@ Confirmed 171 17.1 23.9 192 14.9 aoe ot = ani 4 = A Probable 294 29.5 41.1 a2 4 25.0 ae (0 oO es od ‘ 1@0 O Possible 251 bei ie 262 20.4 L O - C jem Eat (i O a . Totals 716 Push 100.0 776 = 60.3 e 2 ‘ae imal i j files) eqn Be * 998 priority blocks “ ay = : ao oie ws eile 1 B | =e OC O @ & ** | ,286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) :- eo Oy fread Nga) ie] fy : ey [ LJ @ D Ss a SS my a ea O oO gO @O mo iM B ioe ee oO = BO ] & nee in | wp Bego Oomo % of 998 sampled priority —% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for A) a ti ee ee @ |} O88 for this species this species Pe ) bs 2B iw al O a is) Oe BS @ @ Bei oO oo ia Heas oe Priority Nonpriority S88 @\f Be (88 &eoo on ee Confirmed &@ @ ffSS8 8 8 te ) 7 nn Vann Probable oO iy AT m OO ial a e Possible LJ O ® O ff a a BI B mol og Oi Bee Oo @ & a “Ute Be ow i Bit | i | feels Breeding Bird Survey Trends o@e w open sho eeaeteo Illinois = |g, 0 8 = mE OB BSR eB @ = is} iw |e Ola ae Op elpaeathooaefoce i @ | See 2 |G Beeeio 6} hcl Ge — @ 6 oi i i he | Ct O = (a O eo B hy OO | & E P iO wl OD ww Of © B|8 @ @ a Of & rE © Bia oO Be Dm@ce a oO Oo O) O fe | yO aU @ 9 0 + - + + + + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 20 SW el | Year Co a FG), eowh ma h Upper Midwest i 0 Oe & 165 i OfPeroos a oe Boe | mt = 8s [o oO Oo a Oo ab iot : oO est" : ey O be a . iz] pat 2+ 0 + + + + + + =F { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Grasshopper Sparrow 22> Henslow’s Sparrow Ammodramus henslowii Joe Milosevich LOT: (ew 5 BONY Rangewide Distribution: eastern U.S. from the Great Lakes region to Texas and Florida. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant and summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: fields and meadows with a combination of grasses and forbs. Nest: a cup of coarse grass and forbs lined with finer materials, on or very close to the ground. Eggs: 3—5, creamy or pale greenish white, marked with reddish brown, often wreathed. Incubation: | 1 days. Fledging: from 9 to 10 days. The Henslow’s Sparrow was once common on the native prairies of the Midwest and wet grasslands in the eastern U.S. The present breeding distribution is highly localized and limited to the northern region of the eastern half of the U.S., where it inhabits prairie remnants, unmowed hayfields, pastures, and cultivated grasslands, preferring areas with tall, dense grass and a thick layer of ground litter. These birds most often utilize large fields with little or no woody vegetation (Herkert 1994b; Pruitt 1996; Herkert et al. 2002). This secretive and elusive species is difficult to hear or see; its song is weak and sung from low perches on shrubs, grasses, and forbs. It is known to sing at night. Henslow’s Sparrows nest in isolated pairs or in small, loose colonies. Nests are usually placed in thick litter close to the ground. Henslow’s Sparrows can be distinguished from the similar Grasshopper Sparrow by their shorter song and the shorter length of time that their heads are tilted back when singing. Loss of grassland habitat is the major cause of the long-term population decline of this species and more recently the 356 conversion of hayfields and pastures to row crops (Pruitt 1996; Herkert et al. 2002). The creation of large undisturbed grassland areas by the Conservation Reserve Program that began in the 1980s appears to benefit local populations (Herkert et al. 2002). In recent decades, the Henslow’s Sparrow population has declined significantly in the U.S., according to Breeding Bird Survey data. Illinois History In the 19th century the Henslow’s Sparrow was described as “an exceedingly common or even abundant species in Illinois, but is much more local than . . . the Grasshopper Sparrow” (Ridgway 1889) and “a rather common summer resident in suitable localities” (Cory 1909). The Henslow’s Sparrow was not detected in sufficient numbers during either the 1907-1909 or 1957-1958 censuses to warrant comment (Graber and Graber 1963). Due to extensive destruction of its grassland nesting habitat and severe reductions in its population during the 1900s, the Henslow’s Sparrow was listed as a threatened species in Illinois in 1977 and changed to endangered status in 1994. The population in Illinois declined during the 1970s and 1980s but has increased in the 1990s (Herkert et al. 2002). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Illinois population of Henslow’s Sparrow is so small and localized that the BBS does not adequately sample it. The upper Midwest population experienced a decline of —6.2% per year (significant, P = 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution The Henslow’s Sparrow is an extremely difficult bird to find. During the atlas project it was reported in priority blocks in eight counties and Confirmed in four of those counties. More recently it has been found in many more locations statewide. Although still a species in jeopardy, the Henslow’s Sparrow appears to be more widespread and common today than it was in the 1980s and early 1990s. Frequency The Henslow’s Sparrow was reported from 11 (1.1%) priority blocks and 11 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 5 of the priority blocks by observation of fledged young, adults feeding young, and occupied nest (FL, FY, and ON, respectively). Henslow’s Sparrows almost always need to be located by their singing from elevated perches and even then they are not easily observed. It is likely that Henslow’s Sparrows nested in the majority of the blocks in which they were reported and probably occur more widely than indicated by the atlas data. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 5 0.5 45.5 7 0.5 Probable 2 0).2 18.2 d 0.5 Possible 4 0.4 36.4 8 0.6 Totals 11 Lea 100.0 pas U7 * 998 priority blocks ** 1,286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed ® Probable im Possible O O Henslow’s Sparrow 357 To} ate Mey ef-la ge) Melospiza melodia Dennis Oehmke LOY: (HN ON) Rangewide Distribution: southern Alaska and the southern half of Canada, south through all of the U.S. to central Mexico. 115 File) Abundance: common migrant, summer resident and winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: dense vegetation along forest edges, clearings, gardens or shrubbery in residential areas, edges of wetlands. Nest: a cup of grass, forbs, leaves, and bark strips lined with finer materials, on the ground or in a low shrub or brushpile. Eggs: 3-4, pale blue to greenish white, marked with reddish browns. Incubation: 12-14 days. Fledging: from 9 to 12 or more days. The Song Sparrow is familiar, common, and widespread in its breeding range, which includes the southern half of Canada, the U.S. except for the southern states east of Arizona, and parts of Mexico. This species generally inhabits shrubby areas near water in rural and suburban environ- ments, including forest edges, roadside ditches, marshes, hedgerows, pastures, and parks. The Song Sparrow is aptly named for its distinctive musical song that can be heard from early spring through late summer. Most nests are built on or near the ground under tufts of grass or in shrubs, and sometimes in trees and bushes as high as 12 feet above ground. Song Sparrows are considered to be monogamous but some of the young are from males outside the social pair, 358 indicating that simultaneous and serial polygamy occur (Arcese et al. 2002). Song Sparrows are a common host species for the Brown-headed Cowbird; the rate of parasitism is reported to be more than 20% in the upper Midwest (Arcese et al. 2002). The populations benefited from the clearing of the forests for agriculture by inhabiting hedgerows and early successional habitats when agricultural lands were later abandoned. Illinois History The Song Sparrow’s distribution as a breeding species in the state in the late 1800s was limited to the extreme northern part of Illinois (Ridgway 1889). In the early 1900s Cory (1909) considered it an abundant summer resident in the state without reference to north or south. Graber and Graber (1963) noted that the summer population had probably increased between 1909 and 1958 and that Song Sparrows did not occur in the southern zone during the summer in the 1907-1909 breeding censuses. The losses of certain types of habitat (e.g., marshes, orchards, and pasture) were apparently balanced by the increase in forest edge (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends During the period 1966 to 2000, the trends for the Song Sparrow population are estimated at 0.1% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.82) for Illinois and 0.4% per year (significant, P = 0.04) for the upper Midwest. For both the state and region, significantly negative trend estimates during the period 1966-1979 were followed by significantly positive estimates for 1980-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, the Song Sparrow was found in priority blocks in all counties and Confirmed as breeding in nearly all of them. Although they were not a summer resident in southern Illinois a century ago, Song Sparrows are a common breeding resident there now. It was one of the most frequently reported species from priority blocks (Table 4). Frequency The Song Sparrow was reported from 960 (96.2%) priority blocks and 172 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 557 (55.8%) of the priority blocks, primarily by observa- tion of adults feeding young (251 FY records) and fledged young (160 FL records). The Song Sparrow was relatively easy to find and confirm. It is likely that the Song Sparrow nested in most of the blocks in which it was found. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 557 55.8 58.0 OOS sais, Probable 310 4 25 S58 © 927.8 Possible 93 93 9.7 109 8.5 Totals 960 96.2 100.0 1,132 88.0 * 998 priority blocks ** 1 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) . : 2 N\ \\ \v i} % of 998 sampled priority _ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ e Probable ea © Possible C] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends 8 B Hef |S Illinois 0 + + t t + t ' 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 Year 1996 2000 Upper Midwest Oo ++ + +4 Se ee 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 Year 1996 2000 | a ONS g B BB Bie @ aT #/@ GB B @ G@ 4 B 68 H|\8 ce GB SB O| @ S 8 & B Song Sparrow Bag Swamp Sparrow [=I [oX-] o) r4- Me [=Xo) ce] FT aT: | Robert Randall Code: SWSP Rangewide Distribution: central and southeastern Canada, south through the U.S. east of the Rockies to central Mexico, and the West Coast of the U.S. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant, uncommon summer resident in north, decreasing southward; fairly common winter resident, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: emergent vegetation around water, marshes, wet meadows. Nest: a bulky cup of coarse grass lined with finer grasses, in a low bush or shrub, often over water. Eggs: 4—5, pale green to greenish white, marked with reddish browns. Incubation: 12—15 days. Fledging: from 11 to 13 days. Swamp Sparrows breed in the north-central and northeastern U.S. and much of Canada. They inhabit a variety of wetland types, such as marshes, swamps, and wet meadows, and commonly occur in cattails or other brushy and grassy edges and thickets near water. In the breeding season Swamp Sparrows forage for insects and other invertebrates in and along the water’s edge and on moist ground or in shrubs. Its song is similar to the trill of a junco or Chipping Sparrow. 360 Nests are usually placed in clumps of grass or in marsh vegetation such as cattails close to the ground or the surface of the water and are consequently subject to flooding and predation (Mowbray 1997). Since Euro-American settle- ment, the Swamp Sparrow population has certainly declined throughout its range due to the loss of its wetland habitat. Illinois History During the late 1800s, the Swamp Sparrow was known to breed in the northern portion of the state, but how far south it occurred was unknown (Ridgway 1889). Cory (1909) indicated that it was a common summer resident in Illinois without comment about northern or southern distribution. The Swamp Sparrow population in Illinois has undoubtedly declined as a result of the loss of approximately 90% of the wetlands in the state since Euro-American settlement. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The Swamp Sparrow population in Illinois is not adequately sampled by the BBS. The trend estimate for 1966—2000 is 4.9% per year (significant, P < 0.01); however, sample size is small and relative abundance is low. For the upper Midwest, BBS data indicate an increase in population of 2.1% per year (significant, P < 0.01) from 1966 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 1. Distribution The Swamp Sparrow was reported in priority blocks in 30 counties, with breeding Confirmed in 12 of them. Most of the records were in the north—Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, Will, and Winnebago counties. The scattered occurrences in the southern two-thirds of Illinois, especially the southernmost records (Edwards, St. Clair, Wabash, and White counties) were unexpected. Frequency The Swamp Sparrow was reported from 88 (8.8%) priority blocks and 80 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 30 (3.0%) of the priority blocks, primarily by observations of fledged young or adults feeding young (12 FL and 10 FY records). Due to the difficulty in accessing wetland habitats, this species was likely underrepresented during the atlas project and probably nested in more blocks than those reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 30 3.0 34.1 a 4.4 Probable 25 Peal 28.4 59 4.6 Possible 33 a ny Ae 52 4.0 Totals 88 8.8 100.0 168 =-:13.1 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) lh % of 998 sampled priority _ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed ® Probable R Possible O O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 0 +4 4+ - ~ zs + - { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Swamp Sparrow 361 Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: NOCA Rangewide Distribution: central and eastern U.S. from Canada south through Mexico. 115 Bile) Abundance: common permanent resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: thickets, dense shrubs, undergrowth, residential areas. Nest: a cup (compact or flimsy) of weed stems, pliable twigs, bark strips, grass, rootlets, and leaves lined with fine grass and hair, in a shrub or sapling. Eggs: 3—4, grayish, bluish, or greenish white, marked with browns, grays or purples. Incubation: 12—13 days. Fledging: from 9 to 10 days. The Northern Cardinal is one of the most common and well- known songbirds in North America; it is also the state bird of Illinois. It is a year-round resident of the eastern and central U.S. and parts of Mexico. The cardinal was primarily a southern species; its range expanded northward beginning in the early 1800s in response to factors such as a warmer climate, man-made changes to the landscape that have created additional suitable habitat, and the presence of bird feeders in the winter (Halkin and Linville 1999). It is found in a wide range of habitats with shrubs or small trees, including woodland edge and interior, thickets, brushy areas, and residential areas. The male’s loud and clear “what cheer, what cheer, what cheer” can be heard long before spring 362 IN foyadat=)aamer-laellarsl er-lae le eme ace arrives. Unlike most songbirds, the female is also an active singer. Cardinals have a long breeding season with multiple broods each year. Nests are placed in woody vegetation with dense foliage, such as vines, shrubs, ornamental bushes, and small trees usually about 4 to 5 feet from the ground (Graber and Graber 1963; Halkin and Linville 1999). According to Filliater and Breitwisch (1997) and Wolfenbarger (1999), males with brighter red color hold better territories and have greater reproductive success. Illinois History In the late 1800s the Northern Cardinal was a permanent resident except possibly in the extreme northern portion of the state (Ridgway 1889). In the early 1900s it was consid- ered a very common permanent resident in southern Illinois but a rather uncommon summer resident in northern Illinois (Cory 1909). The statewide population increased between 1909 and 1957 and although most of the population was still in the southern part of the state in 1957, the populations in the central and northern parts had greatly increased by the 1950s (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for the Northern Cardinal population in Illinois during the period 1966 to 2000 is 0.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.18). The trend estimate for the upper Midwest for the same period is 0.7% per year (significant, P < 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution The Northern Cardinal was reported in priority blocks in all 102 counties. The cardinal probably occurs as a nesting species in all priority blocks, even in northern Illinois where it was once scarce. It was one of the most frequently reported and widespread species in priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4). Frequency The Northern Cardinal was reported from 973 (97.5%) priority blocks and 182 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 671 (67.2%) of the priority blocks; the breeding evidence for about two-thirds of these records was fledged young (233 FL records) and adults feeding young (229 FY records). Because cardinals are nonmigratory, it is very likely that they nested in all blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 671 67.2 69.0 807s 62.8 Probable 248 24.8 PAYS) 01: ee BP: Possible 54 5.4 3 63 4.9 Totals 973 97.5 100.0 1,155 89.8 * 998 priority blocks ** 1,286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & ® Probable Hae Possible C] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois O+ + n + t ' + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest = 0 n = + { 1966 =1971 1976 =-:1981 1986 =1991 1996 2000 Year Northern Cardinal 363 Dennis Oehmke Code: RBGR Rangewide Distribution: western and southeastern Canada, south through the U.S. east of the Rockies to northwestern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and fairly common summer resident in north, decreasing southward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: second-growth forests and woodlands. Nest: a loosely built cup of twigs and coarse plant material lined with fine twigs, rootlets, and hair in a deciduous tree. Eggs: 4, pale green, blue, or bluish green, marked with browns or purples, usually wreathed. Incubation: 13-14 days. Fledging: from 9 to 12 days. The Rose-breasted Grosbeak breeds in the northern part of the eastern and central U.S. and in southeastern and central Canada. The male is one of the most distinctive birds in North America; its biack back and white underparts contrast sharply with the triangular-shaped rose-red patch on its breast. The female looks like an oversized sparrow. This species’ melodious song has been described as “like a robin that has taken voice lessons.” The Rose-breasted Grosbeak inhabits the mid-to-upperstory levels of deciduous or mixed deciduous-coniferous forests, open second-growth forests, thickets, and suburban areas. These grosbeaks feed on insects 364 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus gleaned from foliage, seeds, and fruit depending on the season. They are usually single-brooded and build their nests in small trees, shrubs, and vines. A significant increase in the U.S. population during 1966-1979 was followed by a significant decrease during 1980-2000, according to Breed- ing Bird Survey data. The clearing of the forests, which creates forest edge and second-growth habitat, and their adaptation to suburban environments have benefited the Rose-breasted Grosbeak population. Habitat availability may be declining as open second-growth forests mature (Burke and Nol 2000; Holmes and Sherry 2001). Illinois History According to Ridgway (1889), the Rose-breasted Grosbeak was a Summer resident in “perhaps more than the northern half’ of the state in the late 1800s. Cory (1909) noted that it was a common summer resident in northern Illinois. In the mid-1900s Rose-breasted Grosbeaks were found in central and northern Illinois (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding occurrences in southern Illinois are fairly recent (Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends From 1966 to 2000 the population trend for the Rose- breasted Grosbeak is estimated at 2.9% per year (nonsignifi- cant, P = 0.08) for Illinois and 0.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.43) for the upper Midwest. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, the Rose-breasted Grosbeak was fairly well distributed and found in priority blocks in 86 counties, primarily in the northern two-thirds of the state. Breeding was Confirmed in 70 counties. The number of records in southern Illinois was unexpected and suggests a range expansion. The lack of records in some of the central and northern counties may be due to the lack of suitable breeding habitat. Frequency The Rose-breasted Grosbeak was reported from 616 (61.7%) priority blocks and 106 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 209 (20.9%) of the priority blocks, most frequently by observation of fledged young (88 FL records) and adults feeding young (74 FY records). It is likely that Rose-breasted Grosbeaks nested in most of the blocks in which they were reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 209 20.9 33.9 251 19.5 Probable 221 v2.1 35.9 2 19.8 Possible 186 18.6 30.2 216 16.8 Totals 616 61.7 100.0 eyes tesa | * 998 priority blocks ** ],286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & ® Probable a @ Possible [aa O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0+ ' : + + ' + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest + oF + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Q) —- -—++ - —— -— + — ++ Rose-breasted Grosbeak 365 # N ” ; 3 Zs Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery ro Code: BLGR Rangewide Distribution: southern half of the U.S., south through Panama. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant and summer resident in the south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: brushy areas, overgrown fields, and hedgerows. Nest: a cup of twigs, rootlets, and inner bark strips, lined with finer materials interwoven with leaves, snakeskin, and paper, in a small tree or shrub. Eggs: 4, pale bluish white, unmarked. Incubation: | 1—12 days. Fledging: from 9 to 10 days. The Blue Grosbeak breeds in the southern half of the U.S., parts of the Great Plains, and much of Mexico but is not an abundant species (Ingold 1993). It is found in open or semi- open areas, such as forest edges, abandoned fields, roadside and streamside thickets, hedgerows, and areas with poor or sandy soils, including reclaimed strip-mined lands. The male Blue Grosbeak looks like and inhabits the same habitats as the related Indigo Bunting but is larger, darker blue, and has brown wingbars; the female could be confused with a female Brown-headed Cowbird. The Blue Grosbeak diet consists of insects and other invertebrates, and seeds. Nests are usually 366 410 (-mO] gel) el-1-1.¢ Guiraca caerulea built low in small trees, shrubs, or vines. Blue Grosbeaks are often double-brooded, at least in the southern portion of their range, and are frequent victims of cowbird parasitism (Friedmann 1963; Ingold 1993). The breeding range ex- panded to the north in the early 1900s, perhaps due to habitat created by the clearing of the forests (Ingold 1993). Illinois History In the late 1800s and early 1900s the Blue Grosbeak was considered to be rare in Illinois, even in the southern part of the state (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). The Blue Grosbeak was not encountered at all during the censuses of 1907-1909 and was rare and erratic during censuses of 1956-1958 (Graber and Graber 1963). An increase in abundance and northward expansion that began in the 1960s continues today. Blue Grosbeaks are more common in Illinois now than they were just thirty years ago but are still rare in northern and many parts of central Illinois (Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The long-term (1966—2000) trend estimates for the Blue Grosbeak populations are 1.7% per year (nonsignificant, P =0.39) and 1.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.29) for Illinois and the upper Midwest, respectively. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project, the Blue Grosbeak was most frequently reported from priority blocks in the southern third of the state and in the lower Illinois River watershed, with rare occurrences in the rest of the state. It was reported in priority blocks in 52 counties, with breeding Confirmed in 25 of them. Bohlen (1989) states that these grosbeaks are particularly numerous in sandy areas in central Illinois and in areas with poor soil in the southern part of the state. Frequency The Blue Grosbeak was reported from 150 (15.0%) priority blocks and 8 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 32 (3.2%) of the priority blocks. Males are easily detected by their distinctive songs and habit of sitting on exposed perches but nests are difficult to locate. Consequently only 21% of the 150 priority block records were Confirmed. It is likely that this species nested in most of the blocks in which it was reported. Breeding Evidence : Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 32 32 PANE: a Pag Probable 52 ait 34.7 3 4.3 Possible 66 6.6 44.0 68 af, Totals 150 15.0 100.0 158 123 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) DP % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority es Confirmed % Probable oD @ Possible CJ O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 + t + + + 4 4 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 2 my 0 + : aT + 1991] 1986 + + 1976 =: 1981 Year 1966 1971 at 1996 2 A =] [[- MC] ge}-) of=F-1,¢ 367 Taef{e fom =lelaliiare Passerina cyanea Dennis Oehmke Code: INBU Rangewide Distribution: far southeastern Canada, south through eastern, central, and southwestern U.S. to northwestern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: abundant migrant and summer resident, decreasing northward; occasional winter resident in south. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open woodlands, second-growth forests, forest edges, weedy fields, and shrublands. Nest: a cup of dried grass, dead leaves, bark strips, moss, and weed stems lined with rootlets, fine grass, feathers, and hair, in a low shrub, forb, or tree sapling. Eggs: 3-4, pure white to pale bluish white, unmarked. Incubation: |2—13 days. Fledging: from 9 to 10 days. The male Indigo Bunting is more cerulean, turquoise, or ultramarine than indigo in color. It is a small songbird that breeds in the eastern, central, and southwestern U.S. and northern Mexico. This common summer resident inhabits brushy areas, woody edges, early successional habitats, abandoned farmland, and clearings in open woods. Males are conspicuous, often perching on fences and wires along roads to sing their complex and variable songs. Their songs can be heard any time of day from late spring through summer. Most breeding males are monogamous; however, about 15% have two or more mates (simultaneous or serial) and a large proportion of the young may be fathered by males that are not the female’s mate (Payne 1992). Nests are placed in fields or along edges in herbaceous vegetation or in shrubs within 3 feet of the ground and are often parasitized by Brown-headed Cowbirds (Payne 1992). The creation of edge 368 and shrubby habitat by the clearing of the forests was beneficial to this species (Bohlen 1989). On a continental scale Indigo Buntings are abundant and have increased in range and density (Payne 1992). Maturation of old fields to forests, intensive agriculture, frequent roadside mowing, and urbanization are threats to the Indigo Bunting population (Payne 1992). Illinois History During the late 1800s, the Indigo Bunting was described as “one of our most abundant and most generally distributed summer residents” (Ridgway 1889). Graber and Graber (1963) state that the Indigo Bunting was found statewide in the summer in the 1907-1909 and 1956-1958 censuses and the population was more abundant and had the highest densities in the south. The number of Indigo Buntings in Illinois increased slightly between 1909 and 1957 (Graber and Graber 1963). During the 1957-1958 censuses, they were found in nearly every habitat type, but especially in woody areas; the highest population densities were in edge shrubs (with up to 295 birds per 100 acres), along drainage ditches, and in hedgerows in the south. This species was probably not abundant prior to Euro-American settlement (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Indigo Bunting populations exhibited similar trends in Illinois and the upper Midwest, with positive trends from 1966 to 1979 and significantly (P < 0.05) negative trends from 1980 to 2000. From 1966 to 2000 the population declined at an estimated rate of —1.0% per year (significant, P <0.01) in Illinois. The long-term (1966—2000) trend estimate for the upper Midwest is -0.6% per year (signifi- cant, P< 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Indigo Bunting was a widely distributed species throughout the state. It was found in priority blocks in all 102 counties and Confirmed as breeding in 97. It was one of the most frequently reported species in priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4). Frequency The Indigo Bunting was reported from 985 (98.7%) priority blocks and 166 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 506 (50.7%) of the priority blocks, with the most fre- quently used breeding evidence criteria being adults feeding young (198 FY records) and fledged young (129 FL records). Indigo Buntings likely nested in all of the blocks in which they were reported and may have occurred in every priority block. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 506 50.7 51.4 577s 44.9 Probable 417 41.8 42.3 489 = 38.0 Possible 62 6.2 6.3 85 6.6 Totals 985 98.7 100.0 1,151 89.5 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of blocks (gray = no records for this species) priority blocks with records for this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ ® Probable @ Possible LJ O Breeding Bird Survey Trends 327 28+ 24+ Illinois 0 + + + 1966 1971 + + + 4 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year O + Upper Midwest 1966 + 1971 + + + 1976 1981 1986 Year + 1991 + 4 1996 2000 a a 8 B 8 8 a 8 B 6/a S |e @ BLG g | ae B 1a @ Bed a Bia 6B Bea OU | @ @ Bo @ Indigo Bunting 369 Dickcissel Spiza americana Dennis Oehmke Ory: (ep BY COs 4 Rangewide Distribution: extreme south-central Canada and central and eastern (west of the Atlantic states) U.S., south to northern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident, decreasing northward; rare winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: extensive grasslands, meadows, and abandoned fields, especially those dominated by forbs. Nest: a bulky cup of coarse forbs, grass, or cornstalk lined with fine grass, rootlets and hair interwoven with grass and a few leaves, in low vegetation. Eggs: 4, pale blue, unmarked. Incubation: 12—13 days. Fledging: from 7 to 10 days. The Dickcissel is a familiar bird in open grasslands with dense cover and moderate to tall vegetation. It breeds primarily in the central U.S. from Ohio to eastern Colorado from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. In the 1800s its range had expanded into the eastern states, probably in response to the creation of agricultural grasslands by the clearing of the forests, but then contracted as the areas reverted back to forest (Temple 2002). With the extensive loss of native prairie this species adjusted by adapting to fallow fields, fencerows, and early successional fields. The common name is derived from its song “dick, dick, dickcissel” which it delivers from a conspicuous perch. Dickcissel nests are generally placed near the ground in dense grasses and forbs and are frequently parasitized by Brown-headed Cowbirds. Seasonal movements may cause dramatic fluctuations in numbers and shifts in occurrence from year to year (Robbins 370 et al. 1986; Temple 2002). As with many grassland species, the Dickcissel population is on the decline. The Dickcissel is a species of conservation concern because of the extent of population decline, loss of its grassland habitat, and mass eradication on its Venezuelan wintering grounds where it is considered an agricultural pest. Efforts that restore grass- lands, such as the Conservation Reserve Program, which converts row-cropped land to permanent cover, particularly grasses, have recently created new potential nesting habitat (Jackson et al. 1996; Best et al. 1997; Temple 2002). Illinois History A century ago the Dickcissel was a common summer resident in Illinois (Cory 1909). Graber and Graber (1963) found this species to be one of the most abundant fringillids in the summer throughout the state in the 1907-1909 and 1957-1958 censuses, with the highest densities in the central zone and lowest in the northern zone. The Dickcissel population in Illinois increased substantially between 1909 and 1957 (Graber and Graber 1963) but more recently is on the decline. Breeding Bird Survey Trends In recent times, Dickcissel populations have significantly declined in both the state and the region, according to BBS data. From 1966 to 2000 the trend estimates are —3.5% per year for Illinois (significant, P < 0.01) and —3.4% per year for the upper Midwest (significant, P < 0.01). Declines of —10.7% per year (significant, P < 0.01) in Illinois and -8.3% per year (significant, P < 0.01) in the upper Midwest were reported for the period of 1966 to 1979. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution : The Dickcissel was widely distributed throughout the state; only Hardin County had no records. It was Confirmed in priority blocks in 83 counties. It was one of the most frequently reported and widely distributed species in priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4). Gaps in distribution were in highly urbanized (i.e., the northeast), heavily forested (i.e., Pope and Hardin counties), and undersurveyed areas (i.e., Clark, Cumberland, Jasper and Crawford coun- ties). Frequency The Dickcissel was reported from 899 (90.1%) priority blocks and 61 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 322 (32.3%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observation of adults feeding young (141 FY records) and fledged young (78 FL records). It is likely that Dickcissels nested in most of the blocks in which they were reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 322 32.3 35.8 339 26.4 Probable 449 45.0 49.9 482 37.5 Possible 128 12.8 14.2 139 10.8 Totals 899 90.1 100.0 960 747 Lo * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) BoUOUAEU @ % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species S| @ 0 @ S G@ B () @ A 2 a 8 SB @ Priority Nonpriority we a Confirmed & ® Probable a @ rm Possible LJ O a if a a B 2] Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois ~ Bee O & bs) Ge i ee || i BO ea a & O+ + + + re 19 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 B Year al) Upper Midwest a 567 49+ 0 + + - +- + + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Dickcissel 371 so) ere) ial. Dolichonyx oryzivorus rir: (has 310) 310) Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada, south to central South America. AHO) Abundance: common migrant and fairly common summer resident in north, decreasing southward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: prairies, tall grasslands, wet meadows, and cultivated croplands. Nest: a cup of coarse grass and forbs lined with finer grasses, in dense cover on the ground. Eggs: 5-6, gray to pale reddish brown, marked with browns or purples. Incubation: 10-13 days. Fledging: from 10 to 14 days. The plumage of the breeding male Bobolink is unique among North American songbirds in that it is white above and black below. Originally a prairie grassland species, the Bobolink now inhabits open fields, hayfields, pastures, and wet meadows and may prefer larger fields with a mixture of grasses and broad-leaved forbs (Martin and Gavin 1995; Fitzgerald and Pashley 2000). Males sing a bubbling song from elevated perches or while flying and circling over their territories. Bobolinks are polygynous; a male frequently pairs with multiple females and the female may lay a clutch of eggs sired by more than one male (Martin 1971; Bollinger 372 and Gavin 1991; Martin and Gavin 1995). Nests are built with grasses and sedges in depressions on the ground where taller vegetation provides shade. Bobolinks breed in southern Canada and the northern half of the U.S. Although popula- tions fluctuate from year to year and place to place, the population has been steadily declining in recent years because of land use changes (e.g., loss of hayfields), changes in the vegetative composition of hayfields, and mowing practices (Martin and Gavin 1995). Illinois History During the late 1800s, Ridgway (1889) reported that the Bobolink bred only in the northern part of Illinois, where it was an abundant summer resident. Cory (1909) likewise indicated that it was “a common summer resident in northern Illinois.” Graber and Graber (1963) reported a slight increase in the Bobolink population between 1909 and 1957. From the early 1900s to the 1950s most of the Bobolink population was in the northern part of the state but their numbers had increased substantially in central Illinois by the 1950s (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Like most other grassland-dependent species, Bobolink populations are in serious decline. BBS data indicate decreases in the population at —9.3% per year in Illinois (significant, P < 0.01) and —2.8% per year in the upper Midwest (significant, P < 0.01) for 1966-2000. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project, the Bobolink was limited to the northern half of the state, where it was found in 50 and Confirmed as breeding in 27 counties. The record in Edwards County may have been migrants. Frequency The Bobolink was reported from 234 (23.4%) priority blocks and 73 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 71 (7.1%) of the priority blocks; adults feeding young and fledged young were was the most frequently used breeding evidence criteria for these 71 Confirmed records (25 FY and 20 FL records, respectively). It is likely that Bobolinks nested in most blocks in which they were reported. Breeding Evidence : Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** LC a |e No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled i@i@oog Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 71 al 30.3 102 7.9 Probable 96 9.6 41.0 130 10.1 Possible 67 6.7 28.6 75 5.8 Totals 234 3=_ 23.4 100.0 307 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _—-% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed 2 Probable @ Possible fa] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois pe a ne 0+ + + + + + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest Count O + + : + + + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year - }=fo) ee) 14) .4 373 atclema Wi lale (=e di-(eq.de)| ae, Agelaius phoeniceus Code: RWBL Rangewide Distribution: eastern Alaska and most of Canada, south through all of the U.S. into Central America. ILLINOIS Abundance: abundant migrant and summer resident, abundant winter resident in south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: marshes, riparian habitats, and fields of all kinds. Nest: a woven cup of sedges and grasses lined with finer grasses, in vegetation, often over water. Eggs: 3-4, pale bluish green, marked with dark colors. Incubation: 10-12 days. Fledging: from 11 to 14 days. Red-winged Blackbirds are one of the most abundant bird species in North America and their breeding range includes most of the continent except northern Canada and Alaska. They inhabit a variety of wetland and upland habitats, including marshes, wet meadows, roadside ditches, hayfields, fallow and cultivated fields, and suburban areas. The male Red-winged Blackbird is easy to identify with its bright red shoulder patches; the female is smaller and has striped, sparrow-like plumage. The male’s “conk, cur-ree” is a familiar sound in the spring. Red-wingeds usually nest in loose colonies and place their nests in emergent vegetation in wetlands, in grasses on the ground, or in trees in uplands. A male may have a harem of up to 15 females nesting in his territory (Yasukawa and Searcy 1995). Females may fledge 374 24 young in their lifetime (Orians and Beletsky 1989). This species adapted to the drastic decline in marsh habitat in the 1800s and early 1900s by utilizing hayfields, pastures, and grain fields (Yasukawa and Searcy 1995). In some regions large flocks may damage agricultural crops, such as corn, sunflowers, and rice (Bernhardt et al. 1987; Meanley 1971; Mah and Nuechterlein 1991). A variety of population control methods are used in some areas to limit the number of birds. Illinois History The Red-winged Blackbird, even in the late 1800s and early 1900s, was “one of our most abundant and best known birds” and an abundant summer resident (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). It remains abundant today. The Red-winged Blackbird population in Illinois increased dramatically between 1909 and 1958 (Graber and Graber 1963). A century ago much of the population was associated with marshes. As marshland disappeared, the population transitioned to cultivated lands, so that less than 3% of the population was associated with marshes by the late 1950s (Graber and Graber 1963; Bohlen 1989). During 1907-1909 and 1957-1958 the distribution of Red-winged Blackbirds in most habitats was highest in the north (Graber and Graber 1963), but now is evenly distrib- uted throughout the state (Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for the Red-winged Blackbird population in Illinois is -O0.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.62) from 1966 to 2000. In the upper Midwest the trend estimate is —1.1% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the same period. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 2. Distribution If Red-winged Blackbirds had remained dependent on marshes, they would not be a common bird today. However, as a result of its successful adaptation to land use changes, the Red-winged Blackbird is abundant and found in every county. It was Confirmed as breeding in all counties during the atlas project and was the most frequently reported species from priority blocks (Table 4). Frequency The Red-winged Blackbird was reported from 993 (99.5%) priority blocks and 182 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 893 (89.5%) of the priority blocks, with fledged young and adults feeding young (277 FL and 256 FY records, respectively) accounting for 60% of these records. The Red-winged was an easy species to see, identify, and confirm and it probably bred in the other blocks in which it was found but not Confirmed. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 893 89.5 89.9 1,039 80.8 Probable 83 8.3 8.4 110 8.6 Possible 17 1.7 a 26 2.0 Totals 993 995 100.0 1,175 914 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed & ® Probable © Possible LO O | Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 + +— (RTS + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 2327 203+ 1966 + 197] + + + _———_——-} 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year 4 Red-winged Blackbird 315 Eastern Meadowlark Sturnella magna Code: EAME Rangewide Distribution: southeastern Canada, eastern and central U.S. south to northern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident, fairly common winter resident in south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: grasslands, savannas, prairies, and cultivated fields. Nest: a cup of coarse grass lined with finer grass, on the ground with domed canopy interwoven into surrounding vegetation. Eggs: 3-5, white, marked with browns or purples. Incubation: 13—15 days. Fledging: from 11 to 12 days. The Eastern Meadowlark is a common and well-known species in rural areas. It breeds from the Great Plains and southwestern regions east to the Atlantic coast and from southern Canada to Central America. Its musical, four-note song can be heard from early spring through summer. Habitats include native prairie, pastures, hayfields, idle or fallow fields, weedy edges of crop fields, and roadsides. Unlike many grassland species, meadowlarks accept smaller grassland tracts for nesting. This species tends to use denser vegetation for nesting and shorter, sparser vegetation for feeding. The well-concealed nest is built on the ground generally in fairly dense vegetation. Eastern Meadowlarks are polygynous, with about half the males of some popula- tions having more than one mate (Lanyon 1995). As with other grassland species the Eastern Meadowlark population 376 Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery has declined due to land use changes, which have drastically reduced grasslands. A population decline has occurred in North America in the past three decades, according to Breeding Bird Survey data (Lanyon 1995). Hay harvesting and roadside mowing destroy nests (Hays and Farmer 1990). Rates of nesting success in Iowa were estimated to be between 40 and 60% (Jackson et al. 1996). Illinois History During the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Eastern Meadow- lark was a common summer resident throughout Illinois, frequenting open fields and prairies (Cory 1909). Graber and Graber (1963) found a slight decrease in numbers between 1909 and 1957, perhaps due to competition with Red-winged Blackbirds. During that 49-year span, the summer population shifted from being most abundant in southern Illinois in the early 1900s to being evenly distributed statewide in the mid- 1900s (Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Trend estimates for the Eastern Meadowlark populations are negative for the period of 1966 to 2000 and for both sub- intervals (1966-1979 and 1980-2000) in Illinois and the upper Midwest. BBS estimates show declines of —2.3% per year in Illinois (significant, P = 0.01) and —2.7% per year (significant, P < 0.01) in the upper Midwest over the period 1966 to 2000. The sharp drop in Illinois during the mid- 1970s may be due to severe winter weather (Graber and Graber 1979). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution Atlas data for the Eastern Meadowlark indicate that it was present in all 102 counties and was Confirmed as breeding in 98 of them. Interestingly, breeding was Confirmed even in the well-populated counties of Cook and DuPage, except where urbanization was heaviest. It was one of the most frequently reported and widespread species in priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4). Frequency The Eastern Meadowlark was reported from 971 (97.3%) priority blocks and 122 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 558 (55.9%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observation of fledged young (237 FL records) and adults feeding young (207 FY records). While Eastern and Western Meadowlarks can be readily identified by their song and call notes, it is possible, at least in northern Illinois where the two species coexist, that they may not have been correctly identified when based on sight identification alone. Breeding Evidence aH W& @ Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 558 35-9 STS 620 = 48.2 Probable = 288 28.9 29.7 328 «255 Possible 125 15 12.9 145 Li Totals 971 973 L002 81,0932) 685.0 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) Ay % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) % of priority blocks with records for this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed Probable o Possible e @ O 1) EA iy CN Breeding Bird Survey Trends B/8 Illinois 565 49+ | 2) ae Sites << 28+ ~ sf 217 Y E Count ° 144 7 + E aE @ | | a Ee} | + 0 + + + + + + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 Year 1996 2000 Hi 1 Upper Midwest 564 49 + 421 OQ + + + + a + 1976 1981 1986 1991 Year + 1966 1971 1996 2000 4 BB) @ 8 G 8 5 |\a B Eastern Meadowlark Western Meadowlark Sturnella neglecta James Landing CTs (8 ONY OD Rangewide Distribution: southwestern and south-central Canada, south through central and western U.S. to northern Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and summer resident, uncommon winter resident, decreasing southward and eastward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: grasslands, savannas, prairies, and cultivated fields. Nest: a cup of coarse grass lined with finer grass, on the ground with domed canopy interwoven into the surrounding vegetation. Eggs: 5, white, marked with browns or purples. Incubation: 13-15 days. Fledging: about 12 days. The Western Meadowlark is abundant and widespread, with a breeding range that includes the central and western U.S., southwestern Canada, and northern Mexico. It inhabits open country, such as native grasslands, pastures, hayfields, roadsides, and weedy edges of cropland. Except for its songs, call notes, and subtle differences in the facial plumage, the Western Meadowlark is nearly indistinguishable from the Eastern Meadowlark. The Western’s song is a warble of flute-like notes; its call is “chuck.” The Western is more often associated with drier and sandier habitats than the Eastern Meadowlark in areas where they co-occur. The Western Meadowlark feeds mainly on the ground and nests in fairly dense vegetation on the ground. With the clearing of the forests for agriculture, the breeding range expanded to 378 the northeast in the 1900s but in recent decades populations have declined slightly in the U.S. and Canada (Lanyon 1994). Illinois History In the 1800s the Western Meadowlark was probably a common summer resident on the prairies in western IIlinois (Nelson 1876). In the early 1900s it was deemed by Cory (1909) to be of “rather rare occurrence” in Illinois. Because of the similarity of the two meadowlark species, Graber and Graber (1963) did not make a distinction between their populations and provided a combined meadowlark account; they reported a decrease in numbers and a northward shift in the meadowlark populations between 1909 and 1957. As the Western Meadowlarks range expanded eastward from the central U.S., they have become more abundant in western and central Illinois but are still less abundant than Eastern Meadowlarks in most areas (Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends For 1966-2000 the trend for the Illinois population of Western Meadowlarks is estimated at —2.3% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.59); the decline for the 1966-1979 subinterval is a significant (P < 0.01) -14.4% per year. The upper Midwest population declined significantly over the period from 1966 to 2000 as well as both subintervals (1966-1979 and 1980-2000), with the long-term trend estimated at -4.2% per year (significant, P < 0.01). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, the Western Meadowlark was found in priority blocks in 48 counties and was limited to the northern half of the state. It occurred most frequently in blocks to the north and west of the Illinois River with decreasing frequency in a southeasterly direction. Records were reported as far south as Pike County on the west and Vermilion County on the east. Breeding was Confirmed in 27 counties. Frequency The Western Meadowlark was reported from 213 (21.3%) priority blocks and 23 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 58 (5.8%) of the priority blocks, primarily by observation of adults feeding young or fledged young (28 FY and 25 FL records, respectively). It is likely that Western Meadowlarks bred in many of the blocks in which they were reported. Because of the similarities between Eastern and Western meadowlarks, some records for this species may be incorrect if based on sight identification alone. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 58 5.8 D2 62 4.8 Probable Th) TA 36.2 87 6.8 Possible 78 7.8 36.6 87 6.8 Totals 4 1) Zi 100.0 236 18.4 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) y* % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ 6 Probable Possible [ra O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 407 35+ 307 Qo 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 40 <= 35+ 30+. 0 + 19 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Mod Western Meadowlark 379 Yellow-headed Blackbird Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus Joe Milosevich Oriys (mS 5 059 B Rangewide Distribution: southwestern Canada through the central and western U.S. to central Mexico. 115 Bile) Abundance: rare migrant throughout the state and rare summer resident in north. Endangered/Threatened Status: endangered. Breeding Habitat: marshes with permanent water and emergent vegetation. Nest: a bulky and firmly woven cup of wet vegetation lined with dried grass, over water in emergent vegetation. Eggs: 4, grayish white to pale greenish white, marked with browns or grays. Incubation: | 1—13 days. Fledging: from 9 to 12 days. The descriptively named Yellow-headed Blackbird breeds primarily in the prairie wetlands of the north-central and western U.S. and southwestern Canada. This blackbird nests in deepwater marshes with moderately dense stands of emergent vegetation, especially cattails, bulrushes, and reeds, interspersed with open water (Weller and Spatcher 1965; Heidorn et al. 1991; Twedt and Crawford 1995). Yellow- headed Blackbirds are colonial nesters and, like other blackbird species, are polygamous, with up to six females in a harem (Orians 1980). Females are single-brooded. Colo- nies are known to frequently move to different wetlands 380 between years and their size may vary in response to changes in vegetative structure and water depth. Illinois History In the late 1800s the Yellow-headed Blackbird was report- edly “confined to the prairie districts of the northern portion of the State” (Ridgway 1889). Cory (1909) reported it as a summer resident in northern Illinois “breeding in open swampy places” and local in distribution, being common in some localities and rare or absent in others with similar habitat conditions. This species has apparently been in Illinois for some time, although it is primarily a western species (Bohlen 1989). Today it is a rare and localized breeding species that occurs mostly in the wetlands of the northeastern part of the state. Because of its limited distribu- tion and the loss and degradation of wetland habitats, the Yellow-headed Blackbird is listed as an endangered species in Ilinois. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Like other wetland specialists, the Yellow-headed Blackbird population is not adequately sampled by the BBS. Because of its small population and localized distribution, the BBS does not estimate a trend for this species in Illinois. In the upper Midwest the trend estimate for 1966-2000 indicates a decline in population of —3.7% per year (significant, P < 0.01) Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution The Yellow-headed Blackbird occurred primarily in the northern counties. It was Confirmed as breeding in 7 of the 11 counties in which it was found in priority blocks. Yellow- heads occasionally occur at isolated and temporary locations much farther south, such as the record in Jersey County during the atlas project and in Madison, Cass, and Mason counties prior to the atlas project. Frequency The Yellow-headed Blackbird was reported from 15 (1.5%) priority blocks and 33 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 9 (0.9%) of the priority blocks, with the most frequently used breeding evidence criteria being adults feeding young (4 FY records) and fledged young (3 FL records). If the birds were found in suitable habitat, nesting likely occurred in the 6 priority blocks with Probable and Possible records. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 9 0.9 60.0 24 1.9 Probable l 0.1 6.7 13 1.0 Possible 5 0.5 ee 11 0.9 Totals 15 1.5 100.0 48 oe * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed &@ @ Probable ie Possible Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest + + Year == 4 1966 1971 1976 =1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Yellow-headed Blackbird 381 Brewer’s Blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus Eric Walters Code: BRBL Rangewide Distribution: southwestern and south-central Canada, south through the central and western U.S. into central Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: uncommon migrant, rare and local summer resident in northeast, occasional winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: shrubby or brushy areas (especially near water), cultivated areas, and around human habitations. Nest: a sturdy cup of twigs, grass, and mud lined with finer materials, on the ground or in small to large trees. Eggs: 4—6, grayish, marked with browns. Incubation: 12-14 days. Fledging: from 13 to 14 days. Brewer’s Blackbirds are found in open habitats in rural and suburban areas and primarily breed in southwestern Canada and the north-central and western U.S. They are found in a wide variety of habitats, including weedy margins of marshes and streams, forest clearcuts, grassy uplands, residential areas, and farmsteads. During the early 1900s, their range began to expand eastward from Minnesota and now extends to Michigan and Ontario. Brewer’s Blackbirds exploited the habitat created by the conversion of forest to agricultural land in these areas (Martin 2002). This colonial nesting species places its nest on the ground, in shrubs or trees, or in emergent vegetation, usually near water. Unlike other blackbirds, the Brewer’s appears to be monogamous 382 (Martin 2002). Because it is well adapted to human modified environments (i.e., forest clearings, urbanized areas, right-of- ways), the Brewer’s Blackbird population has undoubtedly increased in abundance and range since Euro-American settlement (Martin 2002). Illinois History In the late 1800s and early 1900s the Brewer’s Blackbird was not known to regularly occur in Illinois and was considered a straggler even as a migrant (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909). Ford (1956) indicated that the population was expanding eastward and by the 1950s he considered it an uncommon summer resident in the Chicago region. The first reported nests in Illinois occurred in Lake and Cook counties in 1930 (Ford 1930; Lyon 1930). A small colony was apparently active near Dolton in Cook County between 1947 and 1954, as 78 young were banded during that 8-year span (Smith and Parmalee 1955). Currently the Brewer’s Blackbird is a regular spring and fall migrant through Illinois, but has not expanded its breeding range in the state beyond the initial counties and is presently limited to Lake County. Because of its small numbers and limited distribution in the state, the Brewer’s Blackbird was listed as a threatened species in Illinois but was delisted in 1994 because Illinois is at the edge of its breeding range and this species was not consid- ered to be in jeopardy in its primary breeding range. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The small and localized population of Brewer’s Blackbird is not adequately sampled by the BBS in Illinois. The trend estimate for 1966-2000 for the upper Midwest is 1.9% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.07). Credibility Index: IL = none and.UM = 1. Distribution Illinois is at the southeastern edge of the Brewer’s Blackbird breeding range. The only known Illinois breeding sites, documented for several years prior to the atlas project, are limited to a small area along Lake Michigan just south of the Wisconsin line (primarily Illinois Beach State Park) and a few other Lake County locations. During the atlas project this species was documented at a single, nonpriority block in Lake County. Frequency The Brewer’s Blackbird was found in only one block, a nonpriority block in northeastern Lake County where it was Confirmed as breeding. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 0 0.0 0.0 1 0.1 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 0 0.0 100.0 1 0.1 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) Priority Nonpriority Confirmed ® Probable Possible C O Upper Midwest 0 + 1966 + 1971 + t + 1981 1986 1991 Year - 1976 ; { 1996 2000 Brewer’s Blackbird 383 Orel alinlelamele-(e1. d= Quiscalus quiscula Robert Randall t Oxiys (ee OL OT OF 04 Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada and the central and eastern U.S. HHO) Abundance: abundant spring migrant and summer resident, common to abundant winter resident in south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: partially open areas with scattered trees, open woodlots, human habitations, pines, and near wetlands. Nest: a bulky cup of grass, forbs, twigs, rushes, sedges, and mud lined with finer materials, in shrubs and trees. Eggs: 4—5, greenish white to light brown, marked with dark brown or purple. Incubation: 13-14 days. Fledging: from 16 to 20 days. The Common Grackle is one of the most common, conspicu- ous, and widely distributed breeding birds in eastern and central North America. Although presumed to be not as common as the Passenger Pigeon, its migratory flocks are often compared to those of that extinct species. The Common Grackle, a native species that is very successful in human- altered habitats, is common in open areas with scattered trees, such as residential areas, open forests, forest edges, hedgerows, and marshes. The clearing of the forests for agricultural purposes created new habitat for this species. The population greatly increased and its breeding range expanded westward during the 1900s. This gregarious and 384 omnipresent bird is considered by many to be a nuisance. Grackles nest in small colonies in trees, often near human habitations. They are primarily monogamous (Wiley 1996) and females generally produce a single brood per year. Grackles are considered significant agricultural pests that annually cause millions of dollars of damage to crops. Because roost sites may harbor the fungus that causes histoplasmosis, a potentially hazardous respiratory disease, large numbers of roosting blackbirds and European Starlings are killed (Mott 1984). These control measures have been suggested as causing population declines in the East (Bystrak and Robbins 1977). Illinois History The Common Grackle has been considered a common to abundant summer resident throughout the state since the late 1800s (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909; Smith and Parmalee 1955; Graber and Graber 1963; Bohlen 1989). Summer population densities were higher in the northern half of the state in both the 1907-1909 and 1957-1958 censuses (Graber and Graber 1963). Graber and Graber (1963) estimated that the grackle population declined slightly between 1909 and 1957. According to Breeding Bird Survey data, Illinois has one of the highest relative abundance levels for Common Grackles in the U.S. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Sample size and relative abundance are high for the Com- mon Grackle in both the state and region. For Illinois, the trend estimate is —0.4% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.54) from 1966 to 2000. For the upper Midwest, the data indicate a decline of —1.1% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the same period. : Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution Common Grackles were reported from every county and breeding was Confirmed in all but Hardin County. It was one of the most frequently reported and widespread species in priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4) and most likely occurred as a breeding species in all priority blocks. Frequency The Common Grackle was reported from 986 (98.8%) priority blocks and 183 nonpriority blocks. This species was easy to observe and confirm as breeding. Breeding was Confirmed in 854 (85.6%) of the priority blocks, of which 81% were fledged young (351 FL records) and adults feeding young (344 FY records). Breeding Evidence HEHE eRe Be Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 854 85.6 86.6 1,006 78.2 Probable 71 Tal U2 88 6.8 Possible 61 6.1 6.2 IB 5.8 Totals 986 98.8 100.0 1,169 90.9 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& @ Probable ve Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 128 WS . . 96/ oy Tet eee 80+ oun g a 48+ 327 0 + . - - : + —}- { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest + + + = + $4 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year 6 oO] @ 8 8B |e ee & Common Grackle 385 Siae)uiebialstsle(-eme@re)iVeliae Molothrus ater Robert Randall L OLiys (438 3) 5 (OL) Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada, south through all of the U.S. to central Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident, fairly common winter resident in south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: woodlands, forest edges, shrubby areas, and grasslands. Nest: does not build a nest of its own; lays it eggs in other species’ nests. Eggs: indeterminant number (captive females can lay more than 70 eggs in a season), white with brown/gray spots. Incubation: 10—12 days. Fledging: from 10 to 11 days. The Brown-headed Cowbird is a common, conspicuous, and easily recognized species that breeds throughout the U.S., southern and western Canada, and northern Mexico. Prior to Euro-American settlement, this species was limited to the central Great Plains, but the population expanded as agricul- ture and urbanization opened the forests (Lowther 1993). It inhabits grassland areas with scattered trees, such as forest edges, fields, pastures, and residential areas. Brown-headed Cowbirds are brood parasites and totally dependent on other birds to incubate their eggs and raise their young. They preferentially parasitize nests at the boundaries between woods and fields; forest fragmentation has created large 386 areas of potential breeding habitat (Lowther 1993). The female is known to lay eggs in the nests of 220 species and 144 of these are known to have successfully reared cowbird young (Friedmann 1963). Females are adept at finding other birds’ nests and prolific in laying eggs, up to 40 in a season in the wild (Jackson and Roby 1992; Lowther 1993). Cowbirds are a conservation concern because they pose a threat to the reproductive success of their host species, and are of special concern for host species with small popula- tions. Illinois History According to all accounts, the Brown-headed Cowbird has been a common summer resident throughout the state since at least the late 1800s (Ridgway 1889; Cory 1909; Smith and Parmalee 1955; Graber and Graber 1963; Bohlen 1989). Although the population fluctuates from year to year, Graber and Graber (1963) reported an overall decline in the Illinois population between 1909 and 1957, probably in response to the loss of pastures. Scott Robinson (pers. comm.) noted that cowbird parasitism rates in Illinois are among the highest in the U.S. and Bohlen (1989) lists 61 species in Illinois that are known to be parasitized by Brown-headed Cowbirds. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Brown-headed Cowbird populations in Illinois increased at a rate of 1.1% per year (significant, P = 0.05) from 1966 to 2000. In the upper Midwest, BBS data indicate a decline of —0.6% per year (significant, P = 0.02) over the same period. Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution Atlas data indicate that the Brown-headed Cowbird is widely distributed throughout Illinois, occurring in all counties and undoubtedly breeding in every county as well. It was one of the most frequently reported and widely distributed species in priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4). Frequency The Brown-headed Cowbird was reported from 951 (95.3%) priority blocks and 169 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 424 (42.5%) of the priority blocks. Cowbirds were easy to detect throughout the atlas project. The breed- ing evidence for nearly three-fourths of the Confirmed records in priority blocks was fledged young (310 FL records). Since cowbirds often feed a considerable distance from their nesting territories (Robinson et al. 1993), some Probable and Possible records may have been birds passing through the priority blocks. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 424 42.5 44.6 520 40.4 Probable 398 39.9 41.9 443 344 Possible 129 12.9 13.6 157 122 Totals 951 95.3 100.0 1120 87.1 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ e Probable a ) Possible L] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 0 + be —+——_—+4 ' + + 1 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 0 + Year + + + + + + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 S & | deol Ba B O O & @ Boo s @ B® “ & & 8 B BSG a a @ a | B\)e@ 0 5; @ O Brown-headed Cowbird 387 David Enstrom Code: OROR Rangewide Distribution: eastern and central U.S. from Canada south to northern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: fairly common migrant and common summer resident in south, decreasing northward. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: scrubby areas, open successional woodlands, savannas, and park-like areas. Nest: a woven pendant of long, green grass blades lined with finer grass and plant down, suspended from a forked terminal twig and hidden by leaves. Eggs: 3-5, pale bluish white, marked with browns, purples or grays. Incubation: 12 days. Fledging: from 11 to 14 days. Once common in orchards, the Orchard Oriole is found in semi-open to open wooded habitats, especially scrubby areas with scattered trees, such as pastures, fallow fields, orchards, and edge shrubs, with a preference for areas near water. The breeding range is primarily the eastern and central U.S. and northern Mexico. The male’s warble is usually heard only during the earliest weeks of the breeding season. Orchard Orioles sometimes nest in small, loose colonies (Clawson 388 '@} Kol atl nem @) ale) (=) Icterus spurius 1980). Nests are suspended from the outer branches of small or isolated trees, and are parasitized by Brown-headed Cowbirds. Female Orchard Orioles, like most Neotropical migrants, are single brooded (Sealy 1980). Orchard Orioles migrate from their wintering grounds in March and April and may begin their southward migration in mid-July, making for a short breeding season. Population declines in the early 1900s may have been due to loss of savanna habitat (Jackson et al. 1996). Illinois History During the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Orchard Oriole was a common summer resident in Illinois (Cory 1909) and far more numerous than the Baltimore Oriole in the southern half of the state (Ridgway 1889). During the first half of the 1900s, Orchard Orioles were found throughout the state but the population was greatest in the southern region (Graber and Graber 1963). A substantial decline in numbers occurred between the early and mid-1900s due to the loss of orchards and other habitat changes (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend for the Orchard Oriole population in Illinois from 1966 to 2000 is estimated at 0.1% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.87). For the upper Midwest, the trend estimate for the same period is —0.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.31). Credibility Index: IL = 1 and UM = 1. Distribution During the atlas project, the Orchard Oriole was reported in priority blocks in 99 counties and breeding was Confirmed in 84 counties. It was most frequently reported from priority blocks in the southern and central parts of the state. Frequency The Orchard Oriole was reported from 518 (51.9%) priority blocks and 51 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 212 (21.2%) of the priority blocks, with the most fre- quently used breeding evidence criteria being adults feeding young (82 FY records) and fledged young (45 FL records). It is likely that Orchard Orioles nested in most blocks in which they were reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 212 21.2 Probable 118 11.8 Possible 188 18.8 Totals 518 aly 40.9 oF | 18.4 22.8 131 10.2 36.3 201 15.6 100.0 569 44.2 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority blocks (gray = no records for this species) % of priority blocks with records for this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ Probable Possible @ O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 3 oe pe EI (o) oO e e \! + ° = os : = | OH, © me 0 + - + . + 4 : i 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest Bie { 2+ g = at (o) O 1a > PE ° < ee. rs 1+ ° eee . a eae oe od +— + \ 0 + + $ + } H 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Y je = (oldestelaem@)ale) |) 389 = Richard Day / Daybreak Imagery Code: BAOR Rangewide Distribution: south-central and southeastern Canada through the U.S. east of the Rockies to northern South America. ILLINOIS Abundance: common migrant and summer resident, rare winter visitor. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open and riparian woodlands, deciduous forest edges, open areas with scattered trees, parks, and around human habitations. Nest: a suspended woven pendant of plant fiber strips lined with fine grass, plant down, and hair, attached by its rim to the outer drooping branch of a tree. Eggs: 4—5, pale grayish to bluish white, marked with dark colors. Incubation: 12—14 days Fledging: from 12 to 14 days. The Baltimore Oriole breeds in much of the eastern and central U.S. and southern Canada. The bright orange and black plumage of the male Baltimore Oriole makes it one of the most brilliantly colored birds in North America. Its name refers to the colors of Lord Baltimore, the governor of Maryland in colonial times. In 1983 the Baltimore Oriole was merged with the western Bullock’s Oriole (/cterus bullockii) and given the name Northern Oriole, but was formally recognized as a separate species again in 1995 (American Ornithologists’ Union 1998). Baltimore Orioles nest in open and semi-open habitats with a scattering of large 390 sF-lidanre)a-mOlale) (= Icterus galbula trees, including riparian woods, forest edges, parks, residen- tial areas, farms, and orchards. They often nest in cotton- woods and sycamores and had also favored American elms prior to their demise from Dutch elm disease. Their gourd- shaped nests are constructed of string-like plant fibers, often stolen from other active or inactive oriole nests (Rising and Flood 1998) and suspended from the outer branches high off the ground in mature trees. Nest success is generally high and successful nest parasitism is low because adult orioles eject cowbirds eggs from their nests (Sealy and Neudorf 1995; Rising and Flood 1998). The Baltimore Oriole population has benefited from the increase in edge habitat created by the clearing of the forests and has adapted to nesting around human habitations (Rising and Flood 1998). Illinois History During the late 1800s and early 1900s, the Baltimore Oriole was a common summer resident in Illinois (Cory 1909). Although the Baltimore Oriole was reported throughout the state in the 1907-1909 and 1956-1958 censuses, the data were insufficient for a comparison (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimate for the Baltimore Oriole population in Illinois is 0.8% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.19) from 1966 to 2000. The trend for the same period for the upper Midwest is estimated at —0.2% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.47); however, BBS data indicate a significant increase of 2.6% per year (P < 0.01) from 1966 to 1979 followed by a signifi- cant decrease of —1.2% per year (P < 0.01) from 1980 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The Baltimore Oriole was widely distributed throughout the state; it was reported in priority blocks in all counties and confirmed as breeding in 95 of them. It was one of the most frequently reported and widespread species in priority blocks and may have occurred in most of the priority blocks. Frequency The Baltimore Oriole was reported from 813 (81.5%) priority blocks and 135 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 503 (50.4%) of the priority blocks. The most frequently used breeding evidence criteria for these 503 records were adults feeding young, fledged young, and occupied nest (142 FY, 113 FL records, and 112 ON records, respectively). It is likely that Baltimore Orioles nested in most blocks in which they were reported. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 503 50.4 61.9 589 45.8 Probable 142 14.2 17.5 164 12.8 Possible 168 16.8 20.7 195 1S.2 Totals 813 81.5 100.0 948 73.7 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& ® Probable ix Possible ie O Breeding Bird Survey Trends @ | | Be fi Oe BB ae BD Og B B&B 2ée Ss ] @ Illinois 87 6+ B41 e ane oO 4 De = 1 - oe - egy e 2+ 0+ + : . : : + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 8 5 6 + + 1971 ah + + + 1976 1981 1986 1991 Year 1966 + 1 1996 2000 ia Baltimore Oriole 39] House Finch Carpodacus mexicanus Dennis Oehmke COT: (a 5 CO) | Rangewide Distribution: native to the western U.S., now all of the U.S. and extreme southern Canada, south through Mexico. ILLINOIS Abundance: common permanent resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: areas with ornamental plantings, especially evergreens. Nest: a cup of twigs, grass, debris, leaves, and rootlets, in trees, ornamental plants or on ledges under the eaves of buildings. Eggs: 4-5, bluish white or pale bluish gray, sparsely marked with brown or black, often wreathed. Incubation: 13-14 days. Fledging: from 11 to 19 days. The House Finch is native to western North America but has spread throughout the eastern U.S. from a few birds released in New York in 1942 (Robbins et al. 1986). This species now commonly breeds throughout the U.S., southern Canada, and much of Mexico. The House Finch may be unique among “non-native” species in eastern North American because it is attractive, has a pleasant song, and is not yet considered a pest. The House Finch has quickly moved into habitats that used to be the unchallenged domain of the House Sparrow and appears to be as successful as the House Sparrow. The impact of the introduction of the House Finch on the House 392 Sparrow population is not yet clear. In the East the House Finch inhabits urban and suburban areas almost exclusively. Nesting is strongly correlated with human habitation; common sites include small conifers, vines, hedges, and buildings. Females often have more than one brood in a season and occasionally begin second clutches several days before the first clutch has fledged (Evenden 1957; Hill 1993). House Finches are attracted to bird feeders, where they may pose a potential health threat to other birds by serving as a host for the spread of the eye disease conjunc- tivitis. Illinois History The first report of this species in Illinois was in November 1971 at Mt. Vernon in southern Illinois (Bohlen 1989) and the first nest was reported in 1982 at Robinson in Crawford County (Goff and Goff 1982). In the 18 years between the first known breeding attempt in 1982 and the year 2000, the House Finch has become a common breeding species throughout the state with an expansion comparable to that of the House Sparrow and European Starling. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The trend estimates for the House Finch populations are 23.0% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for Illinois and 22.2% per year (significant, P < 0.01) for the upper Midwest for the period 1966 to 2000. Population increases have been dramatic since the late 1980s. Credibility Index: IL = 3 and UM = 3. Distribution By the end of the atlas project, House Finches were found in 88 of the state’s 102 counties. It was most frequently reported from priority blocks in the eastern part of the state. In Illinois the House Finch population has expanded from east to west and it is now a common species. Frequency The House Finch was reported from 411 (41.2%) priority blocks and 113 nonpriority blocks. House Finches were relatively easy to detect and confirm because of their association with human habitations. Breeding was Con- firmed in 225 (22.5%) of the priority blocks, most frequently by observation of fledged young (97 FL records) and adults feeding young (41 FY records). House Finches may have bred in all the blocks in which they were recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 225 22.5 54.7 300 DENS Probable 90 9.0 21.9 108 8.4 Possible 96 9.6 23.4 116 9.0 Totals 411 41.2 100.0 524 = 40.7 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _ % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed #& & Probable Possible C] O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 48 421 364 30+ 0 ‘ 4 | n { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 0 + + + t { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year House Finch 393 BN ae: Joe Milosevich Code: RECR Rangewide Distribution: Alaska and the southern half of Canada through the U.S. except the southern states to Central America; also Europe, Asia, and northern Africa. 115 Fi [e) Abundance: uncommon and irregular winter resident, very occasional summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: coniferous and mixed coniferous- deciduous forests. Nest: a bulky, loosely built cup of twigs, grass, moss, rootlets, and bark strips lined with feathers, moss, and lichens, on a horizontal branch of a tree. Eggs: 3-4, pale bluish or greenish white, spotted with browns or purples (mostly at large end). Incubation: 12—18 days. Fledging: from 15 to 20 days. In North America, Red Crossbills breed primarily in the western U.S., western and southern Canada, and parts of Mexico. Wandering birds occasionally nest as far south as the Gulf states. Red Crossbills inhabit mature coniferous forests with abundant cone crops. Its distinctive bill, with curved mandibles crossed at the tip, is an adaptation for prying open cones in order to extract the seeds. This finch 394 a {=\e Mt @y gey-s-) 0) |] Mey (EM aUiaetic. relies almost solely on conifer seeds for food. Nomadic movements and a long potential breeding season are adapta- tions to the variable availability of its food source (Adkisson 1996). Red Crossbills may breed in every month of the year somewhere in its worldwide range (Benkman 1990). Illinois History The Red Crossbill is not considered a regular breeding species in Illinois, which is at the southern edge of the breeding range. The first recorded nests occurred in McLean and Lake counties in 1973, followed by two records in Sangamon County in 1976 (Bohlen 1989). Only the nest at Illinois Beach State Park in Lake County was successful. Summer observations in the Sand Ridge State Forest in Mason County during the 1980s suggest possible nesting there. Breeding Bird Survey Trends Trends are difficult to estimate for nomadic species such as the Red Crossbill. Illinois does not have a stable breeding population of Red Crossbills and BBS data are not adequate for estimating trends for this species. The trend for 1966— 2000 is estimated at 9.7% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.21) for the upper Midwest; the small relative abundance and sample size contribute to the low credibility index. Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 3. Distribution All records of nesting Red Crossbills in Illinois are notewor- thy. During the atlas project, they were limited to mature coniferous trees at the Morton Arboretum in DuPage County. Red Crossbills are irregular breeders and could potentially breed in expansive tracts of evergreens, such as those at Sand Ridge State Forest in Mason County, Big River State Forest in Henderson County, Lowden-Miller State Forest in Ogle County, and Illinois Beach State Park in Lake County. Frequency The Red Crossbill was reported from one (0.1%) priority block and three nonpriority blocks (two of which are adjacent to the priority block in DuPage County). Breeding was Confirmed in the priority block (a female observed building a nest at the Morton Arboretum) and two of the nonpriority blocks. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 1 0.1 100.0 3 0.2 Probable 0 0.0 0.0 1 0.1 Possible 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 1 0.1 100.0 4 0.3 * 998 priority blocks ** ],286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ @ Probable & Possible & O Red Crossbill a7 Pine Siskin Carduelis pinus Eric Walters LOFiTs (ha od fey | Rangewide Distribution: southern Alaska and the Yolet sores uals eFel0uce) a @rtoreler-Mcome)ilielous Wy (c.elnen ILLINOIS Abundance: common (irregular) migrant and winter resident, occasional summer resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: coniferous and mixed coniferous- deciduous forests, woodlands, parks, suburbs. Nest: a saucer of twigs, rootlets, and grass lined with fine rootlets, moss, fur, and feathers, in a tree. Eggs: 3-4, pale greenish blue, spotted with browns or black, usually wreathed. Incubation: 13 days. Fledging: from 14 to 15 days. Pine Siskins breed in the western and northern U.S. and western and southern Canada; sporadic breeding occurs as far south as a line from Oklahoma to New Jersey and in the Appalachian Mountains. Known for nomadic and irruptive winter wanderings, Fine Siskins are sometimes common and other times rare or absent at a given location, possibly as a response to variability in the abundance of seeds. These small finches primarily inhabit coniferous or mixed conifer- ous-deciduous habitats in forests, parks, and residential areas. The gregarious siskins often forage in flocks and are attracted to bird feeders with sunflower or niger (thistle) seeds. They nest in loose colonies (Weaver and West 1943; 396 Dawson 1997) and nests are usually built in conifers and concealed in the foliage (Bohlen 1989). Pair formation and nesting may begin as early as late February. In cold climates nesting females are fed by their mates while incubating in order to protect the eggs and young from freezing tempera- tures (Dawson 1997). Illinois History Pine Siskins regularly breed as far south as Minnesota and Wisconsin but breeding attempts in Illinois are apparently recent as early accounts of the Pine Siskin in Illinois are non- existent. Chapel (1984) provided a detailed chronology of Pine Siskin nests in Illinois, the first of which occurred in McLean County in 1973. Between 1976 and 1981 four more nesting attempts were made and two of those resulted in successfully fledged young. In 1982 a number of breeding attempts were reported, including eight in Urbana (Champaign County) and four at widely scattered locations in northern Illinois; about half of these nests were successful. Sporadic nesting has continued in recent years. Most, if not all, Illinois nests have been found in conifers. Breeding Bird Survey Trends The BBS does not adequately sample the Pine Siskin population in Illinois, which is localized and small. For the upper Midwest, the trend estimate is 5.7% per year (nonsig- nificant, P = 0.07). Credibility Index: IL = none and UM = 2. Distribution Atlas data indicate that the Pine Siskin continues to be a rare and sporadic breeding species in Illinois. It was reported in priority blocks from seven counties and Confirmed as breeding in three of them. To date, the southernmost breed- ing records are in Sangamon and Champaign counties, with numerous records of nesting or attempted nesting in Urbana. Frequency The Pine Siskin was reported from 10 (1.0%) priority blocks and 12 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 3 of the priority blocks, one each in Champaign, DuPage and Winnebago counties. The breeding evidence criteria for the priority block records were nest building (2 NB records) and nest with young (1 NY record). Nesting may have occurred in some of the priority blocks with Probable or Possible records. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks with records blocks Confirmed 3 0.3 30.0 8 0.6 Probable 4 0.4 40.0 9 0.7 Possible 3 0.3 30.0 5 0.4 Totals 10 1.0 100.0 22 ee * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority % of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ r) Probable C @ Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Upper Midwest 0.5+ 0 + : + + + 19 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Pine Siskin 397 rVontslalerclamerelleiiiareds| Carduelis tristis Dennis Oehmke t Oriys (Wy (O26) Rangewide Distribution: southern Canada and most of the U.S., south to northern Mexico. 11 Hil @) fe Abundance: very common migrant, summer resident and winter resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: weedy and cultivated fields, open deciduous and riparian woodlands. Nest: a cup of forbs and other pliable vegetation lined with plant down, in a shrub or small tree. Eggs: 4—6, pale blue or bluish white. Incubation: 10-12 days. Fledging: from 11 to 17 days. The American Goldfinch is an abundant bird with plenty of aliases, including thistle bird and wild canary. This small finch breeds in much of the U.S. from north of the southern tier of states to southern Canada. The highly gregarious Goldfinch is found in flocks except during their brief reproductive period from late June through September. During the winter, flocks are nomadic, driven by the search for food. Goldfinches occur in weedy fields, floodplain forests, forest edges, early second-growth forests, pastures, and suburban areas; they prefer weedy fields with scattered brush for nesting. Goldfinches are almost exclusively seed eaters and have an affinity for thistle as a source of food and nesting material. They are common at bird feeders with niger 398 (thistle) and sunflower seeds, especially in winter. Nests are placed in thistle (Cirsium spp.) or in a sturdy upright fork of a deciduous shrub or small tree from 3 to 15 feet above ground. Nesting begins relatively late in the summer (late June through September) and the goldfinch usually has only one brood per year. Goldfinches rarely raise Brown-headed Cowbird chicks successfully, perhaps because their seed diet is nutritionally insufficient for cowbirds (Holcomb 1969; Middleton 1977). Illinois History The American Goldfinch was a common to abundant summer resident in Illinois a century ago (Cory 1909) and remains so today (Bohlen 1989). It is a native species that has successfully adapted to the changes in the landscape during the twentieth century. Graber and Graber (1963) found that the population remained virtually unchanged between 1909 and 1957, and that the greatest densities occurred in the northern part of the state. Breeding Bird Survey Trends From 1966 to 2000 the trends for the American Goldfinch population are estimated at —0.5% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.56) in Illinois and 0.0% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.96) for the upper Midwest. BBS data from 1966 to 1979 for the upper Midwest indicate a decline of -4.5% per year (significant, P < 0.01), which was followed by an increase of 1.0% per year (significant, P < 0.01) from 1980 to 2000. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution The American Goldfinch was reported in all 102 counties and was one of the most frequently reported species from priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4). It probably breeds in every Illinois township. Frequency The American Goldfinch was reported from 966 (96.8%) priority blocks and 177 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 238 (23.8%) of the priority blocks, most frequently by observation of nest building (102 NB records) followed by fledged young (37 FL records) and adults feeding young (35 FY records). Even though the goldfinch was an easy species to detect, its nesting activities occur relatively late in the season. Consequently, by the time goldfinches began nesting, the surveys for some blocks had been completed for the season. The goldfinch may have nested in nearly all priority blocks. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 238 23.8 24.6 epee) Probable = 557 55.8 ot Fe) 638 49.6 Possible 171 17.1 ey: 183 14.2 Totals 966 96.8 100.0 1,143 88.9 * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for g for this species) this species bs a Priority Nonpriority ry Confirmed #& 8 = Probable a © = Possible O = Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 167 14 ‘ ° > 10+ . : : * > 5 8 ee a or) ° << 0 - or e . 6+ . Al 2+ 0 BF + =f + =; + + { 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 2+ 0 + + + 4 ' + A 196605 1971, 1976 19819 1986, 1991 1996 2000 Year rVinl-alorc mele elie be, House Sparrow Passer domesticus Deak Och tOiys (Hs s (ON) Rangewide Distribution: Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, southern half of Canada, south through all of the U.S. to Panama. ILLINOIS Abundance: abundant permanent resident. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open areas especially around human habitations. Nest: a spherical cavity of grass and forbs lined with feathers and hair, in a building, tree, or cavity. Eggs: 4—6, white, greenish or bluish, marked with gray or brown. Incubation: 10-13 days. Fledging: from 14 to 17 days. The House Sparrow is an Old World species that was first successfully introduced into the U.S. in New York in the 1850s and into other states in subsequent years. It spread quickly throughout North America and grew to an estimated continental population of 150 million by 1943 (Wing 1943). It breeds in the southern half of Canada and throughout the U.S., with the greatest abundance in the Midwest and the eastern U.S. (Lowther and Cink 1992; Jackson et al. 1996). The House Sparrow is suited to nearly all habitats in rural, suburban, and urban environments, except heavily forested areas. House Sparrows are loosely colonial and nest wher- ever Cavities or semi-enclosed spaces are available, including buildings, trees, and nest boxes. It usurps the cavities used by native species, such as bluebirds, swallows, chickadees, and titmice. Nesting begins early in the spring and a pair may raise two or three broods per season (Will 1973; Lowther 1983). House Sparrows eat primarily grain (e.g., corn, oats, 400 and wheat) and weed seeds. In recent years urban birds have found an easy protein source on the grills of parked cars. The House Sparrow is a conservation concern because of its impact on native species. In recent decades the North American population has generally declined, due in part to more intensive farming practices (Lowther and Cink 1992). Illinois History The arrival of the House Sparrow in Illinois is the result of four introductions between 1868 and 1876 (Barrows 1889). It spread rapidly and occupied all of Illinois by 1886. This led Ridgway (1889) to comment, “Concerning this unmiti- gated pest we have little to say, further than to bewail the misfortune of its introduction, and to plead for its extermina- tion. It is in every respect a first-class nuisance, to be classed along with the house-rat and other noxious vermin.” Cory (1909) added that it “has now unfortunately become very numerous . . . and is most pugnacious, driving away our native insectivorous birds, and has proved itself a most undesirable addition to our avifauna.’” The summer popula- tion remained nearly constant between the 1909 and 1957 censuses; the summer population was estimated at over five million birds in 1958 (Graber and Graber 1963). Breeding Bird Survey Trends Sample size and relative abundance for the House Sparrow are among the highest for all species analyzed by the BBS in the state and the region. According to BBS data, the House Sparrow population declined at —2.6% per year (significant, P <0.01) in Illinois and —2.3% per year (significant, P < 0.01) in the upper Midwest from 1966 to 2000. The decline in the House Sparrow population in Illinois coincided with the arrival of the House Finch leading to speculation of a link between the two trends. Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution As expected, the House Sparrow was abundant and widely distribution in the state during the atlas project. It was found and Confirmed in all counties. The House Sparrow was one of the most frequently reported species from priority blocks during the atlas project (Table 4). It may breed in every Illinois township. Frequency The House Sparrow was reported from 988 (99.0%) priority blocks and 180 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 953 (95.5%) of the priority blocks, with the most fre- quently used breeding evidence criteria being occupied nest, nest with young, adults feeding young, and fledged young (305 ON, 167 NY, 152 FY, and 148 FL records, respectively). It is possible that the House Sparrow bred in all of the priority blocks and the majority of nonpriority blocks as well. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 953 95.5 065991102 85:7 Probable 20 2.0 2.0 36 28 om eee Possible 15 1.5 1.5 30 ps sme cmon Totals 988 99.0 100.0 1,168 90.8 ees * 998 priority blocks ** |,286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority _% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @& a Probable eo @ Possible O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois 2727 238; 204} + 170; 3136+ 0 1024 68+ 34+ Q +— -+-- —-+- + + + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest 272 23 2 Oo +— —+— +— + 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year House Sparrow 401 Dennis Oehmke Code: ETSP Rangewide Distribution: Europe, Asia; central U.S. along the Mississippi and Illinois rivers between St. Louis, MO, and Rock Island, IL. ILLINOIS Abundance: common permanent resident in the west- central counties. Endangered/Threatened Status: none. Breeding Habitat: open areas, especially around rural human habitations; near cattle and pig lots. Nest: a cup of grass and forbs lined with feathers, in a tree cavity or artificial nest box. Eggs: 4—6, white to pale gray, marked with browns. Incubation: 13-14 days. Fledging: from 12 to 14 days. The Eurasian Tree Sparrow is an Old World species with an extensive range in Europe and Asia. A small number of individuals were released in the U.S. in St. Louis, Missouri, in 1870. Although a population was quickly established in St. Louis, the Eurasian Tree Sparrow was displaced in urban areas by the subsequent arrival of the House Sparrow (Widmann 1889 in Barlow and Leckie 2000). Presently Eurasian Tree Sparrows primarily inhabit wooded parks, farms, rural woodlots, and hedgerows. In the U.S. this species is limited to Illinois, Missouri, and Iowa with the population currently centered in west-central Illinois along the Illinois River. This species is a cavity nester and may produce three broods per year. The Eurasian Tree Sparrow is a close relative of the House Sparrow and is similar in Eurasian Tree Sparrow Passer montanus appearance, behavior, and nesting requirements. When these two species compete for nest sites, the House Sparrow generally dominates (Anderson 1978; Barlow and Leckie 2000). Its modest population growth and range expansion may be primarily due to less successful competition with the House Sparrow (Anderson 1978). Illinois History In April of 1870, a small number of Eurasian Tree Sparrows (along with House Sparrows and several other Old World finches from Germany) were introduced into the St. Louis area (Flieg 1971; Barlow and Leckie 2000). That small group flourished and remained fairly local on the Missouri side of the Mississippi River for decades. Cory (1909) stated that the Eurasian Tree Sparrow would probably be observed in Illinois “in the near future.” An exact first occurrence for [llinois is not known. The Eurasian Tree Sparrow population may be experiencing growth in IIlinois, as evidenced by Spring and Christmas Bird Counts (Bohlen 1989). Breeding Bird Survey Trends In Illinois the long-term trend estimate for the Eurasian Tree Sparrow population indicates an increase of 6.7% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.18). The long-term estimate for the upper Midwest is 6.6% per year (nonsignificant, P = 0.17). Credibility Index: IL = 2 and UM = 2. Distribution During the atlas project, the Eurasian Tree Sparrow was found in priority blocks in 23 counties and Confirmed as breeding in 20 of them. It is limited to west-central Illinois from the St. Louis area in the south to Henderson County in the north. This species actually occurs farther north than the atlas records indicate—to Mercer and Rock Island counties along the Mississippi River and Tazewell County along the Illinois River. The population may be expanding even farther up both river systems. Frequency The Eurasian Tree Sparrow was reported from 144 (14.4%) priority blocks and 4 nonpriority blocks. Breeding was Confirmed in 111 (11.1%) of the priority blocks, mostly by observation of occupied nests (31 ON records), adults feeding young (27 FY records), and fledged young (27 FL records). This was a relatively easy species to identify and confirm and nesting probably occurred in all blocks in which it was recorded. Breeding Evidence Priority Blocks * All Blocks ** No. % Sampled % Blocks No. % Sampled Blocks — with records blocks Confirmed 111 Lil 77.1 114 8.9 Probable 13 ie 9.0 14 1.1 Possible 20 2.0 13.9 20 1.6 Totals 144 14.4 100.0 148 Li * 998 priority blocks ** | 286 total blocks (priority and nonpriority) % of 998 sampled priority —_% of priority blocks blocks (gray = no records with records for for this species) this species Priority Nonpriority Confirmed @ a Probable ae @ Possible [eal O Breeding Bird Survey Trends Illinois Count + - + + + + + 4 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2000 Year Upper Midwest a+ 2+ 0 + + : t ' - 1960 1971 19765 1981 Year 1986 1991 + 1996 2000 Eurasian Tree Sparrow 403 Appendix A. County index for sampled atlas blocks. The name of the 7.5-minute quadrangle in which the block occurs is listed. Blocks occurring in more than one county were assigned to the county with the most area in the block. Codes for priority blocks end in ‘‘3”’. County Quadrangle Block County Quadrangle Block County Quadrangle Block Adams Augusta 136B3 Calhoun Grafton 222B3 Clark Moriah 208B3 Adams Bowen 135A3 Calhoun Hamburg 197B3 Clark Snyder 182C3 Adams Camp Point 135D3 Calhoun Nutwood 197D3 Clark West Union 209B3 Adams Clayton 136C3 Calhoun Pleasant Dale Valley 194C1 Clark Westfield East 183B3 Adams Coatsburg 135C3 Calhoun Pleasant Dale Valley 194C3 Clay Clay City 232A3 Adams Columbus 164B3 Carroll Blackhawk 020B3 Clay Flora 232B3 Adams Fishhook 163C3 Carroll Blackhawk 020B4 Clay Louisville East 214C3 Adams Kellerville 163B3 Carroll Boone Branch 021A3 Clay Louisville West 215D3 Adams Liberty 164A3 Carroll Brookville 022C3 Clay Sailor Springs 214D3 Adams Lima 134B3 Carroll Fairhaven 040B3 Clay Xenia NE 231A3 Adams Long Island 134C3 Carroll Hazelhurst 039B3 Clinton Beckemeyer 228C3 Adams Loraine 135B3 Carroll Lanark 021D3 Clinton Boulder 229B3 Adams Marblehead 165D3 Carroll Loran 021B3 Clinton Breese 227D3 Adams Mendon 134D3 Carroll Milledgeville 040A3 Clinton Carlyle 228D3 Adams Payson 164C3 Carroll Mount Carroll 021C3 Clinton Centralia West 229C3 Adams Quincy East 165A3 Carroll Pleasant Valley 020A3 Clinton Keyesport 228A3 Adams Richfield 164D3 Carroll Shannon 022B3 Clinton St. Rose 227A3 Adams Tioga 134A3 Carroll Thomson 041A3 Clinton Stolletown 228B3 Alexander Cache 283D3 Carroll Wacker 020D3 Coles Arcola 178A6 Alexander Cairo 284C3 Cass Arenzville East 161A3 Coles Ashmore 179D3 Alexander Dongola 280C3 Cass Arenzville West 161B3 Coles Ashmore 179D5 Alexander McClure 281C3 Cass Ashland 160A3 Coles Charleston North 179C3 Alexander Mill Creek 281D3 Cass Clear Lake 138D3 Coles Charleston South 184B2 Alexander Tamms 283A3 Cass Newmansville 139D3 Coles Charleston South 184B3 Alexander Thebes 283B3 Cass Virginia 160B3 Coles Charleston South 184B4 Bond Beaver Creek 218C3 Champaign Allerton 151B3 Coles Charleston South 184B6 Bond Greenville 218B3 Champaign Bondville 146D2 Coles Cooks Mills 178C3 Bond Mulberry Grove 218A3 Champaign Bondville 146D3 Coles Humboldt 178D3 Bond Pleasant Mound 218D3 Champaign _Bondville 146D5 Coles Kansas 180C3 Bond Pocahontas 219D3 Champaign — Fisher 120D3 Coles Mattoon East 185A2 Bond Sorento South 219A3 Champaign — Flatville 147A3 Coles Mattoon East 185A3 Boone Belvidere NE O11A3 Champaign Gifford 119D3 Coles Mattoon West 185B3 Boone Belvidere North 011D3 Champaign Homer 148C3 Coles Westfield West 184A3 Boone Belvidere South 025A3 Champaign Longview 152A3 Cook Arlington Heights 029C1 Boone Caledonia 011C6 Champaign Mahomet 146B2 Cook Arlington Heights 029C2 Boone Capron 010B3 Champaign Penfield 118C1 Cook Arlington Heights 029C3 Boone Garden Prairie 010C3 Champaign Penfield 118C3 Cook Arlington Heights 029C4 Boone Riley 026B3 Champaign Rankin 118B5 Cook Arlington Heights 029C5 Brown Cooperstown 162A3 Champaign Rantoul 119C3 Cook Arlington Heights 029C6 Brown Lake Mt. Sterling = 136D3 Champaign — Rising 146A3 Cook Barrington 028B5 Brown Mount Sterling 163A3 Champaign Royal 148B3 Cook Barrington 028B6 Brown Ripley 137C3 Champaign St. Joseph 147D3 Cook Berwyn 032D1 Brown Versailles 162B3 Champaign Thomasboro 147B3 Cook Berwyn 032D2 Bureau Buda 064C3 Champaign Thomasboro 147B5 Cook Berwyn 032D3 Bureau Buda Northeast 064A3 Champaign Tolono 153A3 Cook Berwyn 032D4 Bureau Depue 063D3 Champaign Urbana 147Cl Cook Berwyn 032D5 Bureau La Moille 048D3 Champaign Urbana 147C3 Cook Berwyn 032D6 Bureau Ladd 062B3 Champaign Villa Grove NW 152B3 Cook Blue Island 055B1 Bureau Malden 063A3 Christian Clarksdale 189A3 Cook Blue Island O55B2 Bureau Manlius 064B3 Christian Grove City 174A3 Cook Blue Island 055B3 Bureau Mendota West 049C3 Christian Morrisonville 189B3 Cook Blue Island 055B4 Bureau Mineral 065A3 Christian Niantic 156C3 Cook Blue Island 055B6 Bureau Neponset 065D3 Christian Owaneco 188B3 Cook Calumet City 0S55D1 Bureau New Bedford 047C3 Christian Pana 188A3 Cook Calumet City 055D2 Bureau Ohio 048C3 Christian Stonington 175B3 Cook Calumet City 055D3 Bureau Princeton North 063B3 Christian Taylorville 174D3 Cook Calumet City 055D4 Bureau Princeton South 063C3 Christian Willeys 175C3 Cook Calumet City 055D5 Bureau Putnam 078B3 Clark Annapolis 208A3 Cook Chicago Loop 031B1 Bureau Walnut 047D3 Clark Casey 183C3 Cook Chicago Loop 031B2 Bureau Whitefield 077A3 Clark Clark Center 183D3 Cook Chicago Loop 031B3 Bureau Wyanet 064D3 Clark Clarksville 183A3 Cook Chicago Loop 031B4 Bureau Yorktown 046D3 Clark Dennison 182A3 Cook Chicago Loop 031B5 Calhoun Annada 195D3 Clark Fairbanks 209A3 Cook Chicago Loop 031B6 Calhoun Brussels 223A3 Clark Hutton 182D3 Cook Chicago Loop East 031A5 Calhoun Foley 197C3 Clark Marshall 182B3 Cook Dyer 056A 1 405 Appendix A (cont.). County Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook 406 Quadrangle Dyer Elmhurst Elmhurst Englewood Englewood Englewood Englewood Englewood Evanston Evanston Evanston Evanston Evanston Harvey Harvey Harvey Harvey Harvey Harvey Highland Park Highland Park Hinsdale Hinsdale Hinsdale Jackson Park Jackson Park Jackson Park Lake Calumet Lake Calumet Lake Calumet Lake Calumet Lake Zurich Lake Zurich Mokena Palatine Palatine Palatine Palatine Palatine Palatine Palos Park Palos Park Palos Park Palos Park Palos Park Palos Park Park Ridge Park Ridge Park Ridge Park Ridge Park Ridge Park Ridge River Forest River Forest River Forest River Forest River Forest River Forest Sag Bridge Sag Bridge Sag Bridge Sag Bridge Steger Steger Streamwood Streamwood Block 056A2 032B2 032B6 031C1 031C2 031C3 031C4 031CS5 030C1 030C3 030C4 030CS5 030C6 055C1 055C2 055C3 O055C4 O55C5 055C6 029A5 029A6 032C2 032C4 032C6 031D1 031D3 031D5 055A3 OS55A4 O55A5 055A6 028A5 028A6 054C2 028D1 028D2 028D3 028D4 028D5 028D6 054A] 054A2 054A3 054A4 O054A5 054A6 029D1 029D2 029D3 029D4 029D5 029D6 032A1 032A2 032A3 032A4 032A5 032A6 054B2 054B3 054B4 054B6 O56B 1 056B2 028C1 028C2 County Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Crawford Crawford Crawford Crawford Crawford Crawford Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland Cumberland DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb DeWitt DeWitt DeWitt DeWitt DeWitt DeWitt DeWitt Douglas Douglas Douglas Douglas Douglas Douglas Douglas Douglas DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage Quadrangle Streamwood Streamwood Streamwood Streamwood Tinley Park Tinley Park Tinley Park Tinley Park Tinley Park Wheeling Wheeling Eaton Flat Rock Heathsville Hutsonville Merom Stoy Greenup Hazel Dell Johnstown Neoga Toledo Union Center Woodbury De Kalb Genoa Hinckley Hinckley Kirkland Shabbona Grove Shabbona Grove Somonauk Somonauk Somonauk Somonauk Sycamore Waterman Waterman Clinton Dewitt Farmer City South Kenney Maroa Waynesville East Weldon West Arcola Arthur Hindsboro Murdock Newman Oakland Tuscola Villa Grove Elmhurst Hinsdale Lombard Lombard Naperville Naperville Naperville Naperville Normantown Normantown Romeoville Romeoville West Chicago Block 028C3 028C4 028C5 028C6 054D1 054D2 054D3 054D4 054D6 029B5 029B6 208D3 211B3 211A3 209G3 209D3 212A3 207B3 207A3 185D3 185C3 184C3 184D3 206A3 036A3 026C3 035C3 035C6 025D3 OSOA1 050A3 O51B1 051B3 051B5 051B6 035B3 036D3 036D5 144B3 144A3 145B3 143D3 144C3 143A3 144D3 178A3 178B3 179B3 152D3 Pyles} 179A3 153D3 [5263 032B3 032C3 033A3 033A4 033C1 033C2 033C3 033C4 053B1 053B2 O53A1 053A2 033B1 County DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage Edgar Edgar Edgar Edgar Edgar Edgar Edgar Edgar Edgar Edgar Edwards Edwards Edwards Edwards Edwards Edwards Effingham Effingham Effingham Effingham Effingham Effingham Effingham Effingham Effingham Fayette Fayette Fayette Fayette Fayette Fayette Fayette Fayette Fayette Fayette Fayette Fayette Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Ford Franklin Franklin Franklin Franklin Franklin Franklin Franklin Franklin Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Quadrangle West Chicago West Chicago West Chicago Wheaton Wheaton Wheaton Wheaton Brocton Chrisman Grandview Hume Paris North Paris South Redmon Saint Bernice Sandford Scottland Albion North Albion South Berryville Bone Gap Grayville West Salem Altamont East Dieterich Eberle Edgewood Effingham North Effingham South Hord Shumway Teutopolis Altamont West Avena Beecher City Brownstown Hagarstown Herrick Loogootee Ramsey Ramsey Lake Vandalia Vera Wildcat Lake Buckley Northwest Cabery Gibson City East Melvin East Melvin West Paxton Perdueville Piper City Rankin Akin Christopher Ewing Macedonia Rend Lake Dam Sesser Thompsonville West Frankfort Banner Bath Blyton Canton Duck Island Block 033B3 033B5 033B6 033D1 033D3 033D4 033D6 180B3 150C3 180D3 151D3 181B3 181C3 180A3 181A3 181D3 150D3 239A3 239D3 234C3 238B3 238C3 233D3 205C3 206C3 214B3 215B3 205A3 205D3 215A3 205B3 206B3 204D3 204C3 204A3 216B3 217B3 204B3 216A3 203A3 203B3 217A3 203D3 217 ES 114B3 O088B3 120A3 114C3 113D3 119A3 119B3 088C3 118B3 262B3 264A3 255D3 256C3 29565 254D3 263A3 263B3 107C3 139B3 105D3 106D3 126B3 Appendix A (cont.). County Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Gallatin Gallatin Gallatin Gallatin Gallatin Greene Greene Greene Greene Greene Greene Greene Greene Greene Greene Greene Grundy Grundy Grundy Grundy Grundy Grundy Grundy Grundy Grundy Grundy Hamilton Hamilton Hamilton Hamilton Hamilton Hamilton Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Hardin Hardin Hardin Hardin Henderson Henderson Henderson Henderson Henderson Henderson Henderson Quadrangle Duncan Mills Fairview Farmington West Fiatt Havana Ipava Lewistown London Mills Smithfield St. David Equality New Haven SW Ridgway Shawneetown Wabash Island Athensville Boyer Creek Carrollton Daum Greenfield Hardin Jerseyville North Kampsville Pearl East Roodhouse East Roodhouse West Coal City Coal City Coal City Gardner Lisbon Mazon Minooka Minooka Morris Stavanger Belle Prairie City Broughton Bungay McLeansboro Thackeray Walpole Bentley Burnside Carthage East Carthage West Colusa Fountain Green Hamilton La Harpe Niota Plymouth Sutter Warsaw West Point Dekoven Karbers Ridge Rosiclare Saline Mines Burlington Gladstone Kirkwood West Lomax Raritan Rozetta Seaton Block 1273 106B3 106A3 106C3 127D3 128D3 127B3 105A3 128A3 127A3 274A3 260C3 261D3 275B3 260D3 192B3 198B3 193C3 193D3 192€3 197A3 198A3 194D3 194A3 193A3 193B3 059D1 059D3 059D4 082A3 059B3 082B3 O0S9A3 OS9A6 059C3 060A3 256A3 261B3 257B3 256D3 2 GS 262A3 131D3 102D3 131A3 131B3 102C3 130B3 132A3 103C3 101D3 130C3 132D3 [3263 WSES 275D3 274D3 277A3 TCE: 100D3 099C3 099D3 102A3 103A3 099A3 072D3 County Henderson Henry Henry Henry Henry Henry Henry Henry Henry Henry Henry Henry Henry Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois [Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Jackson Jackson Jackson Jackson Jackson Jackson Jackson Jackson Jackson Jackson Jackson Jackson Jasper Jasper Jasper Jasper Jasper Jasper Jasper Jasper Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jersey Quadrangle Stronghurst Annawan Atkinson Cambridge Galva Geneseo German Corner Hooppole Kewanee North Kewanee South Nekoma Spring Hill Woodhull Beaverville Buckley Cissna Park Claytonville Clifton Crescent City Darrow Donovan Gilman L’Erable La Hogue Milford Milford Onarga East Onarga West Piper City Northeast Sheldon Stockland Watseka Wellington Woodworth Ava Carbondale De Soto Elkville Gorham Murphysboro Oraville Pomona Pomona Raddle Vergennes Willisville Latona Newton Oblong North Oblong South Rose Hill Ste. Marie Wheeler Yale Bluford Dahlgren Harmony Ina Kell Mt. Vernon Opdyke Spring Garden Walnut Hill Waltonville Woodlawn Brighton Block 103B3 065B3 066A3 066C3 075A3 066B3 066D3 046C3 065C3 076B3 O075B3 045D3 074A3 086B3 114D3 115C3 115D3 087B3 087D3 116A3 086A3 087C3 087A3 088D3 116B1 116B3 115B3 114A3 088A3 086D3 116D3 086C3 116C3 115A3 265B3 271B3 264C3 264B3 270B3 265D3 265C3 270A3 270A5 266D3 265A3 266A3 214A3 213B3 208C3 212B3 207C3 213A3 206D3 207D3 241C3 256B3 242A3 255B3 242B3 242C3 242D3 255A3 243A3 254A3 243D3 199C3 County Jersey Jersey Jersey Jersey Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Johnson Johnson Johnson Johnson Johnson Johnson Johnson Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kendall Kendall Quadrangle Elsah Jerseyville South Medora Otterville Elizabeth Elizabeth NE Galena Green Island Green Island Hanover Hanover Hanover Kent Kent Menominee Scales Mound East Scales Mound West Stockton Warren Bloomfield Creal Springs Glendale Goreville Karnak Stonefort Vienna Aurora North Aurora North Aurora North Aurora North Big Rock Elburn Elburn Elgin Elgin Elgin Elgin Geneva Geneva Geneva Hampshire Maple Park Pingree Grove Pingree Grove Plano Sugar Grove Sugar Grove Beecher West Bonfield Bourbonnais Bradley Buckingham Essex Essex Herscher Illiana Heights Illiana Heights Kankakee Kankakee Leesville Momence Momence St. Anne West Kankakee Aurora South Newark Block 222A3 198D3 199B3 198C3 016C3 016A3 017B3 O19A1 O19A2 017D3 017D5 017D6 015C1 015C3 018A3 016B3 017A3 016D3 O15B3 279A3 272D3 278B3 22S DIES USCS 279B3 034D1 034D2 034D3 034D4 035D3 034B3 034B6 027D1 027D2 027D3 027D4 034A2 034A3 034A6 026D3 035A3 027C2 027C3 OS1A1 034C3 034C4 056C6 083A3 084B3 084A3 083C3 083B3 083B4 083D3 O85A1 O085A3 084D3 084D5 O085D3 O85B3 O85B6 085C3 084C3 052A3 051D3 407 Appendix A (cont.). County Kendall Kendall Kendall Kendall Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle 408 Quadrangle Plano Plattville Yorkville Yorkville SE Appleton Appleton Delong Galesburg East Galesburg West Maquon Oneida Victoria Victoria Victoria Victoria Victoria Victoria Wataga Williamsfield Williamsfield Yates City Yates City Antioch Antioch Antioch Antioch Fox Lake Fox Lake Fox Lake Grayslake Grayslake Grayslake Grayslake Highland Park Highland Park Highland Park Lake Zurich Lake Zurich Lake Zurich Libertyville Libertyville Libertyville Wadsworth Wadsworth Wadsworth Wadsworth Wadsworth Wauconda Waukegan Waukegan Wheeling Wheeling Wheeling Zion Zion Zion Zion Zion Zion Dana Earlville Kinsman La Salle La Salle Leland Leonore Block 051A3 052C3 052B3 052D3 096B2 096B3 097D3 097A3 097B2 096C3 075C3 075D1 075D2 075D3 075D4 075D5 075D6 074D3 096A1 096A3 096D3 096D6 008A2 008A3 008A4 O008A5 008B2 008B4 008B6 008D2 008D3 008D5 008D6 029A1 029A3 029A4 028A1 028A2 028A3 007C3 007C4 007C6 007B1 007B2 007B3 007B4 007B6 008C2 007D1 007D3 029B2 029B3 029B4 O007A1 007A2 007A3 007A4 007A5 007A6 091B3 050C3 081A3 062D3 062D4 050D3 080B3 County LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle Lawrence Lawrence Lawrence Lawrence Lawrence Lawrence es Lee bee Lee Lee ee Lee ee ec Lee Lee Lee Lee ice Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Logan Logan Logan Logan Logan Logan Logan Logan Logan Logan Quadrangle Long Point Marseilles Marseilles Marseilles Marseilles Mendota East Ottawa Prairie Center Ransom Ransom Seneca Serena Sheridan Sheridan Starved Rock Streator North Tonica Troy Grove Wedron Birds Chauncey Lawrenceville Russellville Sumner Vincennes Amboy Ashton Compton Dixon East Dixon East Dixon West Franklin Grove Harmon Harmon Lee Paw Paw Steward Sublette Walton Blackstone Campus Chatsworth North Chatsworth South Cullom Dwight Flanagan North Flanagan South Forrest North Forrest South Northeast Pontiac Northwest Pontiac Odell Saunemin Southeast Pontiac Southwest Pontiac Streator South Armington Broadwell Chestnut Delavan South Emden Lake Fork Lake Fork Latham Lincoln East Lincoln West Block 080C3 060C3 060C4 060C5 060C6 049D3 061D3 061B3 081B2 081B3 060D3 060B3 051C3 OS51C5 061C3 080A3 079A3 062A3 061A3 PANN Cs: 212D3 235B3 211D3 234A3 235A3 048A3 037C3 049A3 038C1 038C3 039D3 038D3 047A3 047A6 036C3 050B3 037D3 049B3 048B3 081C3 082D3 089D3 113A3 089A3 082C3 091A3 091D3 089C3 113B3 090A3 090B3 081D3 089B3 090D3 090C3 080D3 124D3 142C3 143C3 125D3 124C3 157A3 157A4 156B3 142A3 142B3 County Logan Logan Logan McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McHenry McHenry McHenry McHenry McHenry McHenry McHenry McHenry McHenry McHenry McHenry McHenry McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean Macon Macon Macon Macon Macon Macon Macon Macon Quadrangle Mount Pulaski New Holland Waynesville West Adair Bardolph Blandinsville Bushnell East Bushnell West Colchester Doddsville Fandon Good Hope Industry Macomb Macomb Macomb Macomb Vermont Barrington Crystal Lake Fox Lake Harvard Hebron Huntley Marengo North Marengo South McHenry Richmond Wauconda Woodstock Arrowsmith Bellflower Bloomington East Bloomington East Bloomington West Chenoa Colfax Cooksville Danvers Fairbury Farmer City North Foosland Funks Grove Gibson City West Gridley Gridley Heyworth Holder Le Roy Lexington McLean McLean Merna Normal East Normal West Saybrook Sibley Stanford Argenta Dalton City Decatur Decatur Forsyth Harristown Long Creek Macon East Block 142D3 141A3 143B3 128B3 129A3 103D3 105C3 104D3 130A3 129C3 130D3 104C3 129D3 129B1 129B3 129B4 129B5 128C3 028B3 027A3 008B3 010A3 009B3 027B3 010D3 026A3 009D3 009A3 008C3 009C3 121B3 121D3 122B1 122B3 123A3 112B3 112D3 112C3 110C3 112A3 L21ES 120C3 123D3 120B3 111B3 111B6 12263 122A3 122D3 111A3 123C2 123C3 111D3 111C3 110D3 121A3 11363 123B3 155A3 176A3 155C2 155C3 155B3 156D3 155D3 176B3 Appendix A (cont.). County Macon Macon Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Madison Madison Madison Madison Madison Madison Madison Madison Madison Madison Madison Madison Madison Madison Marion Marion Marion Marion Marion Marion Marion Marion Marion Marion Marion Marshall Marshall Marshall Marshall Marshall Marshall Marshall Marshall Mason Mason Mason Mason Mason Mason Mason Mason Mason Massac Massac Massac Massac Massac Menard Quadrangle Macon West Warrensburg Atwater Bunker Hill Carlinville East Carlinville West Farmersville Gillespie North Gillespie South Hettick Litchfield Mount Olive Palmyra Plainview Scottville Shipman Summerville Virden South Alton Bethalto Collinsville Edwardsville Granite City Grantfork Highland Marine Monks Mound New Douglas Prairietown St. Jacob Wood River Worden Centralia East Fairman Tuka Kinmundy Omega Orchardville Patoka Salem North Salem South St. Paul Xenia Henry La Prairie Center La Rose Lacon Minonk Varna Washburn Wenona Biggs Chandlerville Duck Island Easton Forest City Kilbourne Mason City Natrona Topeka Joppa Mermet Metropolis Paducah NE Reevesville Athens Block 175A3 156A3 190C3 200C3 191D3 I91E3 190B3 200A3 200D3 192D3 201B3 201C3 191B3 200B3 192A3 199D3 199A3 191A3 221B3 221A3 226B3 220C3 225B3 219C3 227B3 220D3 225A3 219B3 220B3 226A3 221D3 220A3 229D3 229A3 230D3 216D3 230A3 23163 217D3 230B3 230C3 216C3 231B3 078D3 077D3 092B3 078C3 092A3 079C3 093A3 079D3 140B3 139C3 126B4 140A3 126D3 139A3 141B3 125C3 126C3 285A3 279D3 286B3 286A3 278C3 158B3 County Menard Menard Menard Menard Menard Menard Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Monroe Monroe Monroe Monroe Monroe Monroe Monroe Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Morgan Morgan Morgan Morgan Morgan Morgan Morgan Morgan Morgan Morgan Moultrie Moultrie Moultrie Moultrie Ogle Ogle Ogle Ogle Ogle Ogle Ogle Ogle Ogle Ogle Ogle Ogle Ogle Ogle Quadrangle Greenview Middletown Oakford Petersburg Salisbury Tallula Aledo East Aledo West Blanchard Island Buffalo Prairie Eliza Joy Matherville New Windsor Orion Reynolds Toolesboro Toolesboro Viola Ames Columbia Paderborn Renault Selma Valmeyer Waterloo Bald Knob Butler Coffeen Fillmore Fillmore Hillsboro Nokomis Nokomis SW Ohlman Raymond Raymond NE Sorento North Alexander Chapin Concord Franklin Jacksonville Literberry Lynnville Nortonville Prentice Waverly Cadwell Kirksville Lovington Sullivan Chana Creston Daysville Daysville Fairdale Forreston North Forreston South German Valley Grand Detour Kings Kishwaukee Mt. Morris Oregon Polo Block 141C3 141D3 140C3 140D3 159A3 159B3 073B3 072A3 070D3 069D3 069C3 072B3 068D3 074B3 067C3 068C3 O71A3 071A4 073A3 250A3 247B3 247D3 250B3 249A3 248D3 247C3 202A3 201A3 202C3 202D1 202D3 202B3 189D3 189C3 188C3 190D3 190A3 201D3 171A3 161C3 161D3 171D3 171B3 160C3 170A3 173 160D3 172C3 177A3 177C3 177B3 177D3 037B3 036B3 038A3 038A5 025C3 022A3 022D3 023B3 038B3 024D3 024B3 023C3 023D3 039A3 County Ogle Ogle Ogle Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Perry Perry Perry Perry Perry Perry Piatt Piatt Piatt Piatt Piatt Piatt Piatt Piatt Piatt Piatt Piatt Piatt Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Pope Pope Pope Pope Pope Pope Pope Pope Pulaski Quadrangle Rochelle Seward Stillman Valley Chillicothe Dunlap Edelstein Elmwood Farmington East Glasford Hanna City Laura Oak Hill Oak Hill Pekin Pekin Peoria East Peoria East Peoria West Princeville Rome Spring Bay Spring Bay Du Quoin Pinckneyville Pyatts Tamaroa Todds Mill Winkle Atwood Bement Cerro Gordo Hammond Ivesdale La Place Mahomet Mahomet Mansfield Monticello Seymour Weldon East Barry Baylis Bedford Bedford Griggsville Hull Meredosia Milton Milton New Salem Pearl West Perry East Pittsfield Pleasant Hill East Pleasant Hill West Rockport Summer Hill Brownfield Eddyville Golconda Herod Little Cypress Shetlerville Smithland Waltersburg Cypress Block 037A3 023A3 024C3 093B3 094C3 094B3 095C3 107B3 107D3 107A3 095B3 095D2 095D3 108C2 108C3 108A1 108A3 108B3 095A3 094A3 094D3 094D5 254C3 253E3 253D3 254B3 253A3 253B3 58@5 154A3 154B3 154D3 153B3 154C3 146B3 146B5 145A3 145D3 146C3 145C3 167A3 168B3 169D3 169D5 169B3 167B3 162D3 169C3 169C5 168A3 194B3 162C3 168D3 195A3 195B3 167D3 168C3 278D3 273D3 21163 274C3 287C3 277B3 287B3 278A3 280D3 409 Appendix A (cont.). County Pulaski Pulaski Putnam Putnam Putnam Randolph Randolph Randolph Randolph Randolph Randolph Randolph Randolph Randolph Randolph Randolph Randolph Randolph Richland Richland Richland Richland Richland Richland Rock Island Rock Island Rock Island Rock Island Rock Island Rock Island Rock Island Rock Island Rock Island St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair Saline Saline Saline Saline Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon 410 Quadrangle Olmsted Pulaski Florid McNabb Spring Valley Baldwin Chester Coulterville Evansville Kaskaskia Percy Prairie Du Rocher Red Bud Rockwood Steeleville Tilden Walsh Welge Claremont Dundas Landes Noble Olney Wakefield Andalusia Coal Valley Cordova Erie Northwest Hillsdale Illinois City Milan Montpelier Port Byron Cahokia Freeburg French Village Lebanon Mascoutah Millstadt Millstadt New Athens East New Athens West O’ Fallon St. Libory Trenton Venedy Eldorado Galatia Harrisburg Rudement Chatham Cornland Divernon Edinburg Farmingdale Loami Mechanicsburg Mt. Auburn New Berlin New City Pawnee Pleasant Plains Springfield East Springfield West Virden North Williamsville Block 284A3 284B3 078A3 079B3 062C3 251A3 267A3 252A3 2513 267B3 252D3 250D3 251B3 266C3 22G3 252B3 251D3 266B3 234B3 213D3 2ADES 233B3 233A3 INSES 068B3 067B3 044A3 045B5 045C3 069B3 068A3 069A3 044D3 225€3 246B3 225D3 226D3 246A3 247A3 247A5 246D3 246C3 226C3 245C3 22E3 245B3 261C3 262D3 273A3 274B3 173B3 157B3 133 174B3 159D3 172A3 eyes} 157D3 172B3 173A3 173D3 159C3 158D3 158C3 172D3 158A3 County Schuyler Schuyler Schuyler Schuyler Schuyler Schuyler Schuyler Scott Scott Scott Scott Shelby Shelby Shelby Shelby Shelby Shelby Shelby Shelby Shelby Shelby Shelby Stark Stark Stark Stark Stark Stephenson Stephenson Stephenson Stephenson Stephenson Stephenson Stephenson Stephenson Stephenson Tazewell Tazewell Tazewell Tazewell Tazewell Tazewell Tazewell Tazewell Tazewell Tazewell Tazewell Union Union Union Union Union Union Union Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Quadrangle Astoria Beardstown Camden Erwin Ray Rushville North Rushville South Alsey Florence Manchester Winchester Fancher Findlay Lakewood Middlesworth Obed Oconee Shelbyville Stewardson East Stewardson West Tower Hill Windsor Bradford Castleton Elmira La Fayette Wyoming Dakota Davis Freeport East Freeport West Kent Lena Orangeville Pearl City Ridott Delavan North Eureka Hopedale Hopedale Mackinaw Manito Marquette Heights Minier Morton South Pekin Washington Anna Cobden Jonesboro Lick Creek Makanda Mt. Pleasant Wolf Lake Ambia Bismarck Bismarck Collison Danville NE Danville NE Danville NW Danville NW Danville NW Danville SE Danville SE Danville SE Block 138A3 138C3 136A3 13733 138B3 137A3 137D3 170C3 169A3 170D3 170B3 187D3 176D3 187C3 186B3 176C3 188D3 187A3 186D3 186C3 187B3 186A3 077B3 077C3 076A3 076C3 076D3 014A3 013B3 014D3 014C3 015C4 015A3 014B3 015D3 ONES 125A3 109A3 124B3 124B4 109D3 126A3 108D3 124A3 109C3 125B3 109B3 280B3 270D3 281A3 271D3 271.G3 280A3 270C3 117A3 117D1 117D3 148A3 149A3 149A5 149B2 149B3 149B4 149D3 149D5 149D6 County Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Wabash Wabash Wabash Wabash Wabash Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington Wayne Wayne Wayne Wayne Wayne Wayne Wayne Wayne Wayne Wayne Wayne Wayne White White White White White White White White White White White Whiteside Whiteside Whiteside Whiteside Whiteside Whiteside Quadrangle Danville SW Danville SW East Lynn Georgetown Georgetown Henning Hoopeston Humrick Oakwood Potomac Sidell East Mount Carmel Keensburg Lancaster Mount Carmel St. Francisville Abingdon Alexis Avon Berwick Cameron Cameron Galesburg West Greenbush Kirkwood East Little York Monmouth North Henderson Roseville Addieville Ashley Beaucoup Hoyleton Irvington Nashville Oakdale Okawville Albion NW Boyleston Burnt Prairie Cisne Crisp Enterprise Fairfield Geff Golden Gate Johnsonville Mount Erie Wayne City Carmi Centerville Crossville Emma Enfield Maunie New Harmony New Haven Norris City Solitude Springerton Clinton Como Erie Erie Northwest Hahnaman Morrison Block 149C1 149C3 118A3 150B3 150B4 LUGS 117B3 150A3 148D3 118D3 151A3 237B3 238D3 234D3 238A3 235C3 097C3 073D3 105B3 098D3 098A3 098A4 097B3 104A3 098C3 078@3 098B3 074C3 104B3 244B3 243C3 244D3 244A3 243B3 244C3 245D3 245A3 239B3 240C3 240D3 232C3 241A3 232D3 240A3 240B3 23963 231D3 233C3 241D3 258C3 258B3 258A3 260A3 257D3 258D3 259B3 260B3 261A3 259C3 257A3 041C3 040D3 045A3 045B3 047B3 040C2 Appendix A (cont.). County Whiteside Whiteside Whiteside Whiteside Whiteside Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Quadrangle Morrison Prophetstown Sterling Tampico Union Grove Beecher East Beecher East Beecher East Beecher West Beecher West Beecher West Bonfield Bonfield Channahon Channahon Channahon Dyer Dyer Dyer Dyer Elwood Elwood Elwood Essex Frankfort Frankfort Frankfort Frankfort Joliet Joliet Joliet Joliet Manhattan Mokena Block 040C3 046B 1 039C3 046A3 041D3 056D1 056D2 056D3 056C1 056C2 056C3 O083A1 083A2 OS58B3 OS8B5 OS8B6 056A3 056A4 O56A5 056A6 OS58A1 O58A3 OS8A6 083B1 057A2 057A3 0S57A4 057A6 053D3 053D4 053D5 053D6 057B3 054C3 County Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Will Williamson Williamson Williamson Williamson Williamson Williamson Williamson Williamson Winnebago Winnebago Quadrangle Mokena Mokena Mokena Normantown Normantown Peotone Plainfield Plainfield Plainfield Plainfield Romeoville Romeoville Romeoville Romeoville Steger Steger Symerton Symerton Wilmington Wilmington Wilmington Wilmington Wilton Center Wilton Center Carrier Mills Crab Orchard Crab Orchard Lake Harco Herrin Johnston City Marion Pittsburg Belvidere NW Caledonia Block 054C4 054C5 054C6 053B3 053B6 057D3 053C1 053C2 O53E3 053C4 053A3 O53A4 O53A5 053A6 056B3 056B4 058D1 058D3 O58C1 058C2 058C3 OS58CS5 057C1 057C3 273B3 272A3 271A3 262C3 264D3 263C3 272B3 263D3 011B3 Oui County Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Woodford Woodford Woodford Woodford Woodford Woodford Woodford Quadrangle Caledonia Cherry Valley Durand Durand Durand Kishwaukee Kishwaukee Pecatonica Pecatonica Pecatonica Rockford North Rockford North Rockford North Rockford North Rockford South Rockford South Shirland Shirland Shirland Shirland South Beloit South Beloit South Beloit Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Benson E] Paso Flanagan Southwest Germantown Hills Metamora Roanoke Secor Block O11C3 025B3 013A2 013A3 013A6 024B1 024B4 013D1 013D2 013D3 012D1 012D3 012D4 012D6 024A3 024A4 012B1 012B3 012B4 012B5 012A3 012A4 012A6 012C1 012C3 012C4 092D3 110A3 091C3 093C3 093D3 092C3 110B3 411 Appendix B. Summary of atlas data by block. The 7.5-minute quadrangle name, county name, number of species by breeding category, and number of observer hours are given for each sampled block. The columns list the number of species Confirmed (CO), Probable (PR), Possible (PO), and Observed (OB), and the total with breeding evidence (i.e., the sum of Confirmed, Probable, and Possible) (TBE). Codes for priority blocks end in ‘3’. Block 007A1 007A2 007A3 007A4 007A5 007A6 007B1 007B2 007B3 007B4 007B6 007C3 007C4 007C6 007D1 007D3 008A2 008A3 008A4 O008A5 008B2 008B3 008B4 008B6 008C2 008C3 008D2 008D3 008D5 008D6 009A3 009B3 009C3 009D3 010A3 010B3 010C3 010D3 011A3 011B3 011C1 011C3 011C6 011D3 012A3 012A4 012A6 012B1 012B3 012B4 012B5 012C1 012C3 012C4 012D1 012D3 012D4 012D6 013A2 013A3 013A6 013B3 013C3 013D1 412 Quad Zion Zion Zion Zion Zion Zion Wadsworth Wadsworth Wadsworth Wadsworth Wadsworth Libertyville Libertyville Libertyville Waukegan Waukegan Antioch Antioch Antioch Antioch Fox Lake Fox Lake Fox Lake Fox Lake Wauconda Wauconda Grayslake Grayslake Grayslake Grayslake Richmond Hebron Woodstock McHenry Harvard Capron Garden Prairie Marengo North Belvidere NE Belvidere NW Caledonia Caledonia Caledonia Belvidere North South Beloit South Beloit South Beloit Shirland Shirland Shirland Shirland Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Rockford North Rockford North Rockford North Rockford North Durand Durand Durand Davis Ridott Pecatonica County Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake McHenry Lake Lake Lake McHenry Lake Lake Lake Lake McHenry McHenry McHenry McHenry McHenry Boone Boone McHenry Boone Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Boone Boone Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Stephenson Stephenson Winnebago CORPRSPOSOBMTBESHts 15 25 60 4 40 51 20 7 59 40 14 58 BZ 28 15 54 36 60 By Nf) 28 59 11 21 37 48 26 61 19 34 38 31 a2 43 28 8 8 34 10 42 54 39 24 10 47 12 30 46 aS 19 30 9 31 (6) 36 54 18 11 7 32 44 32 43 6 5 23 11 10 26 17 20 20 11 19 11 11 15 DS) 0 14 33 14 4 15 46 12 25 24 24 28 29 10 25 12 18 13 13 14 13 11 13 21 25 20 15 24 29 11 22 24 29 10 30 36 OG 16 18 19 13 14 1 5 22 22 15 9 13 1 KBRDANARRROKP RO NO —_ NG = or Of OO 0 — l 1 — 1 0 2 3 ] 5) 3 2 1 5 5 0 6 2 6 0 5 5 4 6 6 5 0 3 3 B 3 5 8 6 3 4 Wl 2 3 6 5 4 6 4 2 7 5 4 5) 7 1 4 0 1 1 0 0 6 3 1 4 0 2 ] 4 2, 0 1 0 24 55 84 14 68 10) 44 56 81 67 25 79 51 54 15 72 73 80 51 46 80 82 60 53 65 82 56 81 55 54 65 51 72 67 50 33 39 61 54 85 80 70 70 41 75 52 74 88 102 79 68 25 54 47 64 3 19 18 47 58 60 57 73 7 63.0 145.0 13533 20.0 50.0 90.0 30.0 20.0 92.3 84.0 20.0 89.8 60.0 33.0 7.0 64.0 50.0 121.8 22.0 65.0 104.0 23.0 47.0 50.0 80.0 70.0 40.0 149.5 30.0 29.0 PIES 3 49.0 133 24.0 8.0 12.0 62:5 13.0 76.5 56.0 SiS) 168.0 13.0 72.0 21.0 18.0 55.0 88.0 30.0 83.5 0.0 35.0 16.0 47.0 44.5 8.0 15.0 10.5 49.5 28.0 50.5 58.5 3.0 Block 013D2 013D3 014A3 014B3 014C3 014D3 015A3 015B3 015Cl1 015C3 015C4 015D3 016A3 016B3 016C3 016D3 017A3 017B3 017D3 017D5 017D6 018A3 O19A1 O019A2 020A3 020B3 020B4 020D3 021A3 021B3 021C3 021D3 022A3 022B3 022C3 022D3 023A3 023B3 023C3 023D3 024A3 024A4 024B1 024B3 024B4 024C3 024D3 025A3 025B3 025C3 025D3 026A3 026B3 026C3 026D3 027A3 027B3 027C2 027C3 027D1 027D2 027D3 027D4 028A1 Quad Pecatonica Pecatonica Dakota Orangeville Freeport West Freeport East Lena Warren Kent Kent Kent Pearl City Elizabeth NE Scales Mound E. Elizabeth Stockton Scales Mound W. Galena Hanover Hanover Hanover Menominee Green Island Green Island Pleasant Valley Blackhawk Blackhawk Wacker Boone Branch Loran Mount Carroll Lanark Forreston North Shannon Brookville Forreston South Seward German Valley Mt. Morris Oregon Rockford South Rockford South Kishwaukee Kishwaukee Kishwaukee Stillman Valley Kings Belvidere South Cherry Valley Fairdale Kirkland Marengo South Riley Genoa Hampshire Crystal Lake Huntley Pingree Grove Pingree Grove Elgin Elgin Elgin Elgin Lake Zurich County Winnebago Winnebago Stephenson Stephenson Stephenson Stephenson Stephenson Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Stephenson Stephenson Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Jo Daviess Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Carroll Ogle Carroll Carroll Ogle Ogle Ogle Ogle Ogle Winnebago Winnebago Winnebago Ogle Winnebago Ogle Ogle Boone Winnebago Ogle DeKalb McHenry Boone DeKalb Kane McHenry McHenry Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Lake CO;PRS POS OBMUBESErs 42 47 30 39 34 35 38 33 0 47 0 37 37 36 43 37 37 41 35 0 0 35 0 1 29 56 1 29 20 25 30 29 27 24 14 26 43 36 30 37 41 42 64 31 1 15 16 10 0) 14 28 36 10 47 55 57 54 63 57 42 56 55 61 10 17 21 11 13 8 12 12 25 0 24 0 17 11 26 16 24 iL 7/ 22 23 9 19 21 1 20 25 26 15 21 8 0 11 0 15 21 9 20 10 14 14 18 1 | 19 0 1 20 14 0 45 19 21 29 18 16 15 27 18 10 3 18 21 19 24 6 29 0 27 25 13 9 14 7 15 18 10 17 10 5) 11 9 3 4 14 2 0 BRNDRK NNR NOK NK DWE NAIOP NOK AWNKPOCHENCOCORFP RFP RP RBEPNNWOW PK TDWOOCOWK SBP NP KE NK RK WRK KK OOCOrFOCOwAONhN 80 80 61 77 68 62 71 66 0 82 0 69 69 71 TES: 7h 68 77 76 2 1 60 1 2) 60 87 1 89 60 58 64 54 65 50 25) 57 73 79 63 67 84 81 Ve 82 l 61 54 34 104 2 33.0 75.0 39.0 34.9 44.3 40.0 48.2 44.5 1.0 70.0 1.0 53.0 47.5 SRS MS 54.5 36.0 49.0 40.0 1.0 1.0 46.0 1.0 1.0 8.0 17.0 0.5 12.0 18.0 20.0 9.0 8.0 20.5 8.0 12.0 39.0 38.8 35.0 25.0 36.3 117.0 28.0 48.5 32.8 1.0 20.0 17.0 12.0 200.0 18.0 3123 93.0 9.0 48.8 228.6 10.0 14.0 98.8 207.8 30.0 75.0 81.0 55.0 20.0 Appendix B (cont.). Block 028A2 028A6 028B3 028B5 028B6 028C1 028C2 028C3 028C4 028C5 028C6 028D1 028D2 028D3 028D4 028D5 028D6 029A1 029A3 029A4 029A5 029A6 029B2 029B3 029B4 029B5 029B6 029C1 029C2 029C3 029C4 029C5 029C6 029D1 029D2 029D3 029D4 029D5 029D6 030C1 030C3 030C4 030C5 030C6 031A5 031B1 031B2 031B3 031B4 031B5 031B6 031C1 031C2 031C3 031C4 031C5 031D1 031D3 031D5 032A1 032A2 032A3 032A4 032A5 032A6 032B2 032B3 Quad County Lake Zurich Lake Lake Zurich Cook Barrington McHenry Barrington Cook Barrington Cook Streamwood Cook Streamwood Cook Streamwood Cook Streamwood Cook Streamwood Cook Streamwood Cook Palatine Cook Palatine Cook Palatine Cook Palatine Cook Palatine Cook Palatine Cook Highland Park Lake Highland Park Lake Highland Park Lake Highland Park Cook Highland Park Cook Wheeling Lake Wheeling Lake Wheeling Lake Wheeling Cook Wheeling Cook Arlington Heights Cook Arlington Heights Cook Arlington Heights Cook Arlington Heights Cook Arlington Heights Cook Arlington Heights Cook Park Ridge Cook Park Ridge Cook Park Ridge Cook Park Ridge Cook Park Ridge Cook Park Ridge Cook Evanston Cook Evanston Cook Evanston Cook Evanston Cook Evanston Cook Chicago Loop East Cook Chicago Loop Cook Chicago Loop Cook Chicago Loop Cook Chicago Loop Cook Chicago Loop Cook Chicago Loop Cook Englewood Cook Englewood Cook Englewood Cook Englewood Cook Englewood Cook Jackson Park Cook Jackson Park Cook Jackson Park Cook River Forest Cook River Forest Cook River Forest Cook River Forest Cook River Forest Cook River Forest Cook Elmhurst Cook Elmhurst DuPage CO 20 38 32 4] 54 42 13 5D) 15 14 22 15 14 31 17 45 8: 49 28 54 51 43 49 33 20 43 26 19 10 40 38 11 12 26 Pug 40 ays 33 24 17 33 28 16 20 17 10 14 iy 21 21 23 22 18 26 19 3) 21 4] PO OB No —_ —_ oo FSF NN OWN RK RK WH ODK kK HOWWOWK OW OK KN AD —\ i) ra — \o — = oO —_ = o ~ — MAP WUODNKHK NNN WOK KH DKK WWWHAOUNNN OANA WAADKHAANK NNN TBE Hrs 40 32 65 80 48 78 97 74 53 62 37 42 ll 53 41 35 62 29 71 46 32 68 50 2 2B 54 68 32 71 32 66 51 35 36 71 64 32 16 54 37 54 44 51 40 33 57 51 34 28 43 33 31 30 42 18 16 37 40 50 51 43 69 33 56 38 38 62 25.0 ks 26.0 188.8 44.2 130.5 240.5 74.0 44.0 48.0 112.0 11.0 2.0 30.0 5.0 2.0 85.0 43.5 63.3 20.0 Whee! 147.0 30.0 65.0 150.0 1222. 107.0 5.0 0.0 8.0 56.3 23.0 18.0 20.0 56.5 63.0 8.3 12.0 38.5 36.2 ISS 26.0 59.3 52.3 ISS 155.0 58.5 26.0 20.0 8.0 42.8 7.0 91.0 21.0 3.0 3.0 347.8 18.0 436.0 25.0 99.0 84.0 89.0 308.5 79.0 6.0 48.0 Block 032B6 032C2 032C3 032C4 032C6 032D1 032D2 032D3 032D4 032D5 032D6 033A3 033A4 033B1 033B3 033B5 033B6 033C1 033C2 033C3 033C4 033D1 033D3 033D4 033D6 034A2 034A3 034A6 034B3 034B6 034C3 034C4 034D1 034D2 034D3 034D4 035A3 035B3 035C3 035C6 035D3 036A3 036B3 036C3 036D3 036D5 037A3 037B3 037C3 037D3 038A3 038A5 038B3 038C1 038C3 038D3 039A3 039B3 039C3 039D3 040A3 040B3 040C2 040C3 040D3 041A3 041C3 Quad Elmhurst Hinsdale Hinsdale Hinsdale Hinsdale Berwyn Berwyn Berwyn Berwyn Berwyn Berwyn Lombard Lombard West Chicago West Chicago West Chicago West Chicago Naperville Naperville Naperville Naperville Wheaton Wheaton Wheaton Wheaton Geneva Geneva Geneva Elburn Elburn Sugar Grove Sugar Grove Aurora North Aurora North Aurora North Aurora North Maple Park Sycamore Hinckley Hinckley Big Rock De Kalb Creston ec Waterman Waterman Rochelle Chana Ashton Steward Daysville Daysville Grand Detour Dixon East Dixon East Franklin Grove Polo Hazelhurst Sterling Dixon West Milledgeville Fairhaven Morrison Morrison Como Thomson Clinton County Cook Cook DuPage Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook Cook DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage DuPage Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane Kane DeKalb DeKalb DeKalb Kane DeKalb Ogle ee DeKalb DeKalb Ogle Ogle Tee ec Ogle Ogle Ogle Pee Lee ee Ogle Carroll Whiteside Lee Carroll Carroll Whiteside Whiteside Whiteside Carroll Whiteside CO 18 36 38 4] 25 29 34 31 20 27 38 51 34 60 69 54 37 38) 75 69 44 34 13 44 27 43 25 36 38 43 24 43 we 17 43 13 19 26 11 30 24 28 36 50 34 14 4] 27 2 11 22 23 26 51 32 15 PR PO OB TBE Hrs a 4s 29 Nh ap aie She SIP BAY, 14 1 72 [eS I Why i. Wek, PB) ho ee! it) ish ey Sle th By? | OS 4 2A OF 28 6 1 40 Ie) 4) pe 1 Se NW She ipl bd 2) Wik HIS), te 14 10 97 See 2 18 7 64 My Ae hw 2 I Se eh MI teh) ORO 2 7 @ 78 See eee 0) ee Ome LS (are 3 es 64 ie ee 4, 14 0 69 15 6 60 13, 6 60 ch Th As Onn. 3) Sil OH Al I 2S SS L251 46 9 a ee OS 230 46 8 7 40 9 6 47 HW) A Os gh) i BB) Om ears il 3) Lo eS 5 O 2 phy WE) ale 4 ll 74 PAL 2 Mes) k oZOly | Ale 1 OR OMEE Ne Ae he 19 QO 54 2 eee) [Salome as. S10 63 2 ee Ol 24 00 0 0 1 ee Oo PaO 52 10S 69 2A ee eS 18.0 SoU 38.0 99.5 22.0 42.5 29.0 41.0 40.0 32.0 4.5 37.0 16.0 60.0 55.0 12.0 151.5 248.0 37.0 18.0 131.0 44.0 290.0 290.0 2S 20.5 47.0 2.0 24.0 15.0 56.9 30.0 30.5 79.0 les: 81.0 56.5 13.0 20.0 1.0 56.3 13 32.5 27.0 1S 20.0 40.5 55.0 6.0 13.0 41.5 Ske) 10.8 5.0 22.0 8.0 25D 12.0 25.0 20.0 6.0 6.3 2.0 18.5 10.0 6.0 7.0 413 Appendix B (cont.). Block Quad County COP PRS POS OBST BES hts Block Quad County CO) PRs POSOBSTBESErs 041D3 — Union Grove Whiteside [32 02 ee a OO mnt: () 054B2 Sag Bridge Cook 719 5; aS S57 000 044A3 Cordova Rock Island 31 23 10 2 64 27.0 054B3 Sag Bridge Cook 52° 10. Ui a ees 044D3 Port Byron Rock:Istandiy:2 Sa 23.an 2 een OMe amt os) 054B4 = Sag Bridge Cook 39 25°) LO ROF 8382 70.0 045A3 Erie Whiteside AS 13" 236 28) 6489.0 054B6 Sag Bridge Cook 27 13% 30086) /OMi2ss 045B3 Erie Northwest Whiteside 2 Lil ee eC) 054C2 Mokena Cook 2 ‘19522 ee A 2.0 045B5 __ Erie Northwest Rock Islandia 4 7 22) Sap lOmn Somes 0 054C3 Mokena Will 59° 24, 1Sueioe ORS 045C3 Hillsdale Rock Island 16 29 19 2 64 15.0 054C4 Mokena Will 1 20. A6Ge nO S/o 045D3 Spring Hill Henry DAS V2 Ope ee Olea S 20) 054C5 Mokena Will OOP sh ol 1.0 046A3 Tampico Whiteside 322A le 42 054C6 Mokena Will 4 4, 3, (0) 1G: 046B1 Prophetstown Whiteside ee) ee en) tile 054D1 ‘Tinley Park Cook 19 10. 21, 4> S00 046C3 Hooppole Henry SIO 32a 4 Cera) 054D2 ‘Tinley Park Cook 18 10, 14,592) 42 SS 046D3 Yorktown Bureau PAO EE Key Oe) PAs! 054D3 Tinley Park Cook 40 12 22 4 74 68.0 047A3 Harmon Bes ap ey 1) ey PAG) 054D4 ‘Tinley Park Cook 30 18 25 5S 7S 047A6 Harmon [Eee ato, Pes) iKesy AIS) teh) OMG 054D6 Tinley Park Cook 36 18 10°07) G4aies 047B3 Hahnaman Whiteside DOLORES 2 S425 O055A3 Lake Calumet Cook 37° 9 33 e a Ome 047C3 New Bedford Bureau PM sy Wey oh AAS) O55A4 Lake Calumet Cook 23 10 33.30 eee) 047D3 ~=Walnut Bureau iy PP) SSP PD, O55A5 Lake Calumet Cook 36 19 S7ieglise 62 ees 048A3 Amboy ILE 3p) PAL Ek dehy KG) O55A6 Lake Calumet Cook 34 13, QA eS 71st 048B3 Walton Wee [G25 ean Sci Ole.) O55B1 Blue Island Cook 3 1) OAS ORR 7.0 048C3 = Ohio Bureau 3 il IB EY HRS) 055B2 Blue Island Cook [1 4.0) OS ORsIa 7.0 048D3 La Moille Bureau 34, lS eo eeOe 540927.0 055B3 Blue Island Cook 20. 223) 1457 S7eeG0. 049A3 Compton Lies fey 2) Ay NE ye STON 055B4 Blue Island Cook 6 922) MAS 7.0 049B3 — Sublette es 2K) WIS ye St O55B6 Blue Island Cook 33° 12 .25 7 ORRRGIES 049C3 Mendota West Bureau ab 2S ARS MY aye 113 ).5) O055C1 Harvey Cook 17 17 (22,0038 SORES 049D3 Mendota East LaSalle 227 eae la eS O55C2 Harvey Cook 2 D 20e01F 2 7eaee OSOA1 Shabbona Grove DeKalb 2 Ome S44 LO:0; 055C3 _—— Harvey Cook 18 20) i490) O50A3 Shabbona Grove DeKalb Bye alg alts; 7). X68) IEE S) 055C4 Harvey Cook 21 13) 9-9 ete e43Reeto) O50B3 Paw Paw ee 2A) 2 ee ee oem LO O55CS5 Harvey Cook 33° 28) ie Se OSeeou) 050C3 Earlville LaSalle Gy iM) PASO 055C6 ~—_— Harvey Cook 31 222) > Bees Omo! 050D3 Leland LaSalle 30 227 oe 03a 055D1 Calumet City Cook 29, 18' “138 39s Goma) O51A1 Plano Kane ea Ta 055D2 Calumet City Cook 220 SLO ORS 6.0 OS1A3 Plano Kendall ey) ak ey YTB 055D3 Calumet City Cook 3724 eee Vise) 051B1 Somonauk DeKalb i @ @ ie O0 055D4 Calumet City Cook 37 12 32120) 051B3 Somonauk DeKalb prt Aley My! Sy afoy, PASO) O55D5 Calumet City Cook 12) Sif TO) Seo ee) O51B5 Somonauk DeKalb iS) ile ey AS Sy, O56A1 Dyer Cook 12. LOS OFS ORE 051B6 Somonauk DeKalb 2 ee a 0 OO A OO) 056A2 Dyer Cook 15 22, 28) G20 *GSaeeaa0 051C3 Sheridan LaSalle S00 ee eel Ome () 056A3 Dyer Will 62 20) Bees Ee) OS1C5 Sheridan LaSalle Sy tO) ete O056A4 = Dyer Will ee 0) 0) 2.0 051D3 Newark Kendall 2G ee Oe ee OO mees le () O56A5 Dyer Will j 3 3, 0) ele ome a0) 052A3 Aurora South Kendall (Mts; (oy ks} PAY ADB y7/ 0) 056A6 Dyer Will 16 36 18 4 70 45.0 052B3 ‘Yorkville Kendall 59S 3 ae ee SOO, 056B1 Steger Cook 14 28 Slee eess 9.0 052C3 __—Plattville Kendall ey 7K) Ss) Bie) 0) 056B2 Steger Cook 6 22 Bie OR leo 052D3 Yorkville SE Kendall GS el ORS OO) 056B3 = Steger Will 65 24 Foe4s 96m 1230 O53A1 Romeoville DuPage A) 1 NOY TAL Se) 056B4 Steger Will 1 3 pOp Ol AsO 053A2 Romeoville DuPage OBO n OF ae. 20) 056C1 Beecher West Will 12) +25, 1S 20 053A3 Romeoville Will Le Sees Spee (0) 056C2 Beecher West Will 16 26) 1oaeS GOR) 053A4 Romeoville Will 2S 2 Ome.) 056C3 Beecher West Will 28: 16 7 (Geel ORSss 053A5 Romeoville Will ORL 2a Oe eas .0) 056C6 ~—_—_ Beecher West Kankakee 2 » 2. P20 Re25 3.0 053A6 Romeoville Will ZO SS ee eee 4 Ses le} 056D1 Beecher East Will 0 ol 40s OR 2.0 053B1 Normantown DuPage AD 2am Ome ILO) 056D2 Beecher East Will 10 935.) LL pee eS OmeeZIEO 053B2 Normantown DuPage OF Fee Oe sae Ol: 056D3 Beecher East Will 39 16 7 ld gpl oom ae 053B3 Normantown Will 2 2 ee ee ee LO O57A2 Frankfort Will 15 Te Og ORS 3.0 053B6 Normantown Will sy i a ih Sae2.0) 057A3 Frankfort Will 27 10)> Sees A0RS.0 053C1 Plainfield Will 1p ORT Oe MO), alah ahay Eo) O57A4 — Frankfort Will 6 ‘Teel OPORTO 053C2 Plainfield Will Le Oe Oe eee (10) O57A6 Frankfort Will 3 20) -9eg0) 32aaee.0 053C3 Plainfield Will apy ies Key tS) GB 057B3 Manhattan Will 33-6, Sa OR 47 OGO) 053C4 Plainfield Will 1359 ae 2454610 057C1 = Wilton Center Will 3 25 Seeglee sis 053D3 Joliet Will Odin eles OTRAS 057C3 ~~ Wilton Center Will 29 25 9 5ee OSeEee IES 053D4 Joliet Will it W@W Oe esO 057D3 Peotone Will 17 13.5 102),0) 40RR440 053D5 Joliet Will 0 Ome eee 25.0 OS8A1 Elwood Will 6 Op) 1 SSE FOO 053D6 Joliet Will 5 ee Om EROS O058A3 — Elwood Will 28 11s 12 9327 Ss S20 O54A1 Palos Park Cook S114 SIT eS C2453 O58A6 — Elwood Will O° a2 oO 1.0 054A2 Palos Park Cook [3S eee ome 103610) 058B3 Channahon Will 21 26) 15 2a OSeeD oS) 054A3 Palos Park Cook arex NIA ily KO) S10) e220) O58B5 Channahon Will 20 13994528 37ee2s.0 054A4 Palos Park Cook [6/2 OS ee Semmes) 058B6 Channahon Will fy fey AN) i 3.0 054A5 Palos Park Cook Sls S72 COMROOSD O58C1 Wilmington Will 14. 5 a4 ele 22352220 054A6 Palos Park Cook 24°23 52a 14395 058C2 Wilmington Will 3° 1 S32R0) a eaee.0 414 Appendix B (cont.). Block 058C3 O58C5 058D1 058D3 059A3 059A6 O59B3 059C3 059D1 059D3 059D4 060A3 060B3 060C3 060C4 060C5 060C6 060D3 061A3 061B3 061C3 061D3 062A3 062B3 062C3 062D3 062D4 063A3 063B3 063C3 063D3 064A3 064B3 064C3 064D3 065A3 065B3 065C3 065D3 066A3 066B3 066C3 066D3 067B3 067C3 068A3 068B3 068C3 068D3 069A3 069B3 069C3 069D3 070D3 071A3 O71A4 072A3 072B3 072D3 073A3 073B3 073C3 073D3 074A3 074B3 074C3 074D3 Quad Wilmington Wilmington Symerton Symerton Minooka Minooka Lisbon Morris Coal City Coal City Coal City Stavanger Serena Marseilles Marseilles Marseilles Marseilles Seneca Wedron Prairie Center Starved Rock Ottawa Troy Grove Ladd Spring Valley La Salle La Salle Malden Princeton North Princeton South Depue Buda Northeast Manlius Buda Wyanet Mineral Annawan Kewanee North Neponset Atkinson Geneseo Cambridge German Corner Coal Valley Orion Milan Andalusia Reynolds Matherville Montpelier Illinois City Eliza Buffalo Prairie Blanchard Island Toolesboro Toolesboro Aledo West Joy Seaton Viola Aledo East Little York Alexis Woodhull New Windsor North Henderson Wataga County Will Will Will Will Grundy Grundy Grundy Grundy Grundy Grundy Grundy Grundy LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle Bureau Putnam LaSalle LaSalle Bureau Bureau Bureau Bureau Bureau Bureau Bureau Bureau Bureau Henry Henry Bureau Henry Henry Henry Henry Rock Island Mercer Rock Island Rock Island Mercer Mercer Rock Island Rock Island Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Mercer Henderson Mercer Mercer Warren Warren Henry Mercer Warren Knox ~ wn i ie) Ww NWF eB eB NB Be Re ee — FPNWWeEN PWN Bree eP NYP EP NFP PNP KEW BNF ND Hv Ne i) = CORP OMONMNANWWANARK WWAAAANFUOANNNAWHEANAWANANWAAWNODPSPANNVANAKNANYOADAWAFAAVHARK WOMAN OHKR ONNFNN NY POROBS BRgrHts W oO On 14 pp Ww 13 16 22 26 19 30 29 16 P| 24 16 17 31 yz) 38 14 12 28 Aa 26 15 DS Zi 14 31 25 18 27 26 19 13 2 17 11 30 Py} 19 25 26 20 29 20 28 19 1] 24 1] 18 — BP OSDOCONONHE HEP ANANNONNOHDEWAHOOCOCR HP OORNIHENWHEWHAHDAHOWHRWOMNOGOOONOOONONNONUCOH NNDANDNMNHMAMANMFSUADWDNANHHPHAIANADAANANNANF ADA ON HO IAW nN nf NN —_ ~ NTYAMNNANWOANANOK NWODK HK WK WHA FORK WHAONNWNAHAWUHOrF CF WAANNNY OO FW 88 57 57 85 58 67 67 49 44 58 65 46 63 69 61 47 48 64 56 56 25D 87.0 1.0 75.0 Sily/ 5.0 Oss 16.0 5.0 24.4 5.0 ZALES 16.5 45.5 3.0 3.0 3) B35 20.0 19.3 43.0 22.2 16.7 9.0 Sule 44.0 12 27.0 SD 30.0 41.0 18.0 21.8 30.0 26.0 i5)3: 22.0 WS 25s) 14.8 23, 6.8 17.0 22 9.0 14.0 306.0 20.3 1282; 50.8 4.0 18.0 133 7/40) 6.0 LS Vil 22.1 6.0 16.5 30.0 15.0 12.0 14.0 14.1 11.5 Oe Block 075A3 075B3 075C3 075D1 075D2 075D3 075D4 075D5 075D6 076A3 076B3 076C3 076D3 077A3 077B3 077C3 077D3 078A3 078B3 078C3 078D3 079A3 079B3 079C3 079D3 080A3 080B3 080C3 080D3 081A3 081B2 081B3 081C3 081D3 082A3 082B3 082C3 082D3 083A1 083A2 083A3 083B1 083B3 083B4 083C3 083D3 084A3 084B3 084C3 084D3 084D5 O85A1 085A3 085B3 O85B6 085C3 085D3 086A3 086B3 086C3 086D3 087A3 087B3 087C3 087D3 088A3 O88B3 Quad Galva Nekoma Oneida Victoria Victoria Victoria Victoria Victoria Victoria Elmira Kewanee South La Fayette Wyoming Whitefield Bradford Castleton La Prairie Center Florid Putnam Lacon Henry Tonica McNabb Varna Wenona Streator North Leonore Long Point Streator South Kinsman Ransom Ransom Blackstone Odell Gardner Mazon Dwight Campus Bonfield Bonfield Bonfield Essex Essex Essex Buckingham Herscher Bradley Bourbonnais West Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee liana Heights Illiana Heights Momence Momence St. Anne Leesville Donovan Beaverville Watseka Sheldon L’Erable Clifton Gilman Crescent City Piper City NE Cabery County Henry Henry Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Stark Henry Stark Stark Bureau Stark Stark Marshall Putnam Bureau Marshall Marshall Lasalle Putnam Marshall Marshall LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle Livingston LaSalle LaSalle LaSalle Livingston Livingston Grundy Grundy Livingston Livingston Will Will Kankakee Will Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Kankakee Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Ford 22 10 29 24 10 20 15 20 28 11 14 13 32 20 37 20 28 26 38 ZT 23 1] 42 32 40 26 37 28 27 43 17 31 22 24 31 20 15 PR? PO) OB TBE: Hrs 18 15 17 0 0 15 ) 0 0 1] 17 11 15 3 14 12 8 19 36 13 15 17 24 12 7 41 11 12 13 10 8 16 18 q 11 17 15 9 5 —_ Whe OWN COW 7) 11 26 1] 14 11 iS 11 ily) 22 12 19 3 SDONHKOCCOR OEP ANINOCMONHKPAWUAEHOKRIOCONIWONAWANHOCMAANONOWDDWEANHEWONUNUOHOCOSOHCOOCSO 35 43 51 ] 1 80 2 I ] 60 34 56 62 54 59 40 4] 56 60 68 69 53 57 48 47 53 49 42 35 D2 21 36 45 26 45 60 31 33 26 8 63 42 71 2 37 39 51 72 52 71 17 3 74 52 59 49 66 57 44 TT 59 65 47 44 70 34 42 1.0 18.5 8.5 0.0 0.0 Sh 0.0 0.0 0.0 21S 1.0 26.5 20.5 THES 22.0 18.0 ES 225 32.0 21-5 40.0 28.0 14.3 15.0 LES 21.0 24.0 20.0 3:5 LS 10.0 25.0 29.5 S53 10.0 13.0 34.5 11.8 29.0 10.0 31.0 84.0 Pa: 16.0 IS 15.3 118.8 75.8 3253 43.7 33.0 1.0 59.0 42.0 30.0 Tes: 235.3 18.3 19.8 855 10.0 19.4 17.8 22.2 26.5 15.0 14.0 415 Appendix B (cont.). Block 088C3 088D3 089A3 089B3 089C3 089D3 090A3 090B3 090C3 090D3 091A3 091B3 091C3 091D3 092A3 092B3 092C3 092D3 093A3 093B3 093C3 093D3 094A3 094B3 094C3 094D3 094D5 095A3 095B3 095C3 095D2 095D3 096A1 096A3 096B2 096B3 096C3 096D3 096D6 097A3 097B2 097B3 097C3 097D3 098A3 098A4 098B3 098C3 098D3 099A3 099C3 099D3 100D3 101D3 102A3 102C3 102D3 103A3 103B3 103C3 103D3 104A3 104B3 104C3 104D3 105A3 105B3 416 Quad Piper City La Hogue Cullom Saunemin Forrest North Chatsworth North Northeast Pontiac Northwest Pontiac Southwest Pontiac Southeast Pontiac Flanagan North Dana Flanagan SW Flanagan South Minonk La Rose Roanoke Benson Washburn Chillicothe Germantown Hills Metamora Rome Edelstein Dunlap Spring Bay Spring Bay Princeville Laura Elmwood Oak Hill Oak Hill Williamsfield Williamsfield Appleton Appleton Maquon Yates City Yates City Galesburg East Galesburg West Galesburg West Abingdon Delong Cameron Cameron Monmouth Kirkwood East Berwick Rozetta Gladstone Kirkwood West Burlington Niota Lomax Colusa Burnside Raritan Stronghurst La Harpe Blandinsville Greenbush Roseville Good Hope Bushnell West London Mills Avon County Ford Iroquois Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston Livingston LaSalle Woodford Livingston Marshall Marshall Woodford Woodford Marshall Peoria Woodford Woodford Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Knox Warren Warren Knox Warren Warren Warren Warren Warren Henderson Henderson Henderson Henderson Hancock Henderson Hancock Hancock Henderson Henderson Hancock McDonough Warren Warren McDonough McDonough Fulton Warren CO 17 16 11 24 18 19 17 1] Pee 12 24 45 43 4] 47 38 42 54 50 42 28 28 34 15 28 18 17 20 15 29 30 17 27 34 23 16 13 18 10 14 13 10 45 13 36 49 26 17 46 29 18 24 28 20 ZI PR 3 12 10 14 12 10 14 15 17 24 14 21 15 16 1 20 19 30 17 19 47 34 25 36 31 25 33 28 24 30 23 23 28 30 24 22 2D 20 14 18 17 16 28 10 24 19 19 24 POSOBRIBESEts 2 eS 3) AOE iil SiO 27) OO ae 0) 23 O33 ey IS) hes 2) re ORS ee 21 SO 20 24 1 OS eee) 2183 = 40 4 2 41 Oe 0) 25 AGS S35 4 1 64 ay Ape) 72 {0 24) 4 {ee | Se © 5 4 64 LOR a Gv Srl 68 LOme LO SS Ole a2 i) (S/ eh A KG) Key “Si7/ 10 15 74 1} 2 <43 1 ae 1 2 LOGS a) (a) lees 19 1 84 Lars O'S: 23°92 74 i 62 15 0 66 0 O 1 ttl 7A Ome O 1 its) th 78 OOS I il 5 4 63 Wh dL Cafes MS) SY, 8 1 44 5) (ly! ik i Syl 32 4 70 1 Se eS 23 4 58 LS re © 3 2 64 8 1 48 Sa OOS ae Ol 345553 68 12 4 66 DiS 8 OO Gael Oe 12 0 46 eS: HDD: 2) ies Bt 4 18 43 O62 7.0 1533 Pye) 16.3 20.3 ails} 42.3 60.3 BMS 18.0 24.3 26.0 20.0 2.6 Iie) 54.5 61.0 17.0 36.5 50.0 43.0 75.0 34.0 20.0 34.0 35.0 200.0 48.0 66.0 18.0 1.0 73.0 0.0 27.0 0.0 17.0 18.5 ES 0.0 26.3 0.0 39.0 28.8 26.5 36.5 14.5 8.5 12:5 12.5 7.0 ibs) 125 20.0 59.5 48.0 21.1 30.0 123 36.3 PS) 3255 9.0 24.5 41.0 132.5 Biles 17.0 Block 105C3 105D3 106A3 106B3 106C3 106D3 107A3 107B3 107C3 107D3 L08A1 108A3 108B3 108C2 108C3 108D3 109A3 109B3 109C3 109D3 110A3 110B3 110C3 110D3 111A3 111B3 111B6 111C3 111D3 112A3 112B3 LI2E3 112D3 113A3 113B3 113C3 113D3 114A3 114B3 114C3 114D3 115A3 115B3 115C3 SDS 116A3 116B1 116B3 116C3 116D3 117A3 117B3 iLihKe3} 117D1 1B WADe) 118A3 118B3 118B5 118C1 118C3 118D3 119A3 119B3 119C3 119D3 120A3 120B3 Quad Bushnell East Blyton Farmington West Fairview Fiatt Canton Hanna City Farmington East Banner Glasford Peoria East Peoria East Peoria West Pekin Pekin Marquette Heights Eureka Washington Morton Mackinaw E] Paso Secor Danvers Normal West Lexington Gridley Gridley Normal East Merna Fairbury Chenoa Cooksville Colfax Chatsworth South Forrest South Sibley Melvin West Onarga West Buckley NW Melvin East Buckley Woodworth Onarga East Cissna Park Claytonville Darrow Milford Milford Wellington Stockland Ambia Hoopeston Henning Bismarck Bismarck East Lynn Rankin Rankin Penfield Penfield Potomac Paxton Perdueville Rantoul Gifford Gibson City East Gibson City West County McDonough Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Peoria Peoria Fulton Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Peoria Tazewell Tazewell Tazewell Tazewell Tazewell Woodford Woodford McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean Livingston Livingston McLean Ford Iroquois* Ford Ford Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Iroquois Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Vermilion Ford Champaign Champaign Champaign Vermilion Ford Ford Champaign Champaign Ford McLean CO 24 23 27 2o iN 26 11 12 ayy 36 17 18 Sil 23 25 45 17 49 50 55 33 oa 40 36 65 30 38 34 31 35 60 33 15 43 28 20 ai Hl a3 15 36 Ps 27 24 38 27 38 37 a 60 26 ZS 40 45 41 65 35 23 25 24 34 39 PR 15 18 10 20 22 22 27 22 20 10 it 14 17 13 10 1] 11 20 16 13 2A 12 14 14 16 20 ail 25 18 23 14 21 14 ANNONA WOM 24 Pil 12 12 12 PE) v eo) = a Nw a a eee Neb NANNONNANMNMFRANONOUWUONINOH AS OSFWNnWNWONANANAANMNAA — — Nwordedwo dw eee a Am nbhe ON NI fHOND \o 22 17 21 11 13 17 OB TBE Hrs oo 59 61 59 54 65 48 43 69 63 1 37 49 6 76 58 oi 64 33 74 59 71 25) 38 50 63 87 41 58 40 45 58 64 51 21 43 55 50 56 43 54 45 69 37 62 48 1 We 56 28 49 51 46 1 69 39 4] 76 78 79 79 68 46 45 55 65 46 — eae NN OA = N N _ Re NNORFNOrFRFPRPNODOKFONNNOKNNGDOHPKKHBPNOANNKWAARNWOKANDOANS i) i) Br rR COON WRENN KH NWOUNN WwW 17S 34.0 91.0 20.0 20.0 44.5 46.0 18.0 85.0 64.0 1.0 70.0 37.0 5.0 68.5 12.0 33:5 27.0 15.0 43.0 B25 36.0 225 26.0 58.0 23.0 780.0 81.0 32.0 47.0 27.5 37.0 32.0 1359 24.3 15.0 18.0 11.0 11.6 1283 12.0 18.0 24.4 9.0 23.0 1531 1.0 31.9 23.0 36.0 54.5 45.8 44.5 1.0 69.5 41.5 13.7 30.8 35.0 55.0 70.0 63) 15:5 9.0 17.0 20.5 21.0 Appendix B (cont.). Block 120C3 120D3 121A3 121B3 ICS 121D3 122A3 122B1 122B3 122C3 122D3 123A3 123B3 123C2 123C3 123D3 124A3 124B3 124B4 124C3 124D3 125A3 125B3 125C3 125D3 126A3 126B3 126B4 126C3 126D3 127A3 127B3 127C3 127D3 128A3 128B3 128C3 128D3 129A3 129B1 129B3 129B4 129B5 129C3 129D3 130A3 130B3 130C3 130D3 131A3 131B3 131C3 131D3 132A3 132C3 132D3 134A3 134B3 134C3 134D3 135A3 135B3 IB5€3 135D3 136A3 136B3 136C3 Quad Foosland Fisher Saybrook Arrowsmith Farmer City North Bellflower Holder Bloomington East Bloomington East Heyworth Le Roy Bloomington West Stanford McLean McLean Funks Grove Minier Hopedale Hopedale Emden Armington Delavan North South Pekin Natrona Delavan South Manito Duck Island Duck Island Topeka Forest City St. David Lewistown Duncan Mills Havana Smithfield Adair Vermont Ipava Bardolph Macomb Macomb Macomb Macomb Doddsville Industry Colchester Fountain Green Plymouth Fandon Carthage East Carthage West West Point Bentley Hamilton Warsaw Sutter Tioga Lima Long Island Mendon Bowen Loraine Coatsburg Camp Point Camden Augusta Clayton County McLean Champaign McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean McLean Tazewell Tazewell Tazewell Logan Logan Tazewell Tazewell Mason Logan Tazewell Fulton Mason Mason Mason Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton Fulton McDonough McDonough Fulton McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough McDonough Hancock Hancock McDonough Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Hancock Adams Adams Adams Adams Adams Adams Adams Adams Schuyler Adams Adams COPPR POSOB TBEs Hts 43 1 Bele ~46°821:0 sky ly, 4) 8s BY KOU O84 ee ae Oe OM 2-0) See Ll 4 2 47 28.0 S20 13 Sie = 5424. 46 0 2 0 48 21.0 Oe ee On Dees 0 phy Ry IE) OY) S/S i en le OOmESO.0 of, Gb 0) PA Sy) 22 oe Oe O20. Sih IK te IE A) A (eee ee ee) Ome -1), 0) 34 OS eee OS mes LO) Sey WW 3h Bp Aas 30 4 aes ee 4 782770 [OSLO ROR SSeS Some LO i/o 7e0 30) 38) SCS a. Cone 2 ee Oe S450 (5) eS el 0:0) Si) PPL 8) AKU) NZNO i) ie) eS BG) Lie 23 al 4 ae 0) 3 © wm W se we Sil SX) 6 72 44.0 LS eS 3S ieileS ome () 1 a0 Sil te} 1 2 AGO) Aoys 3304 vies 549830 9 20 18 20 47 54.0 Sil ile 2 i Sisy 10) Syl alge Ab i Sy MGW 2329 Sone OFA 0) 24 24 6 3 54 22.0 2215 6 ih Beh ld) 36) AA) Ab IOS ay) 7, OO Ree2 27,0) PAY) ARE) ey BY) AILS Sieh GY ets SRO 26 420 00320 8 2 @ OW TO toe 1 ee Oe 0) 2-0 37 10 15 14 62 36.0 3 eS eel eee OMOO:S 42 11 13 7 66 214.0 sy iP Ie. Le OS eee 20 4A) ia, 1 SOS 4s) (ils IL SLOG SOM laeeore (44-5 34 O ee ee ae Le At See De le) 44 6 ll IL yl SY20) 469) OR Zee OS S720 Sey th iy See SW Ss 12 eases OF ERST ES Shox PH I ay ENNAD 2 12 Cas) 524878:0 si; 9 41 th uso) 24 27 8 4 59 45.5 LOS ae Sp 42 ee13:0 PML Ala © il Day) Pos 22 34 5 8 61 49.0 Mish Ai 1 ib yf Pal 39 MS alone | 2 A9e] 25a mel Aes OL LOS Pho} Pay AW Ih oy) 945) 55) Block 136D3 137A3 137B3 1373 137D3 138A3 138B3 138C3 138D3 139A3 139B3 139C3 139D3 140A3 140B3 140C3 140D3 141A3 141B3 141C3 141D3 142A3 142B3 142C3 142D3 143A3 143B3 143C3 143D3 144A3 144B3 144C3 144D3 145A3 145B3 145C3 145D3 146A3 146B2 146B3 146B5 146C3 146D2 146D3 146D5 147A3 147B3 147B5 147Cl 147C3 147D3 148A3 148B3 148C3 148D3 149A3 149A5 149B2 149B3 149B4 149C] 149C3 149D3 149D5 149D6 1S0A3 150B3 Quad County Lake Mt. Sterling Brown Rushville North Schuyler Erwin Schuyler Ripley Brown Rushville South Schuyler Astoria Schuyler Ray Schuyler Beardstown Schuyler Clear Lake Cass Kilbourne Mason Bath Fulton Chandlerville Mason Newmansville Cass Easton Mason Biggs Mason Oakford Menard Petersburg Menard New Holland Logan Mason City Mason Greenview Menard Middletown Menard Lincoln East Logan Lincoln West Logan Broadwell Logan Mount Pulaski Logan Waynesville East DeWitt Waynesville West Logan Chestnut Logan Kenney DeWitt Dewitt DeWitt Clinton DeWitt Maroa DeWitt Weldon West DeWitt Mansfield Piatt Farmer City South DeWitt Weldon East Piatt Monticello Piatt Rising Champaign Mahomet Champaign Mahomet Piatt Mahomet Piatt Seymour Piatt Bondville Champaign Bondville Champaign Bondville Champaign Flatville Champaign Thomasboro Champaign Thomasboro Champaign Urbana Champaign Urbana Champaign St. Joseph Champaign Collison Vermilion Royal Champaign Homer Champaign Oakwood Vermilion Danville NE Vermilion Danville NE Vermilion Danville NW Vermilion Danville NW Vermilion Danville NW Vermilion Danville SW Vermilion Danville SW Vermilion Danville SE Vermilion Danville SE Vermilion Danville SE Vermilion Humrick Vermilion Georgetown Vermilion CO PR n KR a j=) WwUnhre hOTOrFr CONF PO 2D) 17 18 14 3] 39 15 27 15 29 35 — — FOFODOADAUOAOCON OO —" — re PO NYA WONMNOOWOOWeK NOS OB TBE Hrs Las 6.0 Zee OOPS) 1 64 80.0 iP 9G, Tes 2 600 45.0 5 54 34.0 Lae O69 520 a el) SS 47 54 6.8 2 64 25.0 Age O2ee1 16/0 4 69 22.0 i Ome Ss> 2, 64° 26:0 I fey BYES (Phe) NOS aS 8.0 Olea, 29 6.0 2 472.0 “\ 9b) Sys! 2 Oe OS Orsi, 7.0 me Sik OK) By teil 8.5 ORS 7.8 3) OO) Ome 27 9.0 ORF 54 8.0 PAS) AICO, 0” 84) 58:0 Ly 42540 241 13:0 la 3423-0 2a 20E elie Le AeA? S yy ey NEKO 0 76 40.0 Omen OSes 010) 0 1 2.0 De) -0) 0 1 1.0 0 40) 10:0 0 1 1.0 OmmeS6n 317-0 0 1 1.0 [ie 42 ly) gy SY} MES 0 3 IES 0 1 1.0 0 69 34.0 ie 62024,0 8 44 45.0 One SOma 195 Jee S42 Olle Le 882212610 6.) 747-106.0 0 1 1.0 0 ] 1.0 Gael 112470 0 1 1.0 ] 0 1.0 7. 74 84.0 Zan 952 201.0 4 88 79.0 6 83 142.0 py Heh8) MISHIAG, Bh ify Age, 417 Appendix B (cont.). Block Quad 150B4 Georgetown 150C3 Chrisman 150D3 ~— Scottland 151A3 Sidell 151B3 ~— Allerton 1513 Newman 151D3. Hume 152A3 Longview 152B3 Villa Grove NW 15263 Villa Grove 152D3 Murdock 153A3 Tolono 153B3 Ivesdale 1533 Atwood 153D3 Tuscola 154A3 Bement 154B3 Cerro Gordo 154C3 La Place 154D3 Hammond 155A3 Argenta 155B3 Forsyth 155C2 Decatur 155C3 ~Decatur 155D3 Long Creek 156A3 Warrensburg 156B3 Latham 156C3 Niantic 156D3 — Harristown 157A3 Lake Fork 157A4 — Lake Fork 157B3 Cornland 157C3 Mechanicsburg 157D3. = Mt. Auburn 158A3 Williamsville 158B3 Athens 158C3 — Springfield West 158D3 Springfield East 159A3 Salisbury 159B3 Tallula 159C3 Pleasant Plains 159D3 ~—- Farmingdale 160A3 = Ashland 160B3 ‘Virginia 160C3 ___Literberry 160D3 ‘Prentice 161A3 ~=Arenzyille East 161B3 Arenzville West 161C3_ Chapin 161D3 Concord 162A3 Cooperstown 162B3 Versailles 162C3 _— Perry East 162D3 Meredosia 163A3 Mount Sterling 163B3 Kellerville 163C3 ‘Fishhook 164A3 Liberty 164B3 Columbus 164C3 Payson 164D3 Richfield 165A3 = Quincy East 165D3 Marblehead 167A3 Barry 167B3 Huu lll 167D3 Rockport 168A3 New Salem 168B3 Baylis 418 County Vermilion Edgar Edgar Vermilion Champaign Douglas Edgar Champaign Champaign Douglas Douglas Champaign Piatt Piatt Douglas Piatt Piatt Piatt Piatt Macon Macon Macon Macon Macon Macon Logan Christian Macon Logan Logan Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Menard Sangamon Sangamon Menard Menard Sangamon Sangamon Cass Cass Morgan Morgan Cass Cass Morgan Morgan Brown Brown Pike Pike Brown Adams Adams Adams Adams Adams Adams Adams Adams Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike CO 13 Sil 43 10 38 27 PR ie MW Mmnr~© = Wm 10 24 10 14 17 17 26 16 18 26 16 22 a 21 14 32 24 21 11 12 14 12 a 16 20 11 12 25 16 26 22 PS) 19 20 23 BY) 26 33 20 2S 17 22 15 p45) 24 24 23 17 34 18 13 12 17 23 16 15 16 16 12. 10 16 36 17 13 15 12 13 17 tS 10 ye 10 18 15 13 11 15 12 13 15 13 22 52 15 12 21 2 10 20 15 OB TBE Hrs 0 1 1.0 (oo 40m SS 1 48 9.0 (PS See 4523 ORF 3555410 OR 62225 ORs 4 10:0 OMe SOM FIS25 St let 938 lh Coxfl 6.4 () 0.6) DR Noy PALO) AL Bly ike) 4 Bye) AE Wise PARES) OnStar 0 th Gey DBS th. ML WISH) (Gy les) 3 72. SO) 0 46 = 20.0 0 1 1.0 ee) See tS a ome SEC) Oe BR) DIGS) Om 54, 9.0 ll es) isa) [S25 TS 0) Syl 7.8 sit 7.0 3 48 US i 60m IT 25 Oe 3 mel Ons 0 68 15.0 Sh They, PRs: Ome 635 0.0 2 ODO 6 Sh GAL ITS 5 OR IEG A wales, hil 8) Om OL 16:0 OOM LOS OMA ae OO i. ales. 3? Ry Aililes) Sy teh) PAO SS Ba 601226 Sie tee LOL) ay They sin! 3) tofsy OG ORnOS 5.0 2 Oe aS:0 DM R30) ORG 1 69 ero 5) iW PLS 258 8.0 PL ety PKG Phe eis) EO) me 6523-0) 4” 62° 28.0 2a 04 eee 3 9 60 67.0 ASR Sa SOO AM 49120 OR 65 6.0 2 60 Re 16:0 Block 168C3 168D3 169A3 169B3 169C3 169C5 169D3 169D5 170A3 170B3 170C3 170D3 171A3 171B3 JAKES 171D3 172A3 172B3 172C3 172D3 173A3 173B3 17/363 173D3 174A3 174B3 174D3 175A3 175B3 175C3 176A3 176B3 176C3 176D3 177A3 177B3 KES 177D3 178A3 178A6 178B3 178C3 178D3 179A3 179B3 179C3 179D3 179DS5 180A3 180B3 180C3 180D3 181A3 181B3 181C3 181D3 182A3 182B3 182C3 182D3 183A3 183B3 183C3 183D3 184A3 184B2 184B3 Quad Summer Hill Pittsfield Florence Griggsville Milton Milton Bedford Bedford Lynnville Winchester Alsey Manchester Alexander Jacksonville Nortonville Franklin Loami New Berlin Waverly Virden North New City Chatham Divernon Pawnee Grove City Edinburg Taylorville Macon West Stonington Willeys Dalton City Macon East Obed Findlay Cadwell Lovington Kirksville Sullivan Arcola Arcola Arthur Cooks Mills Humboldt Oakland Hindsboro Charleston North Ashmore Ashmore Redmon Brocton Kansas Grandview Saint Bernice Paris North Paris South Sandford Dennison Marshall Snyder Hutton Clarksville Westfield East Casey Clark Center Westfield West Charleston South Charleston South County Pike Pike Scott Pike Pike Pike Pike Pike Morgan Scott Scott Scott Morgan Morgan Morgan Morgan Sangamon Sangamon Morgan Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Sangamon Christian Sangamon Christian Macon Christian Christian Macon Macon Shelby Shelby Moultrie Moultrie Moultrie . Moultrie Douglas Coles Douglas Coles Coles Douglas Douglas Coles Coles Coles Edgar Edgar Coles Edgar Edgar Edgar Edgar Edgar Clark Clark Clark Clark Clark Clark Clark Clark Coles Coles Coles 14 23 15 18 18 27 25 31 59 48 38 20 4] 18 35 17 28 55 14 16 Pa INS) 26 17 Zi 25 PX) 32 24 17 33 23 22 36 61 ay) 56 PR 38) 25 21 19 18 Pb) 24 iby 20 27 19 19 20 20 25 10 22 11 14 21 11 19 20 14 18 17 25 2D, 14 1] 28 15 13 12 13 24 10 I 7/ 12 19 20 16 11 24 19 19 25 22 20 POS OBS I BEM ts are. 0 2 P64 L/S ee OF 4 2 64 ORG SSG SO m 97 Coss ho 1 NPs )/ 1S ee OU) 2 ee 0 Phos 2) (off 1S a oO) Moy (0). fil Loa ele OS 159 Ol 31908 45 1S Lona Za O2 31 Ome 30m 7 40 Om oo DSR OR 56 14 0 47 16 ORe4S We (0) als: 33 Bees 6 RRO M32 Te A) 26 30 ee 139 Jee s3 Sem 43 yf a LIM M28 45 CReSe 49 aS Thy SHil 1GS aso SOR 70 OW 2 Cuelies 7 LO R279 14 4 47 1 Se lOG 13 eee Ae 14928 555 we it Ue ey 10 ale, Ml ik PR: 22 AS LIOR 55 [Seales 33 2 64 1SeORe35 22m wel) 23 la SS 13 See So 20 LS 30 eae) 33! 20: Om Ti Ws PE Sy} 19 sae 48 LOM Gm 6S Sas FEO] 149s 1S a. 83 12.0 7.0 16.5 45.0 104.0 120.0 17.0 1.0 oD LIES 13.0 9.5 10.0 6): 12.3 8.0 3.0 10.0 11.0 7.0 12.0 21.0 8.0 4.0 33.0 11.0 28.6 135 10.0 54.1 33:5 25.5 15.0 12.0 68.5 54.5 87.0 84.3 16.5 12.0 23.8 43.2 35.4 2355 14.7 54.0 43.2 13:5 14.0 14.0 Doe 14.0 35.0 12.0 16.0 16.0 34.0 9.0 23.0 14.0 22.0 1S 34.3 40.0 162.8 SIF 113.9 Appendix B (cont.). Block 184B4 184B6 184C3 184D3 185A2 185A3 185B3 185C3 185D3 186A3 186B3 186C3 186D3 187A3 187B3 187C3 187D3 188A3 188B3 188C3 188D3 189A3 189B3 189C3 189D3 190A3 190B3 190C3 190D3 191A3 191B3 LOWES 191D3 192A3 192B3 1923 192D3 193A3 193B3 1o3G3 193D3 194A3 194B3 194Cl 194C3 194D3 195A3 195B3 195D3 197A3 197B3 ee 197D3 198A3 198B3 198C3 198D3 199A3 199B3 199C3 199D3 200A3 200B3 200C3 200D3 201A3 201B3 Quad Charleston South Charleston South Toledo Union Center Mattoon East Mattoon East Mattoon West Neoga Johnstown Windsor Middlesworth Stewardson West Stewardson East Shelbyville Tower Hill Lakewood Fancher Pana Owaneco Ohlman Oconee Clarksdale Morrisonville Nokomis SW Nokomis Raymond NE Farmersville Atwater Raymond Virden South Palmyra Carlinville West Carlinville East Scottville Athensville Greenfield Hettick Roodhouse East Roodhouse West Carrollton Daum Pearl East Pearl West Pleasant Dale Vly. Pleasant Dale Vly. Kampsville Pleasant Hill East Pleasant Hill West Annada Hardin Hamburg Foley Nutwood Jerseyville North Boyer Creek Otterville Jerseyville South Summerville Medora Brighton Shipman Gillespie North Plainview Bunker Hill Gillespie South Butler Litchfield County Coles Coles Cumberland Cumberland Coles Coles Coles Cumberland Cumberland Shelby Shelby Shelby Shelby Shelby Shelby Shelby Shelby Christian Christian Montgomery Shelby Christian Christian Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Macoupin Macoupin Montgomery Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Greene Greene Macoupin Greene Greene Greene Greene Greene Pike Calhoun Calhoun Greene Pike Pike Calhoun Greene Calhoun Calhoun Calhoun Greene Greene Jersey Jersey Macoupin Jersey Jersey Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Macoupin Montgomery Macoupin CO NN BPBRWHEWN 39 32 28 43 57 75 49 65 47 56 82 3 30 10 2 21 20 12 10 24 18 ay 26 35) 16 21 20 54 21 46 34 46 39 Bi) 56 68 52 47 47 45 22 Si 43 20 52 34 60 52 25 4] 21 18 22 25 18 17 15 PO OB TBE Hrs mL ay ay all is) hs) gh Mey “Ske: Ona ee Ue) Oy ey ish lye 2) en OO [Sele O) Sy Se [2 () LO ioe Sean 92 oe UG, a i Bil Y 3) Cal 3. 1 43 2 eee ae) 52 OO Oy ih Bs me 34 2) le Oe lees Oe Ome 8 O 24 ae ae | I ee 12S an 04 a) 17 1 74 2 aS) 144 2 61 Ky 2 SM 22 eo ay Sh ey ik 7A Tl Py SASS) ih 2 ay 8) GE 1S eee, 10 5 84 0 O 89 3. 4 83 2 Ome o 3) ih 7G 3) MIE a) ORS © Gul LOS Senn 2 ies ee 2 ey eye ey i Sf 8) ee) 5 2 84 Ae 00 itey 7A OS Th Sk A [32 4 | es G00) ley a 7h) 1 See OO LO Seep liaee SS 49 1 74 ae ee 4.0 13.8 6.3 18.0 12.0 4.0 24.9 27.6 Ish) 12.0 36.0 60.0 74.0 44.0 37.0 30.0 38.0 73.0 15.0 15.0 5.0 16.0 14.5 16.5 18.0 SES 8.0 8.0 11.0 76.0 8.0 2230) 15.0 14.5 15.0 1255 24.0 16.5 16.0 11.5 76.3 30.0 16.0 34.0 40.0 37.0 49.0 49.5 83.0 4.0 43.0 16.0 6.0 30.5 36.0 48.0 68.0 61.0 7.5 60.0 68.0 8.0 7.0 8.0 8.0 6.0 48.0 6.0 Block 201C3 201D3 202A3 202B3 202C3 202D1 202D3 203A3 203B3 203D3 204A3 204B3 204C3 204D3 205A3 205B3 205C3 205D3 206A3 206B3 206C3 206D3 207A3 207B3 207C3 207D3 208A3 208B3 208C3 208D3 209A3 209B3 209C3 209D3 211A3 211B3 PALES 211D3 212A3 212B3 PA VXE 3} 212D3 213A3 213B3 2133 213D3 214A3 214B3 214C3 214D3 215A3 215B3 215D3 216A3 216B3 216C3 216D3 217A3 217B3 2AFC3 217D3 218A3 218B3 218C3 218D3 219A3 219B3 Quad Mount Olive Sorento North Bald Knob Hillsboro Coffeen Fillmore Fillmore Ramsey Ramsey Lake Vera Beecher City Herrick Avena Altamont West Effingham North Shumway Altamont East Effingham South Woodbury Teutopolis Dieterich Wheeler Hazel Dell Greenup Rose Hill Yale Annapolis Moriah Oblong North Eaton Fairbanks West Union Hutsonville Merom Heathsville Flat Rock Birds Russellville Stoy Oblong South Landes Chauncey Ste. Marie Newton Wakefield Dundas Latona Eberle Louisville East Sailor Springs Hord Edgewood Louisville West Loogootee Brownstown St. Paul Kinmundy Vandalia Hagarstown Wildcat Lake Patoka Mulberry Grove Greenville Beaver Creek Pleasant Mound Sorento South New Douglas County Macoupin Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Montgomery Fayette Fayette Fayette Fayette Fayette Fayette Fayette Effingham Effingham Effingham Effingham Cumberland Effingham Effingham Jasper Cumberland Cumberland Jasper Jasper Clark Clark Jasper Crawford Clark Clark Crawford Crawford Crawford Crawford Lawrence Lawrence Crawford Jasper Richland Lawrence Jasper Jasper Richland Richland Jasper Effingham Clay Clay Effingham Effingham Clay Fayette Fayette Marion Marion Fayette Fayette Fayette Marion Bond Bond Bond Bond Bond Madison CO Nw MY Mmm n= A vO 18 Li 22 17 35 30 27 26 Ie) 25 1] 20 12 22 18 11 22 29 1] 16 38 1] 20 24 19 20 51 45 31 12 16 41 48 12 24 44 36 14 13 34 45 12 17 39 26 24 19 27 22 37 21 28 26 28 14 30 23 13 _ Ne Mm ooh — MN CO COW NY Noe NN Ww D9 16 17 21 19 PO OB TBE Hrs Sy 30 2 68 oe ee l4 OOF 33 4 62 1D elas) © PEE 292 53 eel 25) eee 04: Pe 1 lOO 1 See OO ey iP By i (ey AMY SW 23 aS aoe es 23 ae) eS Sy)" Ih Bs ey Ik BS) 23) OO? of A BE, 19 1 54 2 eee Ot 2 Ol ee laeeo4t 3 ee en Akoya “7! ieee eS 2, aS 8) al SD 2 a0 23 O 42 2 i) re O2 1 eee 0) OOO ee | ae) 14 9 64 1S OMe S | See O oA 2 16 1 74 12 Li 42 7 ee (ORS aOS Ws} 22) tes Key al Ss ey AND LO Ome sy th 2 eae O (eS) SH ph sy AGS, pie OE Nee! Xey rfl 2 eel ae at 9s. atey 2 all) Sl eOO 2 eS DT eile D4. fap BPP gers) Looe OO 2 lOO 19 4 30) [oe 0) — oo — oO 60 7.0 17.5 14.3 29.0 Pp aS) 100.0 14.0 19.0 5.0 8.0 10.5 11.0 13.0 9.0 12.0 10.9 9.0 14.0 20.5 9.0 12.0 7.0 9.0 30.0 18.0 19.0 46.5 25.0 2ABS 23.0 i) de> 19.0 16.0 15.0 80.0 16.0 27.0 15.0 13.0 15.0 17.0 12.0 0.0 17.0 23.0 Les 10.3 12.0 13.0 6.0 Os) 12.0 6.0 8.0 8.0 9.4 135 19.0 12.0 13.0 10.0 12.0 12.0 8.0 12.0 8.0 419 Appendix B (cont.). Block 219C3 219D3 220A3 220B3 220C3 220D3 221A3 221B3 221D3 222A3 222B3 223A3 225A3 225B3 225C3 225D3 226A3 226B3 226C3 226D3 227A3 227B3 227C3 227D3 228A3 228B3 228C3 228D3 229A3 229B3 UPXES 229D3 230A3 230B3 230C3 230D3 231A3 231B3 231C3 231D3 232A3 232B3 232C3 232D3 233A3 233B3 233C3 233D3 234A3 234B3 234C3 234D3 235A3 PBS D6 23563 237B3 238A3 238B3 238C3 238D3 239A3 239B3 239C3 240C3 240D3 241A3 241C3 420 Quad Grantfork Pocahontas Worden Prairietown Edwardsville Marine Bethalto Alton Wood River Elsah Grafton Brussels Monks Mound Granite City Cahokia French Village St. Jacob Collinsville O’Fallon Lebanon St. Rose Highland Trenton Breese Keyesport Stolletown Beckemeyer Carlyle Fairman Boulder Centralia West Centralia East Omega Salem North Salem South Iuka Xenia NE Xenia Orchardville Johnsonville Clay City Flora Cisne Enterprise Olney Noble Mount Erie West Salem Sumner Claremont Berryville Lancaster Vincennes Lawrenceville St. Francisville E. Mount Carmel Mount Carmel Bone Gap Grayville Keensburg Albion North Albion NW Golden Gate Boyleston Burnt Prairie Crisp Bluford County Madison Bond Madison Madison Madison Madison Madison Madison Madison Jersey Calhoun Calhoun Madison Madison St. Clair St. Clair Madison Madison St. Clair St. Clair Clinton Madison St. Clair Clinton Clinton Clinton Clinton Clinton Marion Clinton Clinton Marion Marion Marion Marion Marion Clay Marion Marion Wayne Clay Clay Wayne Wayne Richland Richland Wayne Edwards Lawrence Richland Edwards Wabash Lawrence Lawrence Wabash Wabash Wabash Edwards Edwards Wabash Edwards Wayne Wayne Wayne Wayne Wayne Jefferson CO 14 19 24 33 36 25 10 23 40 29 29 46 43 31 12 25 25 20 30 18 22 28 48 44 28 30 14 42 30 11 18 10 26 21 39 29 45 48 4] 37 So 38 42 31 Bo 34 26 Si) ZS 4] 31 25 32 29 15 20 32 39 40 42 34 15 PR POF OBF TBE Hrs 28 13 26 21 22 21 21 40 33 33 12 20 26 0 20 25 45 7 22 23 op) y 8 22 19 23 20 pp) 18 ils) 18 19) 7 13 21 21 14 17 14 16 20 9 1 34 17 16 2 20 17 12 24 19 18 12 20 14 20 10 12 Wy) 16 a5 21 19 19 28 Zul 33 25 22 2 30 12 i 13 22 15 12 17 13 16 21 27 22 16 9 13 14 12 Il 13 13 18 i 12 16 13 16 13 30 — _ mm PO — — bo — Ane BAAN WAN THKWNUNDHE ANN HFWHMNBUNNNNKE NP HKHENNANNK HPNHE WORF RP RP NON PDO MAWODDAKH KP RWANH = OO 55 53 56 59 72 71 62 70 65 74 75 66 88 3 83 73 69 56 66 61 64 47 44 70 77 79 65 68 65 16 67 47 52 61 67 55 68 72 47 66 70 59 52 62 16 65 66 55 68 66 64 65 58 64 74 42 51 52 58 47 40 50 68 63 61 52 52 9.0 9.0 Shiles 26.5 41.0 10.0 Pah 14.0 2 14.0 7.0 41.0 40.0 1.0 38.0 Dar 5.0 24.0 DAES eS 9.0 7.0 31.0 9.0 16.5 10.0 8.0 9.0 13.0 9.0 6.0 41.0 12.0 18.5 17.0 12.0 14.0 3) hea 16.0 15.0 14.0 11.0 14.0 24.0 18.0 15.0 87.0 14.0 18.0 16.7 83.0 25.0 16.0 272.0 93.0 57.0 38.5 116.8 24.8 132.0 13.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 2.0 Block 241D3 242A3 242B3 242C3 242D3 243A3 243B3 243C3 243D3 244A3 244B3 244C3 244D3 245A3 245B3 245C3 245D3 246A3 246B3 246C3 246D3 247A3 247A5 247B3 247C3 247D3 248D3 249A3 250A3 250B3 250D3 251A3 251B3 251C3 251D3 252A3 252B3 252C3 252D3 253A3 253B3 253 C5 253D3 254A3 254B3 254C3 254D3 255A3 255B3 255C3 255D3 256A3 256B3 256C3 256D3 257A3 257B3 257C3 257D3 258A3 258B3 258C3 258D3 259B3 ASICS 260A3 260B3 Quad Wayne City Harmony Kell Mt. Vernon Opdyke Walnut Hill Irvington Ashley Woodlawn Hoyleton Addieville Nashville Beaucoup Okawville Venedy St. Libory Oakdale Mascoutah Freeburg New Athens West New Athens East Millstadt Millstadt Columbia Waterloo Paderborn Valmeyer Selma Ames Renault Prairie Du Rocher Baldwin Red Bud Evansville Walsh Coulterville Tilden Steeleville Percy Todds Mill Winkle Pinckneyville Pyatts Waltonville Tamaroa Du Quoin Sesser Spring Garden Ina Rend Lake Dam Ewing Belle Prairie City Dahlgren Macedonia McLeansboro Springerton Bungay Thackeray Enfield Crossville Centerville Carmi Maunie New Harmony Solitude Emma New Haven County Wayne Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Jefferson Washington Washington Jefferson Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington St. Clair St. Clair Washington St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair St. Clair Monroe Monroe Monroe Monroe Monroe Monroe Monroe Randolph Randolph Randolph Randolph Randolph Randolph | Randolph Randolph Randolph Perry Perry Perry Perry Jefferson Perry Perry Franklin Jefferson Jefferson Franklin Franklin Hamilton Jefferson Franklin Hamilton White Hamilton Hamilton White White White White White White White White White CORP: 31 17 29 25 19 26 40 38 33 28 30 39 a 29 4] 47 34 23 18 30 26 28 29 39 34 30 28 27 28 30 Pil 30 31 27 34 22 28 28 15 25 26 aS, 12 24 12 ite, 48 19 28 29 31 29 17 28 26 24 37 18 28 10 6 12 8 8 6 27 21 28 13 17 24 21 28 24 17 26 30 19 22 17 12 18 il 29 24 17 14 42 35 16 14 2 16 10 18 13 12 13 19 17) 13 19 9 18 16 1s 15 9 20 19 7 s) 11 5 10 16 19 19 15 2 24 7 19 3 26 14 PO OB TBE Hrs 15 23 18 33 26 26 12 8 19 9 13 14 12 8 7 12 13 18 10 14 12 14 11 12 7 15 9 17 6 13 13 3 18 11 13 6 oo — N bv RBPNNRE NP NR KE NWWON NNN & bO Nm SNR NNORF WHNKANWAONONOCHKHK WOK OHNO OO N~1— Co SCOFFONFNONONWONWNUONKONKF KP KF NEF NWNNNKRFONNNAUNUNUNAWOANONANNCOWRONWWHKE NK WN OK AY 61 34 36 56 42 36 61 60 64 51 55 a7 59 76 69 62 67 78 68 69 58 67 76 63 ah 13.0 0.0 4.5 35 IS iI: 9.0 13.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 13.0 0.0 12.0 24.0 20.6 16.0 17.0 39.0 18.7 22a 81.0 88.0 18.0 44.0 57 220.5 56 57 76 Tal 68 1 48 57 51 J] 49 50 51 56 28. 49 61 56 54 53 51 59 58 70 51 53 51 62 81 47 61 69 62 68 62 73 33 58 42 65 69 28.0 21.0 19.0 23.0 11.0 8.0 7.0 10.5 Tks) 8.0 11.0 9.0 7.0 10.0 IES) Nes 10.0 3.9 8.5 8.5 4.5 at eo 26.0 8.5 13.0 3.0 13e7, 15.0 18.0 220 21 0 12.0 14.0 28.0 15.0 12.0 11.0 19.5 26.5 20.0 Appendix B (cont.). Block 260C3 260D3 261A3 261B3 261C3 261D3 262A3 262B3 262C3 262D3 263A3 263B3 263C3 263D3 264A3 264B3 264C3 264D3 265A3 265B3 265C3 265D3 266A3 266B3 266C3 266D3 267A3 267B3 270A3 270A5 270B3 270C3 270D3 271A3 271B3 ZINES 271D3 272A3 272B3 272C3 272D3 Quad New Haven SW Wabash Island Norris City Broughton Eldorado Ridgway Walpole Akin Harco Galatia Thompsonville West Frankfort Johnston City Pittsburg Christopher Elkville De Soto Herrin Vergennes Ava Oraville Murphysboro Willisville Welge Rockwood Raddle Chester Kaskaskia Pomona Pomona Gorham Wolf Lake Cobden Crab Orchard Lake Carbondale Makanda Lick Creek Crab Orchard Marion Goreville Creal Springs County Gallatin Gallatin White Hamilton Saline Gallatin Hamilton Franklin Williamson Saline Franklin Franklin Williamson Williamson Franklin Jackson Jackson Williamson Jackson Jackson Jackson Jackson Jackson Randolph Randolph Jackson Randolph Randolph Jackson Jackson Jackson Union Union Williamson Jackson Union Union Williamson Williamson Johnson Johnson CO 15 16 33 31 16 23 26 17 27 28 24 28 a2 34 20 Sif 36 16 22 24 42 21 3y) 28 28 29 28 65 38 ay) 4] 68 2) 24 2S 25 ol 10 4] PR 28 33 21 16 1] 19 12 23 11 11 11 aS may 10 18 19 15 40 18 10 20 36 19 iP) 24 11 11 13 14 PO OB TBE Hrs 16 19 15 18 32 26 20 24 30 30 15 23 Ae) 23 28 48 6 27 28 24 35 26 25 17, 24 20 10 11 11 4 oh 16 14 16 ai Di) 17 17 27 44 18 Nr OMOrF KN NF WONRF RF WrFOWNNNN TAN CWOWNK ORK KK OK NS 38 63 81 70 48 65 57 60 63 60 51 74 63 68 40 oe 54 74 69 73 78 86 95 96 76 55 51 46 69 67 73 8.5 28.5 293) 21.0 16.5 10.0 13.0 8.0 8.5 60.5 6.0 18.0 11.0 10.5 6.5 37.0 116.0 14.5 16.0 24.5 29.0 69.1 16.5 es 6.5 57.0 9.5 7.0 103.5 12.0 134.9 54.0 15.0 37.0 39.1 es) 8.0 7.0 oD 26.5 33.0 Block 273A3 273B3 273C3 273D3 274A3 274B3 274C3 274D3 275B3 PEP NCS) 275D3 277A3 277B3 PABLO) 278A3 278B3 278C3 278D3 279A3 279B3 DIES 279D3 280A3 280B3 280C3 280D3 281A3 281C3 281D3 283A3 283B3 283D3 284A3 284B3 284C3 285A3 286A3 286B3 287B3 287C3 Quad Harrisburg Carrier Mills Stonefort Eddyville Equality Rudement Herod Karbers Ridge Shawneetown Saline Mines Dekoven Rosiclare Shetlerville Golconda Waltersburg Glendale Reevesville Brownfield Bloomfield Vienna Karnak Mermet Mt. Pleasant Anna Dongola Cypress Jonesboro McClure Mill Creek Tamms Thebes Cache Olmsted Pulaski Cairo Joppa Paducah NE Metropolis Smithland Little Cypress County Saline Williamson Johnson Pope Gallatin Saline Pope Hardin Gallatin Hardin Hardin Hardin Pope Pope Pope Johnson Massac Pope Johnson Johnson Johnson Massac Union Union Alexander Pulaski Union Alexander Alexander Alexander Alexander Alexander Pulaski Pulaski Alexander Massac Massac Massac Pope Pope CO 12 28 28 13 ZA 15 32 21 28 13 11 33 10 US 33 318) 17 27 22 aS 36 42 33 87 37 42 385) 33 39 34 31 38 22 13 19 36 17 30 3) 23 28 32 22 1 17 li, 16 18 20 14 11 11 19 11 12 17 11 19 13 25 13 30 PO OB TBE Hrs 17 21 28 31 PH 13 14 25 26 27 8 ZS 16 26 3] 32 20 Ay 32 43 30 24 15 12 9 15 6 22 10 1] 15 9 1] 20 1] 34 34 28 20 AS) = APNWNOF OWW Or KR BRR RPK WP PRWNNWWNWNWWNHNWHKN NWO fey AIS: 54 ewe: SI G7e3 68 14.0 70 29.8 73 30.0 (hh SHke: 74 = 26.0 Jpey PES TRY PANY SZ.0 55) 10:0 77 =24.0 38) 9238 71 = 24.0 IE) PY Gome23.0 TG: 66 16.0 68 36.0 T5100 66027 el 50 12:0 SOM S:0 57 18.0 62 16.0 104 623.5 70 19.0 TAL Piles 57 16.5 COM 56 16.0 62 17.0 O2mISs5 68 17.0 () fhS 721830 60 15.5 86 29.0 Sie.) 421 Appendix C. Summary of atlas data by county. Information in the table was generated from priority block data and uses the highest breeding status category for a species in the county. The columns represent number of species Confirmed (CO), Probable (PR), Possible (PO), and Observed (OB), and the total number with breeding evidence (i.e., the sum of Confirmed, Probable, and Possible) (TBE). County CO PR PO OB TBE County CO PR PO OB TBE Adams 81 21 12 9 114 befe 66 21 13 8 100 Alexander 74 14 Ne Y 100 Livingston 50 19 {py 10 81 Bond 49 16 16 4 81 Logan By 15 112 3 79 Boone 20 aS 24 4 69 McDonough ths) 1] 10 6 96 Brown 62 18 10 3 90 McHenry 92 iS af 5 114 Bureau 15 13 16 7 104 McLean 87 3 7 4 OF Calhoun 76 16 6 iLi| 98 Macon 67 17 13 5 97 Carroll WP 17 19 4 108 Macoupin Sy 20 IS 5 92 Cass 48 24 ik 3 89 Madison 71 26 12 1] 109 Champaign Wi 14 10 5 101 Marion 62 14 14 4 90 Christian 5) 14 15 5 84 Marshall 70 15 9 6 94 Clark 68 16 16 1 100 Mason 64 14 15 3 93 Clay 65 10 15 3 90 Massac 50 iy 20 3 89 Clinton 65 19 9 6 93 Menard 67 1] 9 5 87 Coles 78 19 9 3 106 Mercer 70 14 17 S 101 Cook 99 16 26 11 141 Monroe 62 25 12 5 99 Crawford 60 14 14 5 88 Montgomery 69 13} 10 4 92 Cumberland 5] 16 17 2) 84 Morgan 67 18 11 qf 96 DeKalb Si 15 11 4 83 Moultrie 75 15 11 10 101 DeWitt 57 a 17 1 95 Ogle 78 14 14 5 106 Douglas 59 20 16 3 95 Peoria 86 19 9 i 114 DuPage 81 6 13 10 100 Perry 54 18 5 2 TE Edgar 49 14 16 1 79 Piatt 58 24 12 2 94 Edwards 55 14 16 ill 85 Pike 81 BS = 8 110 Effingham 46 18 24 6 88 Pope 72 18 10 8 100 Fayette 67 18 18 3 103 Pulaski 49 17 9 l 75 Ford 53 18 9 Q 80 Putnam 47 15 21 2 83 Franklin 51 21 17 7 89 Randolph 56 19 IS 2 90 Fulton 74 15 13 10 102 Richland 63 10 13 4 86 Gallatin 50 28 12 a) 90 Rock Island 59 40 12 13 111 Greene 86 16 11 3 113 St. Clair 76 22, 19 3 ip Grundy 60 7 20 2 87 Saline 4] 31 19 2 91 Hamilton 65 10 21 2 96 Sangamon 68 9 15 4 92 Hancock 719 14 12 6 105 Schuyler 66 8 Pal 1 95 Hardin 33 40 16 3 89 Scott 46 23 20 3 89 Henderson 53 Ds 19 2 97 Shelby 89 8 5 5 102 Henry 60 9 14 3 83 Stark 50 16 5 4 71 Iroquois 1S 13 11 5 99 Stephenson 76 8 12 | 96 Jackson 87 iS) 12 9 114 Tazewell 75 11 iW 4 103 Jasper 52 20 18 7 90 Union 93 12 6 6 111 Jefferson 45 25 14 ® 84 Vermilion 117 2 S 9 124 Jersey 1S 17 1 6 93 Wabash 55 23 19 14 97 Jo Daviess 86 10 14 4 110 Warren 35 20 12 2 87 Johnson 66 15 19 6 100 Washington =f 21 9 5 87 Kane 84 10 15 5 109 Wayne 65 13 10 5 88 Kankakee 69 18 12 6 99 White 74 17 14 1 105 Kendall 56 13 15 15 84 Whiteside 63 14 1] 8 88 Knox Si 34 11 1 102 Will 102 16 10 4 128 Lake 96 11 16 iy 123 Williamson 76 10 13 1 99 LaSalle 84 14 17 6 115 Winnebago 96 23 8 11 127 Lawrence 59 20 5 4 84 Woodford 74 9 5 3 88 422 Appendix D. Summary of atlas data by species. For each species in the atlas database, the table lists the number of priority blocks with Confirmed (CO), Probable (PR), Possible (PO), and Observed (OB) records; the total number of priority blocks with breeding evidence (i.e., the sum of Confirmed, Probable, or Possible records) (TBE); and the number of counties with breeding evidence records for the species in priority blocks. Species with no records listed were found only in nonpriority blocks. Common Name Scientific Name CO PR PO OB TBE #of Counties Canada Goose Branta canadensis 212 40 38 43 290, 78 Mute Swan Cygnus olor 5 Pp 5 3. 12 8 Wood Duck Aix sponsa 324 76 76 24 476 98 Gadwall Anas strepera 0 0 1 0 ] 1 American Wigeon Anas americana 0 0 0 0 0 0 American Black Duck Anas rubripes 0 l | l Z, 2 Mallard Anas platyrhynchos 297 140 90 ay 527 95 Blue-winged Teal Anas discors 35 32 21 13 88 39 Northern Shoveler Anas clypeata 0 0 0 | i Northern Pintail Anas acuta 1 Q ] 0 4 4 Green-winged Teal Anas crecca 0 l 0 4 ] 1 Canvasback Aythya valisineria 0 0 0 0 0 0 Redhead Aythya americana 0 0 0 ] 0 0 Ring-necked Duck Aythya collaris 0 0 ] 0 ] ] Greater Scaup Aythya marila 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis 0 1 0 2 | l Bufflehead Bucephala albeola 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hooded Merganser Lophodytes cucullatus 7 2 5 5 14 11 Common Merganser Mergus merganser 0 0 | 0 ] 1 Red-breasted Merganser Mergus serrator 0 0 0 2 0 0 Ruddy Duck Oxyura jamaicensis 2 ] 3 3 6 6 Gray Partridge Perdix perdix 32 21 12 2 65 19 Ring-necked Pheasant Phasianus colchicus 276 116 164 9 556 72 Ruffed Grouse Bonasa umbellus 1 0 0 0 l 1 Greater Prairie-Chicken Tympanuchus cupido 1 0 0 0 ] | Wild Turkey Meleagris gallopavo 58 21 63 8 142 ail Northern Bobwhite Colinus virginianus 203 592 150 6 745 99 Common Loon Gavia immer 0 0 1 1 Pied-billed Grebe Podilymbus podiceps i 8 8 17 43 22 Brown Pelican Pelecanus occidentalis 0 0 0 1 0 0 Double-crested Cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus 1 2 12 17 IIs 10 American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosus 0 1 5 6 6 5 Least Bittern Ixobrychus exilis 4 6 9 4 19 15 Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias 10 1 210 Sail iP Te Great Egret Ardea albus 2 0 36 84 38 21 Snowy Egret Egretta thula 0 i 0 5) ] 1 Little Blue Heron Egretta caerulea 0 0 7 30 7 5 Tricolored Heron Egretta tricolor 0 0 | 0 | 1 Cattle Egret Bubulcus ibis | 0 1] 34 12, 9 Green Heron Butorides virescens TH 143 290 64 510 99 Black-crowned Night-Heron Nycticorax nycticorax 3 0 30 46 33 20 Yellow-crowned Night-Heron Nyctanassa violacea 5 2 1] 9 18 13 Black Vulture Coragyps atratus 0 0 0 14 0 0 Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura 25 + 0 514 29 17 Osprey Pandion haliaetus 0 ] | 6 2 2B Mississippi Kite Ictinia mississippiensis 3 4 2 3 9 6 Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus 6 0 0 10 6 6 Northern Harrier Circus cyaneus 4 10 3] 34 45 28 Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus 3 5 12 9 8 Cooper’s Hawk Accipiter cooperii AA| W 17 17 45 25 Red-shouldered Hawk Bueto lineatus 14 9 Pps 15 45 29 Broad-winged Hawk Buteo platypterus 9 y oh 15 51 34 Swainson’s Hawk Buteo swainsoni l Bs 2 2 > 2 Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis 179 234 307 79 720 102 American Kestrel Falco sparverius 246 159 229 35 634 97 Merlin Falco columbarius 0 0 0 1 0 0 Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus 0 0 0 2 0 0 King Rail Rallus elegans 3 1 4 ] 8 7 Virginia Rail Rallus limicola 3 i 9 2 19 10 Sora Porzana carolina v 10 20 7 37 16 Common Moorhen Gallinula chloropus 6 0 5 | 11 9 American Coot Fulica americana 15 3 14 22 52 23 Sandhill Crane Grus canadensis | 0 | 2 2 2 423 424 Appendix D (cont.). Common Name Killdeer Spotted Sandpiper Upland Sandpiper Wilson’s Snipe American Woodcock Wilson’s Phalarope Laughing Gull Franklin’s Gull Little Gull Ring-billed Gull Herring Gull Caspian Tern Common Tern Forster’s Tern Least Tern Black Tern Rock Pigeon Ringed Turtle-Dove Mourning Dove Monk Parakeet Black-billed Cuckoo Yellow-billed Cuckoo Barn Owl Eastern Screech-Owl Great Horned Owl Barred Owl Long-eared Owl Short-eared Owl Common Nighthawk Chuck-will’s-widow Whip-poor-will Chimney Swift Ruby-throated Hummingbird Belted Kingfisher Red-headed Woodpecker Red-bellied Woodpecker Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Downy Woodpecker Hairy Woodpecker Northern Flicker Pileated Woodpecker Eastern Wood-Pewee Yellow-bellied Flycatcher Acadian Flycatcher Alder Flycatcher Willow Flycatcher Least Flycatcher Eastern Phoebe Great Crested Flycatcher Western Kingbird Eastern Kingbird Loggerhead Shrike White-eyed Vireo Bell’s Vireo Yellow-throated Vireo Warbling Vireo Red-eyed Vireo Blue Jay American Crow Fish Crow Horned Lark Purple Martin Tree Swallow Scientific Name Charadrius vociferus Actitis macularia Bartramia longicauda Gallinago delicata Scolopax minor Phalaropus tricolor Larus atricilla Larus pipixcan Larus minutus Larus delawarensis Larus argentatus Sterna caspia Sterna hirundo Sterna forsteri Sterna antillarum Chlidonias niger Columba livia Streptopelia risoria Zenaida macroura Myiopsitta monachus Coccyzus erythropthalmus Coccyzus americanus Tyto alba Megascops asio Bubo virginianus Strix varia Asio otus Asio flammeus Chordeiles minor Caprimulgus carolinensis Caprimulgus vociferus Chaetura pelagica Archilochus colubris Ceryle alcyon Melanerpes erythrocephalus Melanerpes carolinus Sphyrapicus varius Picoides pubescens Picoides villosus Colaptes auratus Dryocopus pileatus Contopus virens Empidonax flaviventris Empidonax virescens Empidonax alnorum Empidonax traillii Empidonax minimus Sayornis phoebe Myiarchus crinitus Tyrannus verticalis Tyrannus tyrannus Lanius ludovicianus Vireo griseus Viero bellii Vireo flavifrons Vireo gilvus Vireo olivaceus Cyanocitta cristata Corvus brachyrhynchos Corvus ossifragus Eremophila alpestris Progne subis Tachycineta bicolor Northern Rough-winged Swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis Bank Swallow Cliff Swallow Riparia riparia Petrochelidon pyrrhonota CO 594 i) ow Nn — Rey fee SS feey EY ey fee) Coe) Toe (I — Ww Ww Ww Oo W 211 94 117 60 Bil 14 300 Ws 144 558 388 411 127 467 28 212 83 82 390 208 557 125 54 31 Bo Sy) 75 598 409 532 386 153 274 106 75 PR 207 42 Nn WM oO We) — i EY Acrh ore ooc$ecocacno coc 6 285 76 86 79 73 10 111 59 122 176 174 1/2 218 124 206 58 348 92 160 84 290 250 42 ey 3: 87 261 169 163 192 197 35 33 129 16 15 PO 147 72 20 O NWN _— — N de ~ De OA) OO Oo Oo No So So 282 156 196 140 129 18 134 487 225 218 129 202 233 259 247 110 252 131 164 19 134 244 128 77 126 Ws 175 260 252 196 326 141 144 107 204 37 25 OB 29 _ ios) ONONNDK FNW NW eRe me N NE on MOAN — — = &) oe ay oo None NRK ~1N1OOW OC ON W — mnNmnN WWE Ww = MB ONMNWAIONAHNONFOHNYNRK ODNANNN CO TBE 948 150 fe or © = Og Oa aS 824 988 211 778 326 399 279 233 29 JY, 846 420 538 861 762 862 510 920 196 812 306 406 24 608 742 935 244 Dale, 159 301 678 496 957 927 13 870 565 313 607 179 115 # of Counties 102 56 26 Nn on co So NN AN Of Oo rH HS] oO SO © 102 63 102 85 93 78 77 16 72 102 93 98 102 101 102 101 102 62 102 81 89 17 99 101 102 80 75 61 o2 102 98 102 102 102 09 81 100 75 50 Appendix D (cont.). Common Name Barn Swallow Carolina Chickadee Black-capped Chickadee Tufted Titmouse Red-breasted Nuthatch White-breasted Nuthatch Brown Creeper Carolina Wren Bewick’s Wren House Wren Sedge Wren Marsh Wren Golden-crowned Kinglet Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Eastern Bluebird Veery Wood Thrush American Robin Gray Catbird Northern Mockingbird Brown Thrasher European Starling Cedar Waxwing Blue-winged Warbler Golden-winged Warbler Brewster’s Warbler Lawrence’s Warbler Tennessee Warbler Northern Parula Yellow Warbler Chestnut-sided Warbler Black-throated Green Warbler Yellow-throated Warbler Pine Warbler Prairie Warbler Bay-breasted Warbler Blackpoll Warbler Cerulean Warbler Black-and-white Warbler American Redstart Prothonotary Warbler Worm-eating Warbler Swainson’s Warbler Ovenbird Louisiana Waterthrush Kentucky Warbler Mourning Warbler Common Yellowthroat Hooded Warbler Canada Warbler Yellow-breasted Chat Summer Tanager Scarlet Tanager Eastern Towhee Chipping Sparrow Clay-colored Sparrow Field Sparrow Vesper Sparrow Lark Sparrow Savannah Sparrow Grasshopper Sparrow Henslow’s Sparrow Fox Sparrow Song Sparrow Swamp Sparrow White-throated Sparrow Scientific Name Hirundo rustica Poecile carolinensis Poecile atricapillus Baelophus bicolor Sitta canadensis Sitta carolinensis Certhia americana Thryothorus ludovicianus Thryomanes bewickii Troglodytes aedon Cistothorus platensis Cistothorus palustris Regulus satrapa Polioptila caerulea Sialia sialis Catharus fuscescens Hylocichla mustelina Turdus migratorius Dumetella carolinensis Mimus polyglottos Toxostoma rufum Sturnus vulgaris Bombycilla cedrorum Vermivora pinus Vermivora chrysoptera Vermivora leucobronchialis Vermivora lawrencii Vermivora peregrina Parula americana Dendroica petechia Dendroica pensylvanica Dendroica virens Dendroica dominica Dendroica pinus Dendroica discolor Dendroica castanea Dendroica striata Dendroica cerulea Mniotilta varia Setophaga ruticilla Protonotaria citrea Helmitheros vermivorus Limnothlypis swainsonii Seiurus aurocapilla Seiurus motacilla Oporornis formosus Oporornis philadelphia Geothlypis trichas Wilsonia citrina Wilsonia canadensis Icteria virens Piranga rubra Piranga olivacea Pipilo erythrophthalmus Spizella passerina Spizella pallida Spizella pusilla Pooecetes gramineus Chondestes grammacus Passerculus sandwichensis Ammodramus savannarum Ammodramus henslowii Passerella iliaca Melospiza melodia Melospiza georgiana Zonotrichia albicollis CO 897 176 362 356 212 125 594 p> 163 585 85 949 476 290 633 890 is [on — Hie y= iO Gi OS NS Oi = Si —_— fh WwW = OM NO GCoOWWwWoo FN 320 63 20 40 119 Sol Sie 145 Se 95 171 apY/ 30 0 PR 34 52 119 163 225 177 188 34 18 131 oO 190 29 282 150 209 35 168 466 138 52 94 296 184 295 168 oh 116 294 310 IS ] PO 52 ap) 83 163 214 164 109 25 10 114 74 10 233 12 148 137 116 49 187 103 168 168 57 141 224 152 187 205 62 115 251 93 33 0 © wo Ww _ nN NOG COA WWTANOODWAARPMNNKKNKENHNANICOCHAOANNCOCOF RK WOOCrFORFFOONNNWUOWONWAIUOCOPRONODWAAN OYA) _ —_ —~ _ bt TBE 983 283 564 682 711 15 534 891 68 43 408 756 24 508 990 906 577 958 972 501 124 52 Bil 81 111 207 954 19 369 129 21 639 867 854 518 154 326 716 11 960 88 # of Counties 102 42 69 99 ] 102 14 90 4 101 35 18 1 95 102 14 101 102 102 93 102 102 102 16 89 47 D5 101 102 102 81 a, 66 100 102 30 425 Appendix D (cont.). Common Name Scientific Name CO PR PO OB TBE # of Counties White-crowned Sparrow Zonotrichia leucophrys 0 0 0 1 0 0 Dark-eyed Junco Junco hyemalis 0 0 0 ] 0 0 Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis 671 248 54 1 973 102 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus 209 221 186 8 616 86 Blue Grosbeak Guiraca caerulea 32 52 66 8 150 ay) Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea 506 417 62 ] 985 102 Dickcissel Spiza americana 522 449 128 4 899 101 Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus 71 96 67 1] 234 50 Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus 893 83 17 1 993 102 Eastern Meadowlark Sturnella magna 558 288 125 3 971 102 Western Meadowlark Sturnella neglecta 58 77 78 3 213 48 Yellow-headed Blackbird Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus 9 1 5 2 15 1] Brewer’s Blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus 0 0 0 0 0 0 Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula 854 71 61 3 986 102 Brown-headed Cowbird Molothrus ater 424 398 129 17 951 102 Orchard Oriole Icterus spurius 22 118 188 13 518 99 Baltimore Oriole Icterus galbula 503 142 168 7 813 102 Purple Finch Carpodacus purpureus 0 0 1 0 1 1 House Finch Carpodacus mexicanus 225 90 96 177 411 88 Red Crossbill Loxia curvirostra 1 0 0 0 1 1 Pine Siskin Carduelis pinus 3 4 3 1 10 7 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis 238 35)// 171 9 966 102 House Sparrow Passer domesticus 953 20 15 1 988 102 Eurasian Tree Sparrow Passer montanus 111 iN} 20 B 144 23 Appendix E. Summary of breeding evidence criteria in priority blocks. Breeding evidence code definitions are listed in Table 1. The percentage of the total records (59,443) in priority blocks with breeding evidence is as follows: Confirmed 48.0%, Probable 26.2%, and Possible 25.8%. Confirmed — CO Probable — PR Possible — PO Code Number Percent Code Number Percent Code Number Percent NB 1,254 4.4 M 2,293 14.7 / 7,163 46.8 PE Ns) 0.1 6,253 40.1 xX 8,153 32 DD 312 el 4,939 31.6 UN 604 Dal 376 2.4 ON 4,902 Nii? FS 117 0.4 BY Tey? 26.5 NE 1,266 4.4 NY 2,347 82 22 he? 67 0.4 P ip (e FL 10,140 B5:0 N 558 3.6 A B 28,519 Total 15,608 100.0 Total 15,316 100.0 426 Appendix F. Summary of breeding evidence criteria by groups for Confirmed records in priority blocks. Breeding evidence code definitions are given in Table 1. SPECIES GROUP Waterfowl Upland Gamebirds Grebes Cormorants Herons Vultures Hawks Upland Gamebirds Rails Shorebirds Gulls/Terns Doves Parakeets Cuckoos Owls Nightjars Swifts/Hummingbirds Kingfishers Woodpeckers Tyrant Flycatchers Shrikes Vireos Crows/Jays Larks Swallows Chickadees/Titmice Nuthatches/Creepers Wrens Kinglets/Gnatcatchers Thrushes Mimic Thrushes Starlings Waxwings Wood Warblers Tanagers Towhees, Sparrows Grosbeaks/Buntings Blackbirds Finches Weavers Finches Totals 124 38 25 ap 14 13 59 71 2 30 ais) 90 113 150 125 96 1,254 ee a mm pO! _ —_ NN PW! KF IT NWN ! s 25 Peg Oe hth © Rte on Gr mt ON er Ot Foe ES Nr dN OWN 312 Breeding Evidence Codes UN eile ON FS 1 781 24 - 503 1] - pp) 1 - = a“ 1 : 5 40 20 - - 7 6 I 7 248 iB - 5 503 11 - 2 32 a : 1 386 17 . : 1 1 e 49 461 3713 - 2 2 2 e 11 14 29 6 2 205 11 . - 10 16 - 10 29 274 - 1 28 42 - 6 678 424 11 100 240 419 7 2 59 9 1 D) 71 45 1 10 516 28: 4 1 405 12 1 89 360 864 8 1 447 44 1 - iIBY7/ 24 - 14 178 228 4 - 34 30 - 59 488 212 3) 38 350 7/9 8 8 356 147 3) 1 31 al - 7 115 120 =) 1 15 8 2 Tl 657 215 6 15 536 210 8 64 1,381 345 35 10 134 58 - 70 175 336 1 604 10,140 4,902 Ou) BY. 10 1] 92 24 75 128 13 62 675 385 29 18S 315 91 178 BO 83 2A 61 446 523 283 4] 376 24 881 651 1,143 76 179 E52, NE 21 30 tN WwW NoONAOD ! 39 89 25 15 14 124 26 12 51 13 44 22 111 36 95 101 178 2 26 1,266 NY 38 16 14 55 16 17 125 39 16 167 128 16 31 74 267 42 127 19 231 108 61 7 30 110 90 258 37 181 2,347 Total 883 Syl pla) 1 102 25 486 571 35 665 6 1,245 3 250 274 46 373 144 1,980 1,534 25 356 1,011 532 1,891 894 274 814 164 1,626 1,399 890 146 750 60 2,084 1,740 Sow? 467 1,064 28,519 427 Appendix G. Population trend information for species in Illinois from the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Trend is the estimated population trend (% change/year), P is a measure of its statistical significance, and N is the number of routes on which trends were estimated. 95% CI is the 95% confidence intervals of the trend estimate and RA is the weighted regional abundance of the species (average birds/route). The last column is the Credibility Index (CR)(see text for further information). The source of the data is Sauer et al. 2001. 1966-2000 Trends 1966-1979 1980-2000 CR Trend i) N 95% Cl 95% Cl RA Trend 1p N Trend le N Canada Goose 28.8 <0.01 50 13.8 43.8 ZO} 16.9 0.43 3 PUifead| <0.01 49 3) Wood Duck el 0.05 49 0.2 9.9 0.49 9.7 0.47 1] 382 0.24 48 2 Mallard 4.9 0.02 73 0.8 9.0 2.08 13.6 0.05 27 4.6 0.04 i /p 1 Blue-winged Teal -5.9 0.08 9 -11.2 -0.7 0.07 -6.3 0.01 6 -10.1 0.12 2 3 Gray Partridge -7.8 0.42 8 -25.5 9.8 0.05 -9.9 0.55 4 S)si/ 0.62 # 3 Ring-necked Pheasant -2.0 0.34 59 -5.9 2.0 11.06 -5.3 0.03 37 0.0 0.98 58 p} Wild Turkey 26.1 <0.01 26 20.8 SHS: 0.19 - - - 26.4 <0.01 26 3 Northern Bobwhite -1.9 <0.01 76 -3.1 -0.8 21.67 -6.8 <0.01 56 -1.3 0.04 16 2 Pied-billed Grebe 6.3 0.60 4 -10.6 233 0.02 - - - - - - 5 Double-crest. Cormorant 49.4 ORS 5 6.4 92.5 0.06 - - - 25)// 0.23 5 3 Great Blue Heron 3 iSO Oil IB. Tee 19.9 1.30 -20.8 0.01 12 Ct <0.01 JB: a Great Egret 13.9 0.03 17 Bal 24.7 0.20 -50.8 0.26 2 24.7 0.10 16 fe) Little Blue Heron 0.4 0.96 7 -13.2 13.9 0.17 - - - 14.0 0.37 5 3 Cattle Egret 8.5 0.14 6 -0.5 17.6 0.31 - - - 6.5 0.01 6 3) Green Heron 5} 0.22 69 -0.9 3.8 0.51 32 0.58 28 0.0 0.99 65 2; Black-crwn. Night-Heron p23) 0.20 8 -4.2 28.9 0.07 - - - Wprps 0.11 S 3 Yellow-crwn. Night-Heron -3.7 OB? 2 -7.6 0.3 0.14 - - - -15.8 0.07 ZS Black Vulture -15.5 0.74 2; -85.3 54.2 0.40 - - - -17.9 0.70 2 3 Turkey Vulture AS 0.07 38 -0.9 523 0.79 2.4 0.90 8 26.3 0.03 36 3 Northern Harrier 3.4 0.70 8 -13.0 19.8 0.02 - - - 5.0 0.36 8 3 Cooper’s Hawk 0.3 0.91 8 -5.6 6.3 0.02 - - - -4.6 0.54 8 3 Red-shouldered Hawk -0.6 0.88 9 -7.5 6.4 0.04 -9.4 0.47 BS) 9.4 0.25 6 3 Red-tailed Hawk (Lib <0) 80 7.9 14.3 0.97 -9.1 0.02 aM 10.9 <0.01 80 2 American Kestrel 7.6 0.01 82 1.9 13.4 1.05 -8.0 (22: 30 17 <0.01 81 2 Killdeer 8.1 <0.01 82 es 8.9 10.82 6.0 0.03 61 8.4 <0.01 82 1 Spotted Sandpiper 5.4 0.70 ff -20.1 30.8 0.01 - - - ih: 0.51 4 3 Upland Sandpiper 8.3 0.15 13 -2.2 18.9 0.09 2.8 0.91 6 18.2 0.14 10 3 American Woodcock -2.7 0.82 3 -20.6 1533 0.01 - - - -3.6 0.74 3 3 Ring-billed Gull 36.4 OT 6 -12.0 84.7 0.66 - - - 43.4 0.19 6 3 Herring Gull 3.0 0.33 2 -0.3 6.4 1.04 - - - 3.4 0.32 2 3 Rock Pigeon -1.0 0.14 82 -2.4 0.3 12.88 3.0 <0.01 61 -3.9 0.01 82 D Mourning Dove 0.5 0.37 82 -0.5 15 35.61 -2.5 <0.01 62 1.6 <0.01 82 2 Black-billed Cuckoo -3.6 0.32 33 -10.4 38} 0.18 0.7 0.93 20 -5.2 0.16 19 2 Yellow-billed Cuckoo 2.9 <0.01 Fl -4,3 -1.6 3.68 6.1 0.02 Sh) -3.4 0.04 76 2 Eastern Screech-Owl -3.0 0.78 3 -21.3 153 0.00 - - - -7.7 0.05 2, 3 Great Horned Owl 38 0.07 43 -0.2 WE 0.20 22.0 0.10 10 4.4 0.06 38 2 Barred Owl 0.3 0.86 Dil -2.8 3.3 0.09 14.3 0.54 8 IVa 0.79 18 3 Common Nighthawk -9.9 0.10 17 -20.9 eZ 0.04 2, 0.89 9 OS 0.94 9 3 Chuck-will’s-widow -16.5 0.12 3 -29.1 -3.9 0.12 -48.4 0.14 3 - - - 5 Whip-poor-will -9.6 0.08 19 -19.9 0.6 0.25 -9.3 0.34 13 -7.3 0.14 13 3 Chimney Swift 2.5 <0.01 82 -3.4 -1.5 14.24 29 0.20 61 -4.0 <0.01 82 2 Ruby-throat. Hummingbird 4.7 0.11 36 -1.0 10.4 0.29 5.6 0.32 Bp) 9.9 0.08 30 » Belted Kingfisher 5.9 <0.01 Sis) 2.0 9.8 0.27 4.8 0.73 16 41 0.04 54 2 Red-headed Woodpecker 2.8 <0.01 79 -3.9 -1.7 4.53 -0.2 0.91 60 -5.4 <0.01 79 2 Red-bellied Woodpecker Le 0.1 0.8 -0.4 -1.2 19.7 Hell -4.6 4.9 1980-2000 Ie 0.04 0.22 0.46 0.02 0.76 0.15 0.21 0.51 0.57 0.09 OES <0.01 <0.01 0.32 0.01 0.86 <0.01 0.42 <0.01 0.98 0.76 0.08 0.99 <0.01 0.31 0.07 <0.01 0.06 0.42 0.99 0.40 0.87 0.87 0.80 0.75 0.09 0.42 0.15 0.03 0.09 0.94 0.90 <0.01 <0.01 0.21 0.90 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.25 0.77 0.61 0.65 <0.01 <0.01 0.19 0.88 0.84 Oi 0.83 0.19 0.62 0.26 <0.01 0.23 <0.01 0.26 CR WeNWHe NNNWNHRK KR KENNY KE NNNNK WN NNR KF KP NNN KF KN WWWNDN WWWWWNDND WRK RK NN NNN WW WN RRR KN 429 Appendix H. Population trend information for species included in the atlas for the upper Midwest from the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Trend is the estimated population trend (% change/year), P is a measure of its statistical significance, and N is the number of routes on which trends were estimated. 95% CI is the 95% confidence intervals of the trend estimate and RA is the weighted regional abundance of the species (average birds/route). The last column is the Credibility Index (CR) (see text for further information). The source of the data is Sauer et al. 2001. 1966-2000 Trends 1966-1979 1980-2000 CR Trend 2 N 95% CI 95% CI RA Trend P N Trend Iv N Canada Goose 18.0 <0.01 319 NENG) ne Bos) iL) OM OI 22 13:45 8<0:01 313 1 Mute Swan 5.4 (@.335) 10 -4.9 SY 0.40 - - - 2.4 0.62 10 3 Wood Duck 4.2 0.01 32) 1.0 es 0.73 iis) 0.07 81 aya! 0.0718 2) Mallard XD) <0.01 425 0.7 hil 255) 5.6 0.03 188 1.4 0.04 410 1 Blue-winged Teal -4.0 <0.01 126 -5.6 -2.5 0.46 1.0 0.61 1 -4.1 0.01 98 2, Northern Shoveler 0.9 0.52 12 -1.6 3.4 0.03 -3.6 Os 2 -1.1 OMT 8 3 Northern Pintail -11.9 0.12 18 -25.4 7 0.08 - - - -11.0 0.28 13 3 Hooded Merganser 5.4 0.33 26 -5.1 159 0.07 7 0.62 4 ES Om2 22 3 Ruddy Duck -9.4 0.03 9 -16.2 -2.6 0.40 -13.7 0.20 4 -9.9 0.09 7 3 Gray Partridge 0.1 0.95 64 -3.5 Shy) 0.47 15.6 0.03 26 -5.4 0.03 58 2 Ring-necked Pheasant -2.2 <0.01 320 -3.6 -0.8 9.99 -0.9 0.34 197 -0.5 0.39 304 ] Ruffed Grouse 1.4 0.48 100 -2.4 ee, 0.28 -1.9 OS a 4.0 0.02 85 2 Sharp-tailed Grouse 6.2 0.46 11 -9.3 Die 0.13 3.9 0.28 5 4.9 0.48 9 3 Greater Prairie-Chicken -5.7 0.29 9 ali 3.8 0.66 14.8 0.03 3} -14.1 0.04 9 3 Wild Turkey 18.0 <0.01 174 ZAG 23.4 0.34 1382 0.24 iT 5/001 173 2 Northern Bobwhite -2.6 <0.01 348 -3.4 -1.9 16.06 -4.7 <0.01 221 -19 <0.01 314 2 Pied-billed Grebe -2.1 OWS 81 -5.1 0.9 0.18 TEST); ()) nes 2 -6.7 0.03 69 2 Double-crest. Cormorant 24.1 0.23 50 -14.2 62.3 0.55 - - - 12.0 0.12 50 3 American Bittern -5.8 <0.01 109 -7.8 -3.7 0.29 -4.3 0025S -5.8 <0.01 81 2 Least Bittern -4.9 0.36 6 -10.9 ED: 0.01 - - - - - - 3 Great Blue Heron 4.2 <0.01 479 2a, \5// iL Syl 6.0 0.01 165 3.30 <0:0L 47 i Great Egret IDES <0.01 3 UVP 17.8 0.42 -22.8 0.12 10 13.8 <0.01 49 a) Little Blue Heron -1.9 0.71 11 -11.2 7.4 0.51 -10.3 0.02 3 1426n O31 8 3 Cattle Egret 7.9 0.05 9 1.9 13.9 0.63 - - - 5 Omen OL06 9 3 Green Heron -0.5 0.36 365 -1.7 0.6 0.51 355) 0.02 194 SN) HOA SIO) 2 Black-crwn. Night-Heron D3} O25 29 -1.5 6.2 0.13 7.8 0.01 10 -14 0.88 ay) 2, Yellow-crwn. Night-Heron — -3.7 0.32 3 -7.6 0.3 0.09 - - - -15.9 0.08 3 3 Black Vulture 5.7 0.03 7 3.4 al 0.08 - - - Bll 0.03 6 3 Turkey Vulture 7.4 0.01 288 Del 12.6 1.23 2.8 0.50 90 Tos’ << 010) 275 1 Osprey 29.3 0.01 25 10.8 47.8 0.04 -0.9 0.90 5 15.0 0.02 23 3 Bald Eagle 8.4 0.03 32 ibs IS.) 0.07 - - - 12.4 -+0.08 31 3 Northern Harrier 1.0 O35 144 -1.1 3.0 0.19 2.6 0.57 51 OSE OWS 128 2 Sharp-shinned Hawk ee, <0.01 40 3.9 10.5 0.02 -8.7 0.05 7 3 O04 32 3 Cooper’s Hawk 9.7 <0.01 104 Shoe) 14.0 0.05 2.8 0.67 10 16.4 <0.01 94 3 Red-shouldered Hawk 0.0 0.99 73 -5.3 53) 0.09 -8.2 0.27 Pal Sal 0.04 55 3 Broad-winged Hawk 0.0 1.00 105 -2.4 2.4 0.12 el 0.02 40 =2. Omen Oat, 96 2 Swainson’s Hawk 1.9 0.70 4 -6.7 10.5 0.01 - - - =13:9° § 0.26 4 3 Red-tailed Hawk 5.0 <0.01 468 3.8 6.1 0.88 2 OFS 93 Sys) OOM 452 2 American Kestrel Mp 0.01 467 0.6 a7) 0.98 4.3 O: Ole 22: 2.055) 00455447 2 Virginia Rail -2.5 0.26 18 -6.7 1.6 0.01 -2.3 0.44 8 -9.2 0.07 1] 3 Sora -1.3 0.53 79 -5.4 2.8 0.19 -0.1 0.98 41 -1.8 0.42 63 2 Common Moorhen -4.2 0.51 2 -15.7 U3} 0.03 -24.9 0.01 7 - - - 3 American Coot -5.9 <0.01 42 -8.3 -3.5 0.35 -5.4 0.43 18 -9.1 0.01 55 2 Sandhill Crane lS <0.01 95 8.7 14.2 1.83 12 <0:011 pe OOme—O:01 94 1 Killdeer DML <0.01 541 Dal 3h) 10.06 3.3) 00 36S Real ado So 2 Spotted Sandpiper -2.3 0.03 2, -4,3 -0.2 0.08 5.4 <0.01 315, 2.4 (22 78 3 Upland Sandpiper -0.5 0.64 180 -2.8 7 0.47 -0.3 0.84 102 0.2 0.88 144 2 Wilson’s Snipe -0.1 0.96 135 -1.8 7 123 Sul 0.05 Ta -3.6 <0.01 111 2 American Woodcock 3340) 0.52 34 -5.9 11.9 0.02 7.4 0.47 9 -49 0.49 24 iS Ring-billed Gull 6.7 0.11 91 -1.5 14.8 Se TEC eee <() Oe 7, 3 ee) 89 2 Herring Gull -2.9 0.26 45 -7.9 Mil 2.61 -3.1 0.67 20 a9) as 44 1 Forster’s Tern 1.0 0.84 10 -7.8 9.7 0.21 - - - -9.9 0.06 10 3 Black Tern -4.4 0.04 74 -8.5 -0.2 0.71 -0.8 0.79 51 ey OO) 49 2 Rock Dove -0.7 0.05 489 -1.4 0.0 13.10 3.2 <0.01 299 -2.5 <0.01 481 2, Mourning Dove -0.1 0.76 542 -0.5 0.4 32.39 -0.9 0.03 342 OSie O03 mo S3 2 Black-billed Cuckoo -1.3 0.07 352 -2.7 0.1 0.69 7.4 <0.01 208 -2.9 <0.01 307 2 Yellow-billed Cuckoo -2.5 <0.01 421 Pee) -1.8 2.58 2 OO | BRS -3.6 <0.01 386 2, Eastern Screech-Owl ES 0.22 iN} -0.6 3.6 0.01 - - - -4.7 0.06 8 8 Great Horned Owl iN 0.20 214 -0.6 DG 0.18 ef) 0.79 54 -0.5 0.68 186 2, Barred Owl Sy! 0.18 130 -1.5 8.3 0.10 8.0 032 36 2.6 0.09 114 2 Short-eared Owl 13.6 0.03 6 5.4 21.8 0.05 - . - 13: Smee O05 5 3 430 Appendix H (cont.). Common Nighthawk Chuck-will’s-widow Whip-poor-will Chimney Swift Ruby-throat. Hummingbird Belted Kingfisher Red-headed Woodpecker Red-bellied Woodpecker Yellow-bellied Sapsucker Downy Woodpecker Hairy Woodpecker Northern Flicker Pileated Woodpecker Eastern Wood-Pewee Acadian Flycatcher Alder Flycatcher Willow Flycatcher Willow/Alder Flycatcher Least Flycatcher Eastern Phoebe Great Crested Flycatcher Eastern Kingbird Loggerhead Shrike White-eyed Vireo Bell’s Vireo Yellow-throated Vireo Warbling Vireo Red-eyed Vireo Blue Jay American Crow Fish Crow Horned Lark Purple Martin Tree Swallow N. Rough-winged Swallow Bank Swallow Cliff Swallow Barn Swallow Carolina Chickadee Black-capped Chickadee Tufted Titmouse Red-breasted Nuthatch White-breasted Nuthatch Brown Creeper Carolina Wren Bewick’s Wren House Wren Sedge Wren Marsh Wren Golden-crowned Kinglet Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Eastern Bluebird Veery Wood Thrush American Robin Gray Catbird Northern Mockingbird Brown Thrasher European Starling Cedar Waxwing Blue-winged Warbler Golden-winged Warbler Northern Parula Yellow Warbler Chestnut-sided Warbler Trend -1.3 -0.9 -2.5 -1.6 S) 0.1 -3.8 1.6 1.5 0.8 1.0 -3.4 a, -0.3 -2.0 1.4 -0.7 0.2 -1.8 2.3 -0.3 -1.9 -8.4 0.0 -4.9 Le -0.1 1.8 -0.4 eS 72 -1.2 -3.2 INet/ 12 0.6 2M 0.1 -0.1 2.1 0.9 3.0 1.8 4.2 32 -2.8 12 1.8 -1.3 0.8 -0.4 Ye, -1.5 -0.1 1.8 0.2 -2.0 -1.8 -0.5 1.5 0.2 -1.4 2.3 1.8 -0.2 O52 0.38 0.02 <0.01 <0.01 0.92 <0.01 <0.01 0.21 0.01 0.10 <0.01 <0.01 0.19 0.01 0.02 0.18 0.60 <0.01 <0.01 0.30 <0.01 <0.01 0.97 0.21 0.02 0.82 <0.01 0.09 <0.01 0.33 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 0.78 0.03 0.69 0.91 <0.01 0.08 <0.01 <0.01 0.12 <0.01 0.32 <0.01 0.02 0.51 0.74 0.71 <0.01 <0.01 0.70 <0.01 0.53 <0.01 <0.01 0.05 <0.01 0.89 0.06 <0.01 <0.01 0.69 1966-2000 Trends N 110 37 133 486 312 391 431 507 135 509 364 543 264 533 157 158 313 409 243 482 528 So. 115 141 71 324 493 485 spy? 554 6 450 423 390 419 258 271 547 145 380 325 101 472 34 PAA Di 520 228 79 45 240 494 180 412 D2 542 240 530 543 47] 126 100 144 453 ily) ebwatell -5.2 -2.9 -4.5 -2.2 2.0 -1.4 -4.5 0.8 -0.8 0.2 -0.2 -3.9 2.6 -0.8 -3.5 0.3 -1.7 -0.5 -2.5 1.4 -0.9 -2.4 -11.3 -1.2 -12.4 0.3 -0.8 123 -0.8 0.8 -6.5 -1.9 -4.1 0.7 0.1 -3.5 0.2 -0.4 -1.5 153 -0.1 Ney) 1.0 -0.9 3 -8.3 0.8 03 -5.3 -3.9 -2.6 1.9 -2.2 -0.8 1.5 -0.5 -2.9 -2.4 -1.0 0.8 -2.0 -2.9 1.0 0.8 -1.0 95% CI 2.6 1.1 -0.5 -1.0 5.0 eS -3.0 2.3 aye) 13 Dol -2.8 Dee 0.2 -0.5 29) 0.3 0.9 -1.0 353 0.3 -1.3 -5.5 1.1 2.6 Sul 0.6 23 0.1 1.8 24.8 -0.5 -2.2 Pod 2.4 4.7 4.1 0.6 1.4 UE, 1.9 4.3 Phe) 9.4 D2 Pel Naf/ 3h8) 2.6 ae) 1.8 4.0 -0.9 0.5 2.0 0.9 -1.2 -1.3 0.0 onl 2.3 0.0 3.6 Pei 0.6 RA 0.22 0.94 0.37 7.66 0.34 0.35 3.28 See 1.34 1.70 0.45 3.62 0.65 B95 0.87 2.05 0.84 1.86 23 2.01 Bil 4.92 0.63 NEN 0.20 0.64 2.61 8.53 10.76 29.99 0.10 13.18 3.20 4.17 1.70 PRS} 9.78 22.56 2.60 Sy) 6.19 1.26 1.86 0.14 2.03 0.62 9.07 1.80 0.61 0.49 1.38 3.95 5.49 1.87 48.04 5.05 4.06 4.87 74.62 4.40 0.42 0.77 0.61 3). 5.34 1966-1979 Trend 2 2.9 0.31 2.6 0.64 -2.6 0.16 0.5 0.63 1.8 0.36 2.6 0.16 0.5 0.51 -2.6 0.06 -0.6 0.76 Sa aee<0-Oil 6.1 0.02 -4.2 <0.01 23 0.41 -1.3 0.06 -0.1 0.97 0.0 0.99 Dai, 0.10 0.9 0.50 -2.0 0.01 -3.5 <0.01 ES 0.08 -0.9 0.14 -9.1 <0.01 4.9 0.01 -0.5 0.91 -0.6 0.77 -1.9 0.07 pm <()50)l -1.1 0.03 14 4<0.01 0.5 OF if} 0.22 5.9 <0.01 5.6 0.03 2.0 0.52 6.1 0.14 49 <0.01 -1.8 0.46 2.3 0.02 -43 <0.01 -0.8 0.67 0.1 0.96 14.9 0.37 -5.7 <0.01 -2.8 0.69 1.9 0.01 -3.0 0.05 -0.1 0.95 -1.6 0.72 -2.8 Ons -96 <0.01 iL) 0.31 0.7 0.62 i Suee<001 0.4 0.44 -46 <0.01 -0,9 0.08 -0.2 0.79 -0.7 0.53 0.4 0.82 -2.5 0.08 ORS 0.33 -0.9 0.29 Le? 0.01 N 56 21 69 307 106 176 294 179 58: 291 167 shy) 94 323 66 73 140 203 139 253 327 345 3 54 38 137 292 283 355 B57 292 301 174 213 14] PES Ball 67 218 188 36 237 4 99 21 326 114 Sil 11 ds 248 107 218 359 341 130 349 S's) 183 48 46 = yf / 249 83 1980-2000 Trend P 0.0 0.99 -2.6 0.17 -2.3 0.20 -3.1 <0.01 Byer 0M Oi 0.0 0.98 -6.1 <0.01 210 iee<0:0)1 Site) ; beta 4 * get, 4 «@ ™~ ouopty ro I a i id Gea \ tre 108 nm > Veale @ a. ; 7 OF by i \ , (aM “i ‘7 (od) (a ; ( i ho, with ty (oa oy f : é aq > « of ar te i¢e fal’) ; / 14h . SB iT a! ver _. = : ' } é 18 y sy ? rY 7 LF Sack Dalieat eed May Ge g — a hg i” tibiee sé ; Ly j eS A , TAiepa) sere , s ioe wal. 46. 2h) am@oth * 900s) ee ~ » SNiRgetA Chee aot »s ¥¥O th Pafesta st rede vighaied, 3 te! bear qa ‘ep = 243) stance beer ci 00 — ? are? peel sauces Fi P : eee ep, « - ats : te rtheemantioand — Ar | _ a or _ Albout the Authors ee ES Oe ee eee Vernon Kleen, now retired, was the avian program manager for the Illinois Department of Natural Resources from 1972 to 2001. His work for the Department focused primarily on the population status and distribution of nongame species with particular emphasis on endangered and threatened species. Vern served as the project coordinator for the Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas project. He was responsible for its inception in the state and for coordination and management of the atlas project, as well as being a co-author of this publication. Liane Cordle is a research scientist at the Illinois Natural History Survey where the focus of her work is the study of natural resources using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology. Her major contributions to the atlas included the data summary and analysis, the Breeding Bird Survey information, production of the maps and figures, species accounts, and publication coordination. Robert A. Montgomery was the senior staff biologist for the Max McGraw Wildlife Foundation from 1969 to 2003. He is involved in a variety of research and habitat development projects working with game and nongame birds and serves on several local, state, and regional conservation committees. He has been involved in the Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas project from its inception, serving as data manager and member of the publication committee, and contributing to the data summary and analysis, land cover and habitats, breeding bird survey, and species accounts sections of this publication. 459 > ,ortwh: off TeodP, 409 0904 : 39327 /4.. i; Natural History Survey Library NATURE THE ILLINOIS BREEDING BIRD ATLAS PROJECT is comprehensive statewide survey of the birds that breed in Illinois. Among the goals of the atlas project were the _ determination of the distributions of breeding birds and their status in the state, documentation of a baseline for future analysis, and education of the public 2 apout this natural resource. _ Over a six-year period from 1986 to 1991, hundreds of volunteers spent thousands of hours locating birds and collecting data using standardized protocol in precisely located areas through- _ out the state. Of the 197 bird species reported with some evidence of es in Hlinois during _ the atlas project, 172 species were documen ted a as confirmed breeders, 5 species as probable bic and 10 species as possible breeders. This publication summarizes the results of the data collection. T he introductory sections include a description of the project, its methodology, and a summary of results. The species accounts section includes information on the range, abundance, breeding habitat, life history, historical status, recent population trends, and ae in 1 the state for 183 species See bred in Illinois during the atlas Pe period. The Illinois Breeding Bird Atlas Project data provide a oe io “Measuring furure changes i in the state's avifauna and will help in efforts to conserve, protect, and oe this natural resource. ISBN’ 1-642%32-07-2 ILLINOIS ILLINOIS NATURAL a ; Soo BR Sh . SURVEY RESOURCES wag Mele re i ni Hash ILLINOIS NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY os | | | ~—« 9178 1882'932078 607 East Peabody Drive « Champaign, IL 61820 “a 7 ae rs rs sae Ae i Aaa ¥ ia | owe ey ie mM ee re oe ? hie ie ‘e 7 if Ae - : By UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-URBANA il 3 0112 071057837