EPA > Bird Conservation > Basics of Bird Conservation in the U.S.

Protecting birds has been a national goal for Americans since the early 1900s. Our affection for birds is so strong that Rachel Carson's prediction of an eternity of "silent springs" sparked the modern environmental movement. As the futures of bird species have grown more precarious, Americans have responded with extraordinary measures to save their avifauna.

This essay summarizes the important steps we have taken toward bird conservation in the U.S. and provides basic information and resources on a range of issues related to this topic. Read on to find out what birds need, what threatens them, where bird conservation has been, and where it is headed. Let's begin with some basics.

The number of bird watchers and laws to protect and conserve birds attests to our love of these animals. Why do we care for them so much? The reasons include aesthetic enjoyment, scientific significance, and economic value.

Aesthetic Enjoyment. Birds provide intangible aesthetic enjoyment and enrich our lives with their presence. This must surely be their greatest value to us, as illustrated by the fact that over 63 million Americans watch birds--and the number is growing every year. We look forward to hearing birds singing in the morning, to enticing birds to our feeders, and watching wild birds as a diversion from the pressures of our daily lives. We even value birds that we personally will never see; it is uplifting just knowing that large blue and gold parrots are eating fruit somewhere in South America. This intangible value stems from knowing that our world is still wild enough to support exotic species. As social symbols, all manner of powers and values have been assigned to particular species or to birds, in general. Birds are ubiquitous as symbols of freedom, strength, joy, wisdom, and death. In the U.S., every state has its own state bird, the avian counterpart of the Bald Eagle, our national symbol.

Scientific Importance. The scientific value of birds cannot be calculated. We have learned about aspects of flight, migration, vision, behavior, and physiology from birds. In a major coup, finches provided Charles Darwin with the insight he needed to formulate the theory of natural selection, the mechanism of evolution. Birds are also invaluable in telling us about the effects we are having on the environment. The influential ornithologist, Roger Tory Peterson, realized that birds are bioindicators, or bell-weathers, of environmental change. The shear decline in bird numbers tells us that we are damaging the environment through habitat fragmentation and destruction, pollution and pesticides, introduced species, and many other impacts. Bird species have shown the specific impacts of our activities, such as the deleterious reproductive effects of the pesticide, DDT. Ocean-going birds are bioindicators of marine pollutants. And now, birds are beginning to tell us about the current and potential future effects of climate change (see "Why have birds declined?", below).

Ecological and Economic Value. In addition to the joys they bring to people's lives, birds are also valuable for economic reasons. Consider just a few facts from the Steering Committee of the North American Bird Conservation Initiative about the economic value of birds. In the U.S., recreation is big business and nature-based recreation has increased at a rate of 30% annually since 1987. Bird watching is growing faster than nearly any other type of recreation. Between 1982-1983 and 1997, the number of birders soared from 21 million to 63 million people. Birding festivals have grown in the last decade to a multi-million dollar business and Americans spend over $20 billion per year on bird-related materials and activities, from seeds and feeders to bird-watching excursions in exotic lands. Hunting continues to be a major form of recreation generating $3.9 billion per year of economic activity. The recreational value of birds is anything but chicken feed!

Birds have ecological value as important elements of natural systems and the functions birds perform as pollinators, insect eaters, and rodent predators also result in tangible benefits to people. The Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center notes that birds play "a critical role in reducing and/or maintaining low populations of insect prey" in natural systems. Birds eat up to 98% of budworms and up to 40% of all non-outbreak insect species in eastern forests. These services have been valued at as much as $5000/year/square mile of forest (Robinson, 1997). Research in agricultural settings confirms what many farmers already know-birds help control agricultural pests. In orchards, birds seek out and destroy up to 98% of over-wintering codling moth larvae, a major pest of apples worldwide.

There are also costs incurred by not protecting birds. The cost of recovering endangered species from certain oblivion costs millions of dollars per year. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that we spent $18.5 million on recovery of the Northern Spotted Owl in 1995, and that is just one of many endangered birds with expensive, but essential, recovery efforts. See Box 1 for an account of measures needed to help one endangered species, the California Condor.

It is very clear that if we ever lost most of our birds, not only would it be a sad day, it would be a more expensive one.

The number of species, or species diversity, in the U.S. is impressive. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service states that 12-15% of the world's approximately 9000 bird species occur in the U.S. That's between 1080 and 1350 species in the 50 states, Puerto Rico, and other U.S. territories. About 700 species regularly occur in the continental U.S. and approximately 650 of these are breeders here (Ehrlich, et al., 1988).

A large number of U.S. bird species are migratory and about 250 of these are neotropical migrants. Neotropical migratory birds nest in Canada or the U.S. and then fly south to Mexico, the Caribbean, Central America, or South America for the winter. Most songbirds (such as thrushes and warblers) and many shorebirds (sandpipers and plovers), waterfowl (ducks, geese), raptors (birds of prey, including hawks) fit this definition. Some of these species fly just a few hundred miles between their summer and winter homes; others travel prodigious distances. The Red Knot, a shorebird, is a world-class migrant, covering a distance of up to 10,000 miles in each direction as it flies between its breeding sites in the Canadian tundra and wintering habitat in Tierra del Fuego at the southern tip of South America. Read more about neotropical migrants on the Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center page.

Another roughly 100 species are short distance migrants. The California Gull, which nests at Mono Lake in California and winters on the Pacific coast, is an example of a short distance migrant. Although Whooping Cranes travel 2,600 miles from Canada to Texas, this endangered species also qualifies as a short distance migrant since it does not migrate south of the U.S.

The remainder of U.S. species are residents or vagrants. The Great Blue Heron is a resident species that forages in wetlands throughout the year and nests in tree-top colonies (called rookeries) with dozens of other herons in the spring. Many of our common birds, such as Northern Mockingbirds, Northern Cardinals, Western Scrub Jays, Tufted Titmice, and Mountain Chickadees, are also resident species. Vagrants or accidental species are rare visitors that spend little time here. They are not breeders nor do they have consistent populations in the U.S.

The 700+ bird species can be divided into game birds (58 species) and non-game species. The majority of conservation efforts have focused on game species, due to the strong interest in hunting them. As a result, a significant amount of money is spent on game bird management and habitat protection. Non-game species have received relatively little attention compared to their game bird cousins, although this has begun to change in recent years.

All bird species need specific habitat conditions to survive and reproduce. The resources birds need vary by species, but in general, birds require adequate foraging habitat and suitable nesting habitat, and many species must have reliable migratory stop-over sites. Adequate habitat must have the quantity (size, configuration) and quality characteristics that sustain species.

Habitat Quantity. For a habitat to support a species on a long-term basis, the area must be large enough. An obvious reason why small patches become species-poor is because there simply isn't enough space for the animals to meet their nutritional and nesting requirements. But other more subtle problems arise from small habitat sizes and changes in configuration. To understand these problems, think of small habitat patches as islands in a sea of unacceptable habitat. Habitat islands occur naturally in the ocean, of course, and some species are adapted to living on these islands. But, human activities have created many more habitat islands by fragmenting large, contiguous ecological communities into small pieces. Thus, a forest which is divided into smaller parts and surrounded by agriculture becomes a set of forest islands in an agricultural sea. Some species can adjust to the fragmentation of their habitat, but others cannot. The Western Burrowing Owl may be able to tolerate a patchy habitat configuration, so long as the patch size and arrangement mimics the prairie dog towns where the owls have long lived. On the other hand, Robinson (1997) notes that forest-nesting neotropical migrants are very sensitive to fragmentation. To preserve these species, contiguous woodland patches of between 10,000 and 50,000 acres or more seem to be required.

As patches shrink in size, the ratio of "edge" to habitat interior increases, allowing the effects of the hostile environment outside the patch to reach deeper into the habitat. Problems that arise as a result are known as "edge effects". Edge effects can include changes in temperature, moisture levels, and predation pressure that can reach deep into a habitat's interior. For example, as the salt marsh habitat of the California Clapper Rail has been reduced from mile-wide swathes to narrow strips just yards wide, native and non-native predators have been able to easily invade the entire habitat and significantly reduce Clapper Rail numbers. Salt marsh vegetation a mile wide provided significant impenetrable interior. Now, the Rail's habitat is mostly edge with very little interior. Increasing the size of habitats and joining them with habitat corridors are two ways to reverse the effects of habitat loss and fragmentation.

Many species, especially migratory birds, depend on adequate habitat sizes of multiple habitat types. A large number of migratory shorebirds are dependent on nesting habitat in the tundra, winter habitat in coastal zones, and migratory stop-over sites (or staging areas) in between. Decreases in any of these habitats could reduce shorebird numbers. While the importance of breeding and wintering habitat is clear, researchers have found that migratory stop-overs are essential links in species survival. From shorebirds to warblers to Whooping Cranes, migratory birds must have places to rest and fuel up during their travels. Interior wetlands, coastal wetlands, and riparian zones (the lush forest and shrub vegetation that grows along stream sides) are particularly important migratory bird staging habitats.

Habitat Quality. Good habitat quality provides adequate nesting sites, abundant food to support adults and young, and many places to escape predators. Although an area may look large enough to support a particular species, if the characteristics of the habitat are not adequate for reproduction and survival, the species will not remain there. The celebrated Northern Spotted Owl is a perfect example of a species that can't live just anywhere. The Spotted Owl is truly a Pacific coast, old-growth forest specialist and second growth forest won't do. An important reason for this habitat specificity is that this owl thrives on a diet dominated by northern flying squirrels. During the year, an adult Spotted Owl can eat up to 500 of these nocturnal mammals. Although flying squirrels have a wide range and varied diet, they achieve high densities when foraging on significant supplies of the fungal species that grow best in the humus of mature, Pacific coast, coniferous forests. Researchers believe this sensitive food chain is a major reason that this rare owl is virtually never a long-term resident of younger coniferous forests. In contrast to the Spotted Owl, the much more common Northern Cardinal is a habitat generalist. This resident species eats a range of seed types and insects, not specializing on any particular food item, and it nests in a variety of brush or shrub environments. As a habitat generalist, the Northern Cardinal has been able to find a home even in the altered landscapes of suburbia. For the migratory Dunlin, a small shorebird, only the hummocky wetlands of the northern Canadian tundra will do for nesting habitat. The fertility of the tundra soil, the local mounded topography, local wetland hydrology, nutrient value of the plants, and the structure of the plants are all characteristics of the habitat that contribute to Dunlin nesting habitat quality.

Habitat quality is a product of the interaction of physical factors, such as soil type and hydrology, and biotic factors such as the species present and the structure of the vegetation. To maintain high quality habitat, the natural ecological structures and processes of an ecosystem must be protected.

The tremendous diversity of U.S. avian species is threatened by the human enterprise. As we have changed the landscape and altered ecological processes, bird species have declined and some have been lost forever. Since Europeans arrived in the U.S., dozens of bird species have become extinct. Hawaii lists 24 species as extinct and on the mainland extinct species include the Great Auk, Labrador Duck, Heath Hen, Passenger Pigeon, Carolina Parakeet, Bachman's Warbler, Ivory-Billed Woodpecker, and the Dusky Seaside Sparrow. Many others are headed for that precipice. Under the federal Endangered Species Act, 90 bird species are listed as endangered or threatened, 11 are candidates for listing, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service considers another 122 species to be "non-game birds of management concern" in the U.S. and its possessions (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1995). The National Audubon Society and Partners in Flight, a Western Hemisphere bird conservation initiative, have also compiled a list of sensitive species called the WatchList. This list identifies over 100 species that may be on the road to extinction.

These lists are supported by scientific data that show a large number of species are declining in numbers. We do not have information on the number of birds of each species, i.e. the abundance of species, at the time Europeans arrived. However, we have been tracking the trends in bird abundances for many decades. The Patuxent Wildlife Research Center manages data on 421 breeding species in North America tracked since 1966 through the Breeding Bird Survey (BBS). Trend data for each species can be found at http://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/ . BBS data show that 51% of species tracked have declined. Some forest-nesting species are declining rapidly, as are species in recently disturbed habitats (Robinson, 1997). Grassland nesting species, such as the Bobolink, Dickcissel, and some sparrows, showed the most significant and consistent declines. Using these and other data, the U.S. Steering Committee of the North American Bird Conservation Initiative states that 71% of neotropical migrants declined between 1978 and 1987 and 45% declined significantly.

The Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences coordinates data for shorebirds gathered at over 400 sites in the U.S. and abroad as part of the International Shorebird Surveys. Data collected by Manomet and other research groups show that 16 of 47 shorebird species studied declined in abundance in the last 25 years and 5 more species are expected to decline by 25% in the next five years.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service analyzed the 122 non-game species of management concern and found that neotropical migrants, grassland-nesting species, and ground or low-nesting birds were more common on the list than would be expected based upon their proportional representation across all bird species groups. Over-represented bird families included herons, non-harvested waterfowl, daytime raptors, rails, and sparrows.

Another source of trend information is the Aububon Christmas Bird Count, extending back 100 years to 1900. These counts are collected each year by an army of volunteers counting birds on specified days around the holiday season. Christmas Count data can provide statistical challenges to analysis, but information can be gleaned. For example, James and Ethier (1989) found that Christmas count data showed a significant decline in Western Burrowing Owl numbers in California, but a significant increase in Florida Burrowing Owl populations.

Data on neotropical migrants show that, while approximately 50% of species have declined, the other 50% have either remained stable or increased. As a result, ornithologists, such as Scott Robinson (1997), state that, on average, numbers of neotropical migratory species have remained stable over the last decade. See Box 2 for an example of a rapidly increasing species, the snow goose, and the unfortunate results this growth is having on its habitat and the other species that depend on that habitat. People interested in bird conservation are working to keep all species represented at self-sufficient and sustainable levels. This goal requires improving habitat conditions for declining species and changing conditions for rapidly increasing ones that are threatening avian biodiversity.

The reasons for species declines include habitat loss and degradation, pollution and pesticides, human structures such as towers, and non-native and native species impacts.

Habitat Loss and Degradation. The most important factors in species declines are habitat loss and degradation. Humans have caused significant landscape and ecological changes which have affected species. The ecologist, Paul Ehrlich, and his colleagues at Stanford University estimate that humans now use 40% of the earth's terrestrial productivity-that's 40% of the land's bounty for us and only 60% for all other terrestrial species!

This redistribution of the natural wealth affects habitats across the U.S. For example, on average, we have destroyed 50% of the wetlands that existed here prior to European settlement. These habitats were breeding areas for millions of ducks and other waterfowl and hosted millions of shorebirds on their migratory journeys. Only 10% of Pacific coast old growth forests remain. And, the amount of tallgrass prairie habitat has dropped to only 1% of its original extent. As these habitats are destroyed, bird numbers drop.

Forest and mineral harvesting, conversion to agricultural uses, and conversion to urban land uses top the list of impacts that fragment and destroy habitats. Our national forests are fragmented by over 378,000 miles of roads, more than eight times the mileage of all U.S. interstate highways. Agriculture is a major culprit in wetland and riparian zone losses. In Iowa, for example, only 11% of the original wetlands remain; most of the rest are now farmed. A steadily increasing threat is urban sprawl which is eating up agricultural land and natural habitats at an increasing rate around urban centers. Development is reducing open grasslands and interior wetlands, which are easy areas to develop. Sprawl is gobbling up coastal and beach zones at an enormous rate, destroying migratory stop-overs.

Habitat losses have especially affected forest and grassland-nesting birds in the U.S. For many species, declines are compounded by losses of wetland and riparian zone migratory stop-over locations. In addition to changes in breeding and stop-over habitats in North America, migratory birds have been harmed by habitat changes to their wintering grounds outside the U.S. In particular, rainforest destruction in Central and South America may be an important factor in the decline of some U.S. nesting species. Rainforest loss has accelerated in the last three decades and, now, less than 50% of the world's rainforests remain. Changes in land use practices after the rainforest is removed also affect species. For example, after rainforest is removed, thousands of acres become agricultural land for growing cash crops such as coffee. In studying land use changes, researchers have found many migratory birds that formerly wintered in the rainforest are able switch their wintering habitat to coffee fields grown under a shady overstory of native rainforest species. However, now, many farmers are removing the native species overstory and changing these valuable fields of shade-grown coffee to monocultures of coffee plants grown in the sun. Loss of the native overstory plants will reduce already limited wintering bird habitat. For more on the importance of shade-grown coffee read Why migratory birds are crazy for coffee under Fact Sheets on the Smithsonian Migratory Bird Center page.

Even when habitats appear to be intact, they may be degraded by a range of influences including edge effects from fragmentation, pollution, human intrusion, grazing, non-native species invasion, and any number of other human-induced activities. Habitat degradation often happens slowly, as the result of many small incremental changes to ecosystems. Small, continual impacts, called cumulative impacts, add up over time and "nickel and dime" the ability of species to survive. Eventually species are lost.

Researchers have recently focused on recreation as a factor in bird population declines. Recreational use of wild areas can cause birds to restrict their nesting location, cause abandonment of nest sites or entire rookeries, and can generally disrupt foraging and nesting activities. Habitats may also be degraded by poor management practices. For example, mowing grasses or tilling soil for weed control during the nesting season results in the loss of uncounted adults, chicks, or nests of eggs each year. Researchers cite frequent mowing of hay fields as a significant factor in Bobolink declines. Other activities during the nesting season, such as felling trees, drilling wells, or any of a thousand other projects, may cause losses of birds and nests.

Pesticides. Pesticides are significant sources of avian mortality. DDT was the well-known culprit in the near-demise of many species feeding at the top of the food chain. Brown and White Pelicans, Peregrine Falcons, Osprey, and Bald Eagles were all headed the way of the Passenger Pigeon until DDT was identified as the cause of these species' declines and banned by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Today, every one of these species has recovered significantly-a true conservation success story. But, many other pesticides are still used today, resulting in reproductive problems and death for millions of birds. A study by Pimentel and his colleagues (1992) provided the conservative estimate of 67 million birds killed annually as a result of pesticide use. Based on the recreational value of birds, Pimentel's group estimated that these bird deaths cost the U.S. $2.1 billion per year in lost recreational opportunities. This estimate of the economic worth of birds killed by pesticides is very modest as it does not include the value of other important benefits birds provide, such as pest control.

In South America, pesticide use may be a significant factor in the decrease of some species. Thousands of Swainson's Hawks are killed each year in Argentina, the indirect effect of pesticides used to kill grasshoppers. Birds are also the targets of biocides. For example, the American Bird Conservancy, The Nature Conservancy, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and Venezuela Audubon have come together to protect the Dickcissel from pesticide use in Venezuela (Bird Conservation. 1999. Update: Dickcissel conservation in Venezuela.10:4). Dickcissels are U.S. grassland nesting birds that descend in the millions on small areas of Venezuela for the winter where they cause tremendous damage to crops. For 30 years, farmers have been using pesticides to kill many thousands of the offending Dickcissels. This killing has contributed to a 40% decline in this species from 1966 levels. The non-profit conservation groups are working to find non-lethal ways to discourage the birds from crop consumption. The American Bird Conservancygives more information on birds and pesticides.

Structures and Towers. In North America, hunting was once a significant factor in species losses but, today hunting of game birds does not appear to contribute to declines. This former threat has been replaced by other significant problems. Human-made structures are an increasing hazard to birds, especially migratory birds. It is estimated that 100 million birds are killed each year by collisions with buildings and skyscrapers. Many millions more are killed by towers, such as those erected for cell phones. The number of towers is growing at an exponential rate and so is the danger to birds. There are no firm estimates of the numbers of birds killed by towers each year; researchers are currently investigating the magnitude of this source of avian mortality. See Towerkill.com for more information. Other major causes of mortality are lights from buildings that attract migratory birds as well as power lines and wind turbines that are known to kill thousands of birds of prey each year.

Non-native and Native Invasive Species. A significant threat is currently posed by invasive non-native species. These are species, brought to the U.S., either accidentally or on purpose that proliferate and threaten native species through predation, competition, and/or habitat destruction. How many people realize that tumbleweed, a symbol of the old west, is actually a non-native weed from the steppes of Russia? Or, how many know that the chestnut blight, which destroyed almost every American chestnut in the eastern states, was a non-native fungus from Asia? The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that 4,300 acres of habitat are taken over each day by non-native plants. This rate exceeds the amount of habitat lost to urban sprawl. Damage done by these invasive non-natives is estimated to cost Americans $123 billion per year. As native habitat disappears and is replaced by an alien community, the native animal species often decline. In just one example, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management states that the Sage Grouse has declined from a population of 1 million to about 200,000, and a major contributor to the decline is the loss of native habitat to exotic plants. See the U.S. Bureau of Land Management Weed Page.

Non-native animals are also major culprits in species declines. The red fox, which is not native to the west coast, has been implicated in the decline of the endangered California Clapper Rail in the San Francisco Bay region. However, the effects of most non-native animals pale in comparison to the damage done by domestic and feral (free-ranging and wild) cats. Our domestic and wild felines are widely recognized as the greatest threat to birds of any non-native predator. There are probably more than 100 million domestic and feral cats nationwide. Clawed or declawed, well-fed or hungry, bell or no bell, all cats that spend time outside will hunt and kill birds, as well as other wildlife. Researchers in Wisconsin found, in that state alone, cats kill an estimated 39 million birds per year. Nationwide, the number is certainly in the hundreds of millions. See Cats and Wildlife: A Conservation Dilemma by J. S. Coleman, S. A. Temple, and S. R. Craven. Coleman, Temple, and Craven state that "worldwide, cats may have been involved in the extinction of more bird species than any other cause, except habitat destruction." Read more about the effect of cats on birds at the American Bird Conservancy web site.

As ecosystems change due to human activities, even native species can threaten overall avian biodiversity. The Snow Goose is one example of a native species that is proliferating at a destructive rate (see Box 2). Another prime example of a native species having destructive effects is the Brown-Headed Cowbird. The Cowbird has an unusual lifestyle. Instead of building a nest and raising its own chicks, the Cowbird makes its living as a brood parasite-a species that lays its eggs in the nests of other birds, forcing the host birds to raise the foreign Cowbird chicks. Brood parasites reduce the ability of their hosts to raise their own chicks and this may result in reproductive declines or failure for the host. Over 200 bird species in North America are victimized by Cowbirds. Landscape changes, especially habitat fragmentation and agricultural conversion, seem to have favored the Cowbird and its ability to parasitize nests. As forest habitat edges adjacent to cultivated or grazing lands increase, forest interiors become more accessible to Cowbirds which are able to reach a greater number of potential victims. Many researchers believe that a number of songbird species are declining because the Cowbird is expanding its range and increasing its ability to parasitize nests.

Global Climate Change. Finally, a new threat, which is expected to intensify in the next century, is global climate change. There is no doubt that the temperature of the earth's atmosphere has increased over the last 150 years, and there is little doubt that increases in the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere from our burning of fossil fuels is a significant factor in that increase. Because we have added, and continue to add, such large amounts of "greenhouse gases", such as CO2 and other pollutants, to the atmosphere, scientists expect that the atmospheric temperature will rise between 1 and 3.5 degrees Fahrenheit by the year 2100. As the earth warms, birds respond in a number of ways. There is evidence that some species are laying eggs earlier and others may be changing their range and migratory behavior in response to climate-driven habitat changes. One study found that Dunlins may be declining in number as a result of geological and atmospheric changes that are drying out their nesting habitat. About 8000 years ago, Dunlin breeding habitat, near Hudson Bay, was covered with a huge glacial ice sheet about 1 mile thick which depressed the earth's surface. The glacier is long gone, but the ground is still rebounding from the lifted weight, at the rate of about 3 feet per century. As the land rises, the Dunlin's wetland habitat has become drier. Ecologists also believe that warmer global temperatures are adding to the dessication of the Dunlin's wetland breeding grounds. This species is tenaciously tied to its breeding sites and their genetic programming may not allow the birds to move to other viable nesting habitat (Alison, 1999).

Many government and non-profit groups are collecting data on the effects of climate change on birds in order to predict how global environmental change may affect bird species diversity, abundance, and behavior. See the web sites at the U.S. EPA Climate Change site and the American Bird Conservancy for more information on climate change and birds.

As humans have become more technological and more populous, the impacts to birds have intensified. By the end of the 1800s, it was clear to the American people that birds were in trouble and the public was ready to take action. In 1886, George Bird Grinnell, naturalist and outspoken opponent of the bird slaughter typical of his day, advertised his desire to start a bird conservation group, to be called the Audubon Society. The response to his proposal was so overwhelming, he could not handle the demand. Grinnell did not continue his group, but local Audubon groups began forming. The Massachusetts Audubon Society was the first, and others followed. In 1905, most of the local groups formed the National Audubon Society (NAS). This non-profit group has worked ever since to protect birds through grassroots and national action. Ornithologist, Frank Chapman, initiated Christmas Bird counts in 1900 and they continue to this day under NAS sponsorship, providing long-term monitoring information. NAS began buying land for bird sanctuaries and today they run 100 such refuges. Over half a million people are members of NAS, supporting education, habitat preservation, and national action to protect birds.

Other non-profit groups have been instrumental in protecting birds and their habitats. The Nature Conservancy (TNC), founded in 1951, has acquired and manages over 11 million acres of habitat in the U.S. and 60 million acres in Canada, Latin America, the Caribbean, Asia, and the Pacific. Its 1340 preserves make TNC the largest private nature reserve system in the world. Ducks Unlimited is dedicated to the preservation of sustainable waterfowl numbers. Formed in the 1930s, Ducks Unlimited has a strong hunting focus, but is moving rapidly toward becoming a leader in wetland conservation. Through their money and efforts, Ducks Unlimited members have protected millions of acres of waterfowl habitat and are working toward a goal of protecting 8.8 million acres. The American Bird Conservancy recently formed to promote the conservation of western hemisphere bird species by fostering networks and collaborative partnerships. They provide much of the critical support for Partners In Flight (described below).

Many other non-profit and citizens' action groups across the U.S. work to preserve birds. From Hawk Mountain Sanctuary in Pennsylvania to Point Reyes Bird Observatory in California, non-profit groups are protecting land, conducting research, and leading the way in bird conservation.

In the early 1900s, public concern for birds also began to express itself in the form of government action. In 1903, the first preserve for birds, the 8-acre Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge, was set aside specifically to protect heron nesting colonies from destruction by hunters killing birds for the hat industry. Federal legislation to protect birds began with the durable Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. Canada and Mexico are both signatories on the associated treaties and this Act is still a major force in migratory bird protection.

During the twentieth century, the focus of most federal and state legislation and funding for bird conservation was on game bird species. Hunters and Ducks Unlimited have been strong advocates for waterfowl conservation and management, habitat protection, and wetland restoration. As a result, the populations of many waterfowl have been well researched and many thousands of acres of wetlands have been protected and restored. The Dingell-Johnson Act and the Federal Duck Stamp Program are just two of the many funding programs used to purchase waterfowl-friendly preserves and National Wildlife Refuges.

In 1973, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) became a strong tool for the protection and recovery of seriously depleted species. Research and management, as well as the protection and acquisition of habitat for rare birds is supported by this law. A number of species, including the Bald Eagle, have returned from the edge of extinction, thanks to the ESA. Even though target endangered and threatened species are the focus of recovery measures, many other species of birds and other wildlife also benefit from these efforts.

Many other federal laws work to protect habitat, particularly the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which requires a thorough environmental review of federal projects, and the Clean Water Act, which contains strong wetland protection provisions. In many states, the Clean Water Act is the only law that provides significant wetland protection.

An international effort to protect important wetlands was initiated in 1971 with the Ramsar Convention. The Convention was an initiative designed to encourage nations to identify and protect important wetland complexes, especially for waterbirds. Over 110 parties have signed on to the Convention, listing at least 950 wetland sites of importance around the world.

While these laws and programs were substantial efforts to protect bird species, they have not been enough to prevent the precipitous declines in avian species which have occurred since the 1970s. In the 1980s and 1990s, the significant loss of wetlands and serious decreases in duck numbers, shorebirds, and songbirds led to new legislation and creative initiatives to reverse the downward slide in species abundances.

A variety of new wetland funding legislation has been passed since 1985 which is restoring and protecting wetlands. Two programs, the Conservation Reserve Program and Wetlands Reserve Program, may contribute significantly to the recovery of species by restoring wetlands. The National Audubon Society's wetlands campaign provides information on these programs and other funding opportunities at their site.

In addition to funding measures, four significant bird conservation initiatives have been undertaken. The first is the North American Wildlife Management Plan (NAWMP) of 1986. The NAWMP has been a very successful program in which alliances are built between many groups in a critical waterfowl area. These "Joint Ventures", as they are called, develop a plan to conserve local waterfowl species. The overall goal of the plan is to restore waterfowl populations to 1970s numbers and each Joint Venture develops target numbers for their areas that support the overall NAWMP goals. There are 13 Joint Ventures in operation and, to date, at least 4.3 million acres of waterfowl habitat have been protected. While the Joint Ventures have been waterfowl-based, new alliances will begin to factor in other bird species that could benefit. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service administers the NAWMP.

While game species and endangered birds have received protection, songbirds and other non-game migrants have been largely neglected. The need to work internationally for migratory songbird prompted the non-profit National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to fund Partners In Flight (PIF) in 1991. PIF is a consortium of non-profit groups, government agencies, industry, and researchers dedicated to the conservation of migratory landbirds throughout the Western Hemisphere. To achieve this goal, PIF is working with groups and countries to identify and address threats to migratory birds. They also focus on strengthening the connection between science and conservation. In 2000, PIF will complete a comprehensive series of Bird Conservation Plans for the U.S. based on a peer-reviewed species prioritization approach. The full PIF planning approach can be found at the Partners In Flight site.

The U.S. Shorebird Conservation Plan (USSCP) was established in 1996 to augment the work begun in 1985 by the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network (WHSRN). WHSRN is a consortium of nations and organizations with the goal of identifying and protecting important shorebird habitat. Over 9 million areas are now managed under WHSRN. Through the Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences, the USSCP is expanding on WHSRN by developing plans for 12 shorebird management regions of the U.S. which will provide management recommendations as well as habitat protection, acquisition, and restoration direction.

Following in the footsteps of the other plans, the North American Colonial Waterbird Conservation Plan was initiated in 1998 to develop and implement cooperative arrangements to protect rookeries and manage colonial species.

A strength of these programs is their focus on classes of birds with similar life histories and facing similar threats. However, to ensure the most complete protection of species and the most efficient use of resources, these initiatives should be linked. Helping to coordinate the implementation of these plans is the role of the North American Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI). This multi-national, multi-organization group was an outgrowth of North American Free Trade Agreement provisions. The mission of NABCI is to protect and restore all bird populations and habitats in North America through "coordinated efforts at international, national, regional, state and local levels, guided by sound science and effective management". To this end, NABCI is working with all the bird initiatives to help find financial resources to implement effective conservation measures and to establish conservation delivery vehicles on an ecological basis, building upon the successful Joint Ventures of NAWMP. See the NABCI site for more information on this initiative and bird conservation topics.

Our bird species depend on habitat in the U.S. and other countries. To protect and recover bird populations, the initiatives such as NACBI, as well as the U.S. public and non-profit organizations are working throughout the Western Hemisphere to achieve these goals:

1. Preserve important breeding sites, especially sensitive habitat, such as wetlands, and colonial nesting sites.

2. Preserve critical migratory stop-over sites, especially important wetlands, riparian zones, and open grasslands with high quality forage.

3. Reduce habitat loss and fragmentation through planning, good management practices, and acquisition.

4. Reduce habitat degradation in sensitive areas, especially by reducing pesticide use, human disturbance, invasion by destructive species, and incompatible land uses.

5. Increase the amount of habitat available through ecological restoration, creation, and enhancement.

6. Educate the public about the importance of birds and the need to protect and restore habitat.

7. Work cooperatively with the public and other nations to understand the threats to species and reverse negative effects.

8. Support research and monitoring that provides information on the status of species, threats, and potential conservation approaches for reducing threats.

Bird conservation actions could not be developed without species monitoring and research into habitat needs, threats, and effective conservation measures.

Monitoring. Monitoring is the collection of data that are able to reveal significant trends in factors of interest. Bird population monitoring programs, such as the Breeding Bird Survey and the Christmas Bird Count, have measured the numbers of breeding and wintering birds. They have been valuable in assessing long-term population trends over North America. Other monitoring projects, particularly the Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship program (MAPS), are examining survival rate and reproductive success-two important factors that provide information on why a population is changing. Thousands of volunteers are involved every year in these significant large scale monitoring efforts:

1. Breeding Bird Survey -For the last 33 years, volunteers have collected breeding bird data along approximately 3000 survey routes in North America. Data are collected and analyzed by the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center. BBS information is considered one of the best tools for understanding bird population trends.

2. Audubon Christmas Counts -Since 1900, thousands of volunteers have counted birds in the U.S. on specified days around the holiday season. This program, sponsored by the National Audubon Society, collects monitoring data on winter bird populations and the data base is maintained by the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology. For analysis of these data, see http://www.mbr-pwrc.usgs.gov/bbs/cbc.html.

3. Breeding Bird Census -This program, also sponsored by NAS and the Cornell Lab, is designed to collect population and habitat data on breeding birds at specific locations in the U.S. Data have been collected since 1937. A winter season equivalent of this program, Winter Birds Population Studies, was initiated in 1948.

4. MAPS -The Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship (MAPS) Program collects data on the survivorship and reproductive success of breeding birds. Birds are caught in mist nests and banded at nearly 500 locations in the U.S.; most of these stations are run by volunteers. The Institute for Bird Populations (IBP), a non-profit research group, developed this program and implemented it in 1995. IBP compiles and analyzes the data from all MAPS stations each year.

5. International Shorebird Survey -Shorebirds have been counted since 1974 at over 400 sites, mostly in the U.S., in this survey which is coordinated by the Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences.

6. Hawk Migration Surveys -Hawk migration surveys are conducted at various locations each year by private organizations and non-profit groups. See the web site for Hawk Mountain Sanctuary for data from one of the largest hawk migration points in the U.S.-over 20,000 birds of prey counted per year.

7. Colonial Waterbird Surveys -The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service monitors populations of breeding colonial waterbirds on federal refuges.

8. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Waterfowl Monitoring Programs and State Game Bird Monitoring Programs - Well-developed federal and state waterfowl and game bird monitoring is essential to determining hunting seasons, hunting restrictions and bag limits.

9. Breeding Bird Atlases -In many states and counties, local birding experts produce exhaustive volumes describing the range and abundances of local breeding birds. These projects compile useful information on changes in species over time and provide baseline information on breeding birds.

10. Project FeedWatch-Since 1987, over 14,000 citizens in the U.S. and Canada have collected data between November and April on the birds visiting their feeders. This "citizen science" project, administered by the Cornell Lab, is providing information on the presence and absence of feeder species, on changes in bird population sizes, and on changes in winter ranges. See Project FeedWatch for information on the project and how you can participate.

Research. Research is the systematic collection of data to test hypotheses or answer specific research questions. Once monitoring data show a downward trend in a species, then research is needed to determine the cause of the trend. For example, research into the reasons for pelican declines in the 1960s and 1970s revealed that DDT was the cause. Universities, non-profit groups, and government agencies all conduct research to answer fundamental questions about bird life cycles, habitat needs, behavior, and conservation.

Read about one research project, the Wake Forest University Albatross Project , to learn some amazing facts researchers are discovering about these ocean-going birds.

Literature. Birders, organizations, and researchers publish information about their work in books, magazines, and professional journals. Popular press magazines include Audubon (from NAS), Bird Conservation (from ABC), Birding (from the American Birding Association), WildBird, and Birders World. Scientific literature is published in a wide range of scientific journals. If you are interested in ornithological literature, see Recent Ornithological Literature.

For lighter reading, try these two good books on birds and their conservation: Where have All the Birds Gone? by John Terbough (1989) and Living on the Wind: Across the Hemisphere with Migratory Birds by Scott Weidensaul (1999).

The U.S. EPA web site, EPA and Bird Conservation, is a good source of information on what you can do to help birds. Go to that site to read more about taking these steps:

2) Participate in "citizen science programs". National ones include: BBS, Audubon Christmas Counts, FeederWatch, Backyard Bird Count, and MAPS. Look for local watershed projects, non-profit groups, or government agency projects that monitor birds through volunteer efforts. See a list of some citizen science projects at http://www.birds.cornell.edu/LabPrograms/citSci/index.html.

3) Enhance the environment for birds by working with local conservation projects, such as watershed protection programs.

5) Enhance your property for birds by planting native species or providing nesting sites.

6) Help birds with your personal life-style choices, such as keeping your cat indoors, avoiding pesticides, and buying bird-friendly products.

BOX 1

The Condor Conundrum: The Rough Road to Species Recovery

On April 9, 1987, the last free-living California Condor was captured by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and brought into captivity to join the remaining 26 members of its species. With that, the Condor became extinct in the wild. That's the bad news. The good news is that conservation efforts to save the Condor are showing results and, as of September, 1999, the captive population is up to 161 birds and 48 captive-bred birds have been reintroduced to the wild to ride the warm air currents over their historic habitat in California and the southwest. The Condor is far from out of danger, but the Condor's road to recovery is a shining example of the extraordinary bird conservation efforts we will take.

The California Condor is, essentially, a huge vulture, making its living by scavenging dead animals. Deer and calves are two of its favorite meals. These birds weigh roughly 20 pounds and, with their wings nine-feet from tip to tip, Condors have the largest wing span of any North American land bird. Our Condor is an intelligent, curious, and social bird--all traits that help Condors find their food and survive. This species is a resident, non-migratory bird that nests primarily in cliff caves. Condor pairs reproduce slowly, raising a single chick every other year.

Geological records show that the Condor once ranged over a wide area of North America, from the west coast to Texas, Florida, and New York. Changes in climate may have caused the Condor's range to shrink. By the time Europeans reached North America, the Condor was found along the west coast from British Columbia to Baja California in Mexico.

While natural factors were responsible for long-term range decreases, in the last 200 years or so most causes of Condor deaths have been linked to human activities. The Condor is a large target and illegal hunting has been a major source of mortality. An even more common demise for Condors is from carcasses of dead animals poisoned by lead shot. There are many other sources of mortality, including collisions with power lines as well as egg and chick predation from the expanding Raven population.

Condor conservation has required extraordinary measures, including research, habitat protection, legal protections, and management. Biologist, Carl Koford, conducted the initial systematic research on the species in the 1930s. As a result of his work, Koford developed recommendations for the Condor's long-term survival, including habitat protection. In 1937, the U.S. Forest Service established the 1,200 acre Siquoc Condor Sanctuary in Santa Barbara and, in 1947, the U.S. set aside the Sespe Condor Sanctuary, 46,500 acres in Los Padres National Forest near Los Angeles. As a non-migratory bird, the Condor had little legal protection. That changed when the Condor was listed as an endangered species under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) and under California's ESA. Even with this protection, Condor numbers continued to decline in the 1970s and 1980s. By 1987, only nine birds remained in the wild.

The Condor recovery program has been successful in increasing the captive population, but reintroduction of birds to the wild has proved more difficult. Curious Condors will seek food from people in developed areas, exposing the birds to power line collisions and other urban dangers. In addition, lead poisoning from shot remains a problem. Although the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service required lead shot be phased out of use beginning in 1991, lead is still used, primarily because hunters do not like the steel shot alternatives. New metal alloys for bullets may make hunters happier and finally eliminate lead shot from the environment (Graham, 2000).

Condor conservation today continues with the captive breeding program, bird reintroductions, intensive monitoring of released birds, habitat management, and research into ways to reduce threats to Condor survival in the wild. Of course, all of this adds up to an expensive program. One take-home message from the Condor's story is that we need to prevent species from declining to such extreme levels. By the time a species has dropped below 1000 to 2000 animals, recovery becomes very expensive and very unpredictable. For the sake of biodiversity and good economics, we should protect declining species before they reach critical levels. A goal of many bird conservation organizations and programs is to "keep common birds common" by working now to protect habitat and provide for species' needs.

BOX 2

Honk if You Love Geese!

Seeing migrating geese in their neat chevrons, honking as they go, is a joyous experience. It's hard to imagine having too many of these great birds. Unfortunately, as the burgeoning Snow Goose population is proving, having too many geese is not only possible, but is highly destructive to the arctic tundra where this species breeds.

Snow Geese are beautiful large white or gray birds with black-tipped wings. In 1968, Dr. Fred Cooke began studying these attractive birds at La Perouse Bay, at the edge of the Hudson Bay. The huge Hudson Bay basin, a primary breeding area for the the mid-continent population of Snow Goose, is a fertile but fragile sedge/grass community with a short growing season. At the time Cooke began his study, approximately 2000 goose pairs nested at La Perouse Bay. Thirty years later the population had ballooned to an estimated 22,500 pairs-an annual growth rate of 8%! If only our investments would grow this quickly!

Explosive growth rates are occurring for four of the five major Snow Goose populations across the continent. The average growth rate for these populations is estimated at 4% per year. Currently, the mid-continent population is estimated at 3 to 6 million birds. Wildlife authorities believe a more sustainable population number is 1 to 1.5 million animals.

Why are Snow Goose populations exploding? There appear to be multiple reasons. Mike Johnson, biologist for the North Dakota Game and Fish Department, notes that winter food availability seems to be a major factor. The geese originally foraged in coastal and inland wetlands, most of which have been destroyed. Agricultural fields have replaced wetlands and other habitats too. Geese have adapted well to foraging in the agricultural fields and they have been growing fat on this new resource. Over-winter survival seems to have increased, which results in more birds to breed in the tundra in the spring. Protections for migratory species, declining numbers of hunters, wetland habitat enhancement and restoration, and other management activities have boosted Snow Goose numbers, perhaps more than any other waterfowl species.

With between two and six times the number of snow geese that the arctic habitat can support, the geese are eating themselves out of nest and forage. They have grazed vegetation to the dirt in their traditional high quality habitats, which completely destroys the native community. Then, they have moved into less choice habitat to do the same. Studies are showing that the fragile arctic communities will take decades to return to a viable habitat, if they can recover at all. Quite simply, Snow Geese are destroying the arctic tundra.

Eventually, the geese will run out of forage and their population will collapse. When this happens, they will take with them many other species, including the Canada Geese, Sandhill Cranes, ducks and shorebirds that also forage and breed in this habitat.

Changes to wintering and migratory stop-over habitat may have hurt many species, but they have been a boon to Snow Geese. Conservation efforts will require reducing the snow goose population to preserve its habitat and protect the other species dependent on the arctic tundra. This is a major conservation challenge, and not the type managers usually face. But, as ecological systems are changed by human activities, some species will benefit and may threaten biodiversity. Conservation requires maintaining sustainable numbers of all species. For some species, like the Snow Goose, that will mean finding ways to decrease numbers.