Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center
This resource is based on the following source:
Herkert, J. R. 1998 (revised 2003). Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Henslow's Sparrow. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown, ND. 17 pages.
This resource should be cited as:Herkert, J. R. 2003. Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Henslow's Sparrow. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown, ND. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Online. http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/literatr/grasbird/hesp/hesp.htm (Version 12DEC2003).
James R. Herkert
Series Coordinator: Douglas H. Johnson
Series Assistant Coordinators: Lawrence D. Igl, Jill A. Dechant Shaffer
Reviewers: Lori B. Pruitt and Maiken Winter
Range Map: Jeff T. Price
Illustration: Christopher M. Goldade
Major Funding: Prairie Pothole Joint Venture, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Geological Survey
Funding also provided by: U.S. Forest Service
Collaborators:
Louis B. Best, Iowa State University
Carl E. Bock, University of Colorado
Brenda C. Dale, Canadian Wildlife Service
Stephen K. Davis, Saskatchewan Wetland Conservation Corporation
James J. Dinsmore, Iowa State University
James K. Herkert, Illinois Endangered Species Protection Board
Fritz L. Knopf, Midcontinent Ecological Science Center
Rolf R. Koford, Iowa Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit
David R. C. Prescott, Alberta NAWMP Centre
Mark R. Ryan, University of Missouri
David W. Sample, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
David A. Swanson, Ohio Division of Wildlife
Peter D. Vickery, Massachusetts Audubon Society
John L. Zimmerman (retired), Kansas State University
Information on the habitat requirements and effects of habitat management on grassland birds were summarized from information in more than 5,500 published and unpublished papers. A range map is provided to indicate the relative densities of the species in North America, based on Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) data. Although birds frequently are observed outside the breeding range indicated, the maps are intended to show areas where managers might concentrate their attention. It may be ineffectual to manage habitat at a site for a species that rarely occurs in an area. The species account begins with a brief capsule statement, which provides the fundamental components or keys to management for the species. A section on breeding range outlines the current breeding distribution of the species in North America, including areas that could not be mapped using BBS data. The suitable habitat section describes the breeding habitat and occasionally microhabitat characteristics of the species, especially those habitats that occur in the Great Plains. Details on habitat and microhabitat requirements often provide clues to how a species will respond to a particular management practice. A table near the end of the account complements the section on suitable habitat, and lists the specific habitat characteristics for the species by individual studies. A special section on prey habitat is included for those predatory species that have more specific prey requirements. The area requirements section provides details on territory and home range sizes, minimum area requirements, and the effects of patch size, edges, and other landscape and habitat features on abundance and productivity. It may be futile to manage a small block of suitable habitat for a species that has minimum area requirements that are larger than the area being managed. The Brown-headed Cowbird (Molothrus ater) is an obligate brood parasite of many grassland birds. The section on cowbird brood parasitism summarizes rates of cowbird parasitism, host responses to parasitism, and factors that influence parasitism, such as nest concealment and host density. The impact of management depends, in part, upon a species' nesting phenology and biology. The section on breeding-season phenology and site fidelity includes details on spring arrival and fall departure for migratory populations in the Great Plains, peak breeding periods, the tendency to renest after nest failure or success, and the propensity to return to a previous breeding site. The duration and timing of breeding varies among regions and years. Species' response to management summarizes the current knowledge and major findings in the literature on the effects of different management practices on the species. The section on management recommendations complements the previous section and summarizes specific recommendations for habitat management provided in the literature. If management recommendations differ in different portions of the species' breeding range, recommendations are given separately by region. The literature cited contains references to published and unpublished literature on the management effects and habitat requirements of the species. This section is not meant to be a complete bibliography; for a searchable, annotated bibliography of published and unpublished papers dealing with habitat needs of grassland birds and their responses to habitat management, use the Grassland and Wetland Birds Bibliography on the home page of this resource.
This report has been downloaded from the Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center World-Wide Web site, http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/literatr/grasbird/. Please direct comments and suggestions to Douglas H. Johnson, Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, U.S. Geological Survey, 8711 37th Street SE, Jamestown, North Dakota 58401; telephone: 701-253-5539; fax: 701-253-5553; e-mail: Douglas_H_Johnson@usgs.gov.
 |
| Figure. Breeding distribution of Henslow's Sparrow in the United States and southern Canada, based on Breeding Bird Survey data, 1985-1996. Scale represents average number of individuals detected per route per year. Map from J. T. Price, American Bird Conservancy, Boulder, Colorado, pers. comm. |
Keys to management are providing large areas with suitable habitat (tall, dense, herbaceous vegetation with well-developed litter), avoiding habitat disturbances during the breeding season, and controlling succession.
Studies have been inconclusive regarding the amount of woody vegetation that will be tolerated by Henslow's Sparrows, although it is generally accepted that encroachment by woody vegetation eventually precludes use by this species (Piehler 1987, Smith 1992, Melde and Koford 1996, Pruitt 1996). Several studies have indicated that Henslow's Sparrows prefer areas with low density of woody vegetation (Peterson 1983; Kahl et al. 1985; Zimmerman 1988; Mazur 1996; Michaels 1997; Winter 1998, 1999; Cully and Michaels 2000). Densities of tall (>2m) shrubs/trees were 70% higher at unoccupied areas than at occupied areas at one site in northeastern Illinois (Herkert and Glass 1999). However, a different Illinois study found no significant difference in woody stem densities for shrubs <2m tall (Herkert 1994a), and a Minnesota study found no significant difference in the number of trees, shrubs, and bushes between areas used and not used by Henslow's Sparrows (Hanson 1994). In Wisconsin, a positive correlation was detected between Henslow's Sparrow abundance and woody cover <1 m; however, despite this positive correlation, percent woody cover <1 m at occupied sites was low (0.79%), as was total woody cover (1.69%) (Sample 1989). A table near the end of the account lists the specific habitat characteristics for Henslow's Sparrows by study.
Grassland isolation also may influence the distribution of Henslow's Sparrows (Winter 1998). In Missouri, Henslow's Sparrows were absent from a 28-ha isolated prairie fragment, but were present in a 16-ha fragment that was 1.6 km from a larger prairie where Henslow's Sparrows were present (Hayden 1985). In Missouri tallgrass prairie fragments, density of Henslow's Sparrows increased with the total area of grassland in the surrounding landscape and with decreasing distance among grassland patches (Winter 1998). Although Henslow's Sparrows are sensitive to habitat fragmentation, nesting success does not seem to be influenced by fragment size (Winter 1998, 1999; Winter et al. 2000). In Missouri tallgrass prairie fragments, nest success was lower <50 m from a shrubby edge, presumably because of increased mammalian activity and increased mammalian depredation of nests near edges (Winter 1998, Winter et al. 2000). In Illinois, Henslow's Sparrows were more inclined to hold territories in the interior of fields than in the 50 m between the interior of the field and the wooded boundary (O'Leary and Nyberg 2000).
Henslow's Sparrows apparently will renest after a first nest fails, and nests found with eggs in mid-August or dependent young in September suggest that the species may be double-brooded (Graber 1968). In southwestern Missouri, Winter (1998) found that Henslow's Sparrows were double-brooded. In southern Michigan, Henslow's Sparrows commonly raised two broods per nesting season (Robins 1971), whereas, in Wisconsin, second broods were uncommon (Wiens 1969). In Maryland, fledglings were found in late July, which suggested that double-broodedness had occurred (Skipper 1998).
In Illinois, mowing tended to reduce but not eliminate Henslow's Sparrows in the growing season immediately following mowing (Herkert 1994a). However, timing of mowing the previous year may influence whether or not Henslow's Sparrow occupy a particular field. In New York, fields mowed late the previous year were avoided at the beginning of the breeding season, but some were occupied later in the season once vegetation has recovered (Mazur 1996). However, in an earlier New York study, Henslow's Sparrows bred in pastures that had been mowed in late July to August 1-6 yr earlier (Smith and Smith 1992). Henslow's Sparrows continue nesting late (i.e., August) into the summer (Potter 1915, Reinking and Hendricks 1983) and abandon fields once they are mowed (George 1952, Graber 1968, Hayden 1985). Many nests and fledglings are destroyed by mowing during the breeding season (M. Winter, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, pers. comm.). Therefore mowing should not be allowed in areas with nesting Henslow's Sparrows until after the breeding season (about 15 August). Even though late-season (early August) mowing can destroy Henslow's Sparrows nests (Potter 1915), conservation mowing in Missouri (one annual cut occurring after mid-July) was found to result in higher densities of Henslow's Sparrows than in burned areas (Swengel 1996). In Missouri tallgrass prairie fragments, Henslow's Sparrow densities were lower in areas hayed the previous year than those hayed two years earlier (Winter 1998).
Grazing also influences Henslow's Sparrows distribution and abundance. In general, moderately to heavily grazed areas are not used by Henslow's Sparrows (Peterson 1983; Skinner et al. 1984; Zimmerman 1988; J. R. Herkert, Illinois Endangered Species Protection Board, Springfield, Illinois, unpublished data). At Konza Prairie in Kansas, Henslow's Sparrows were not encountered until grazing had been halted for 2 yr (Zimmerman and Finck 1982). However, Henslow's Sparrows have been reported to occupy areas that are lightly grazed (Skinner et al. 1984, Swengel 1996). In Missouri, Henslow's Sparrow densities were highest on lightly grazed (vegetation height >30.4 cm) pastures, followed by idle pastures; they were not found on heavily grazed (vegetation height ≤10.2 cm) pastures (Skinner 1975). In New York, Henslow's Sparrows were found on lightly grazed pastures occupied annually by cattle from 15 May to 15 October. These pastures also had been mowed in late July to August in the previous year (Smith and Smith 1992). In southwestern Wisconsin, Henslow's Sparrows were nearly equally abundant in rotationally grazed pastures, continuously grazed pastures, and ungrazed pastures (Temple et al. 1999). Ungrazed grasslands were neither mowed or grazed from 15 May to 1 July. Continuously grazed sites were grazed throughout the summer at levels of 2.5- 4 animals/ha. Rotationally grazed pastures, stocked with 40-60 animals/ha, were grazed for 1-2 d and then left undisturbed for 10-15 d before being grazed again; pastures averaged 5 ha. All sites were composed of 50-75% cool-season grasses, 7-27% legumes, and 8-23% forbs.
Henslow's Sparrow populations tend to increase through the summer (Mazur 1996, J. R. Herkert, Illinois Endangered Species Protection Board, Springfield, Illinois, pers. obs.) and late-arriving (after 31 May) birds may use areas typically avoided by early-arriving birds, such as burned or mowed areas (Skinner et al. 1984; Mazur 1996; M. Winter, pers. comm.).
Where possible, provide ≥30 ha of contiguous grassland (Zimmerman 1988, Smith and Smith 1992, Mazur 1996). If contiguous management units are not available, provide a complex of smaller units located near enough to one another to facilitate colonization from adjacent territories in available habitat (Mazur 1996). Create large, grassy areas near small prairie fragments; small prairie fragments can support higher densities of Henslow's Sparrows if surrounded by other grassland habitat (Winter 1998). Remove woody vegetation within and along the periphery of grassland fragments to discourage predators that may use woody vegetation as travel corridors and to enlarge the amount of interior grassland (Winter 1998, O'Leary and Nyberg 2000).
Never burn, mow, or otherwise disturb an entire area in one breeding season because disturbance reduces available habitat for one or two growing seasons (Herkert et al. 1993, Hanson 1994, Melde and Koford 1996). Implement a rotational disturbance regime to maintain grassland habitat (Zimmerman 1988, Herkert 1994a, Melde and Koford 1996).
In order to avoid destruction of nests, conduct management treatments before birds arrive in the spring (15 April) or after the young have fledged (15 September) (Smith 1992, Hanson 1994, Mazur 1996).
Provide dense and moderately tall (>30 cm) grassy vegetation (Smith 1992).
Removal of woody vegetation is needed when it becomes taller than the fully grown herbaceous vegetation (Smith 1992, Herkert et al. 1993, Mazur 1996).
Prevent encroachment of woody vegetation with periodic prescribed fire (Eddleman 1974). In Kansas, use a rotational burning program in which 3-4 adjacent tracts of prairie are burned on a 3-4 yr cycle; incidental observations suggest that each patch should be 30 ha (Zimmerman 1988). In Missouri, use a rotational burning program in which 20-30% of the site is burned each year (Winter 1998). Management units should be at least 20-30 ha, if possible (Herkert 1994a). In Missouri tallgrass prairie, annually burn one-third to one-half of a management area to maintain suitable habitat (Clawson 1991). Burning is preferred over haying, because vegetation recovers more quickly after burning than haying (Winter 1998).
Prescribed burns should be conducted in early spring (March to early April) or late fall (October and November) (Herkert et al. 1993).
In New York, burn once every 5-6 yr or mow every 4-5 yr (Mazur 1996). These intervals will allow vegetation to recover between disturbances to provide suitable habitat while keeping succession in check.
In Missouri, implement conservation haying (one annual cut after mid-July) on a 2-3 yr rotation (Swengel 1996).
In Missouri, provide idle or lightly grazed grasslands. Light grazing was defined as grazing pressure that left >40% vegetative cover at 25 cm (Skinner 1982, Skinner et al. 1984).
Grassland restoration areas should be ≥50 ha and preferably >100 ha in size (Herkert et al. 1993).
| Author(s) | Location(s) | Habitat(s) Studied* | Species-specific Habitat Characteristics |
| Birkenholz 1973 | Illinois | Idle, idle tallgrass, idle tame, wetland, wet meadow | Were most abundant in meadows of bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis), little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium), and prairie dropseed (Sporobolous heterolepis) with dense grass cover <60 cm tall; were not found in areas dominated by tall grasses or shrubs |
| Bollinger 1995 | New York | Tame hayland | Abundance was positively associated with field size and negatively associated with vegetation height |
| Eddleman 1974 | Kansas | Burned tallgrass, burned tallgrass pasture, idle tallgrass, tallgrass pasture, wet meadow | Used unburned or ungrazed areas in moderately dense vegetation 0.6 - 1.2 m tall; avoided sparse vegetation and dense grasses >1.2 m; preferred areas dominated by big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) and Indiangrass (Sorghastrum nutans) |
| Hanson 1994 | Minnesota | Idle native, idle tame | Preferred areas with substantial uncompressed litter; space between the bare ground and the bottom of the litter layer, litter depth, overall litter cover, and height of standing dead vegetation were all greater in areas of use rather than areas of non-use; mean litter depth at used areas was 7.1 cm and mean height of standing dead vegetation was 59.4 cm |
| Herkert 1994a,b | Illinois | Burned tallgrass, cropland, idle seeded-native, idle tallgrass, tame hayland | Preferred large areas with taller, denser vegetation and a higher proportion of residual standing dead plant material; on grasslands ≥150 ha, occupied areas had significantly greater grass height and greater vegetation height; vegetation at occupied sites was characterized by 27.5 cm mean grass height and 47.2 cm mean vegetation height; were rarely encountered on grassland fragments <100 ha |
| Kahl et al. 1985 | Missouri | Burned tallgrass, cropland, idle, idle tallgrass, tallgrass hayland, tallgrass pasture, woodland, woodland edge | Used song perches characterized by: no woody stems ≥2.5 cm diameter at breast height (dbh), few woody stems <2.5 cm dbh (usually 0/ha, never >100/ha), dense ground vegetation of intermediate height (20-40 cm), and dense litter coverage |
| Mazur 1996 | New York | Idle tame | Inhabited large (>8 ha), flat (<7% slope) fields dominated by knapweed (Centaurea spp.), brome grass (Bromus spp.), and bedstraw (Galium spp.), with tall, dense vegetation, a well established litter layer, and a low density of woody-stemmed plants |
| Michaels 1997, Cully and Michaels 2000 | Kansas | Burned tallgrass, idle tallgrass, tallgrass hayland | Used areas characterized by low tree density, high physiognomic cover diversity, deep litter, and high coverage of litter; dense, homogenous vegetation; and standing dead vegetation; used areas 2-3 growing seasons postfire significantly more than 0-1 and >4 growing seasons postfire; presence of some low, woody vegetation did not reduce use of habitat |
| Piehler 1987 | Pennsylvania | Idle tame | Vegetation structure in territories was taller and denser than in surrounding area; no territories contained shrub cover; territories had 98.0% litter cover, 2.0% bare ground, 5.95 cm litter depth, 102.2 cm mean vegetation height, and 117.3 cm effective vegetation height |
| Reinking and Hendricks 1993 | Oklahoma | Burned tallgrass, idle tallgrass | Avoided nesting in spring-burned areas |
| Robins 1971 | Michigan | Tame hayland | Required an intermediate moisture range, dense herbaceous vegetation, well-developed litter, and available song perches |
| Rotenberry and Wiens 1980 | Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming | Idle mixed-grass, idle shortgrass, idle shrubsteppe, idle tallgrass, montane meadow | Occurred only in tallgrass habitat; abundance was correlated with percent litter cover |
| Sample 1989 | Wisconsin | Burned tallgrass, cropland, DNC (idle seeded-native, idle tame), idle, idle seeded-native, idle tallgrass, idle tallgrass/tame, idle tame, tame hayland, tame pasture, tame savanna pasture, wet meadow, wet-meadow pasture | Preferred mesic or wet habitats with relatively tall and dense, but patchy, vegetation; were common in both native and tame grasses; abundance was positively correlated with percent cover of woody vegetation 0-1 m (0.79%), number of dead stems 0-1 m (27.2 stems/m²), total number of dead stems (110.8 stems/m²), maximum vegetation height (88 cm), vegetation height/density (40 cm), and percent cover of standing residual vegetation (9.9%); abundance was negatively correlated with percent cover of exposed soil (1.0%) |
| Schulenberg et al. 1993 | Kansas | Burned tallgrass, idle tallgrass | Singing males were located in unburned tallgrass but not in burned tallgrass; one nest was found woven into dried stems, 10.2 cm above ground; nest was well-concealed in a 37-39 cm tall clump of little bluestem surrounded by sedges (Carex spp.), forbs, and some free-standing shrubs; nest site was characterized by 10% standing little bluestem, 10% live little bluestem, 25% sedge, 20% forbs (mostly blazing star [Liatris punctata] and hemp dogbane [Apocynium cannabis]), 5% bare ground, 30% litter, and <2 cm litter depth |
| Skinner 1974 | Missouri | Idle tallgrass, idle tame, tallgrass hayland, tallgrass pasture, tame hayland, tame pasture | Preferred idle grassland and grazed pastures with vegetation height >48 cm; none were found in pasture <10 cm or in hay stubble; avoided areas where forbs predominate |
| Skinner et al. 1984 | Missouri | Burned tallgrass, idle tallgrass, tallgrass hayland, tallgrass pasture, tame pasture | Occupied areas with tall, dense cover; preferred lightly grazed and idle grasslands; commonly occurred on undisturbed grasslands even if they were disturbed the previous year |
| Smith and Smith 1992 | New York | Pasture | Avoided pastures <30 ha; time since last mowing did not influence late season (late July to early August) distributions, several were found in areas mowed the previous year |
| Swengel 1996 | Missouri | Burned tallgrass, burned tallgrass hayland, tallgrass hayland, tallgrass hayland/pasture | Preferred large prairies 1-2 growing seasons after conservation haying (one mowing after 15 July) or burning |
| Volkert 1992 | Wisconsin | Burned tallgrass (restored), idle tallgrass (restored) | Highest densities were observed 2-3 yr postburn; were absent from recently burned prairie |
| Wiens 1969 | Wisconsin | Idle pasture, tame pasture | Occupied territories with greater mean litter depth, effective vegetation height, and forb height than outside of territories; occupied areas also had lower coverage and density of forbs; no territories contained posts, fence lines or trees; territories had 97% grass cover, 20% forb cover, 1% bare ground, and 5% effective cover <5 cm; of 4 territories, mean distance from territory boundary to woods was 175 m, to fence line was 22.5 m, and to cultivated field was 40 m; no territories contained posts, fence lines, or trees |
| Winter 1996; M. Winter, pers. comm. | Missouri | Idle tallgrass | Density was lower in small prairies and increased with increasing litter depth and decreasing bare soil cover; nesting success did not differ with size of prairies |
| Winter 1998, 1999 | Missouri | Burned tallgrass, idle tallgrass, tallgrass hayland | Placed nests among layers of thick litter about 6-8 cm above the ground; most nests were covered by litter and vegetation; nests were never placed near or within woody habitat; mean vegetation measurements at successful nest sites were 3 cm litter depth, 43 cm vegetation height, 0.25 m visual obstruction, 0.4 woody stems/0.15 m², 27% litter cover, 51% grass cover, 19% forb cover, 2% woody cover, and 0.6% bare soil |
| Zimmerman 1988 | Kansas | Burned tallgrass, idle tallgrass | Occupied territories characterized by greater coverage of standing vegetation, lesser coverage of woody vegetation, and taller live grasses than areas outside of territories |
* In an effort to standardize terminology among studies, various descriptors were used to denote the management or type of habitat. "Idle" used as a modifier (e.g., idle tallgrass) denotes undisturbed or unmanaged (e.g., not burned, mowed, or grazed) areas. "Idle" by itself denotes unmanaged areas in which the plant species were not mentioned. Examples of "idle" habitats include weedy or fallow areas (e.g., oldfields), fencerows, grassed waterways, terraces, ditches, and road rights-of-way. "Tame" denotes introduced plant species (e.g., smooth brome [Bromus inermis]) that are not native to North American prairies. "Hayland" refers to any habitat that was mowed, regardless of whether the resulting cut vegetation was removed. "Burned" includes habitats that were burned intentionally or accidentally or those burned by natural forces (e.g., lightning). In situations where there are two or more descriptors (e.g., idle tame hayland), the first descriptor modifies the following descriptors. For example, idle tame hayland is habitat that is usually mowed annually but happened to be undisturbed during the year of the study.
Birkenholz, D. E. 1973. Habitat relationships of grassland birds at Goose
Lake Prairie Nature Preserve. Pages 63-66 in L. C. Hulbert, editor.
Proceedings of the Third Midwest Prairie Conference. Kansas State
University, Manhattan, Kansas.
Bollinger, E. K. 1991. Conservation of grassland birds in agricultural areas.
Pages 279-287 in D. J. Decker, M. E. Krasny, G. R. Goff, C. R. Smith, and
D. W. Gross, editors. Challenges in the conservation of biological
resources. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
Bollinger, E. K. 1995. The effects of habitat selection and vegetation
succession on the breeding dispersion of birds nesting in eastern
hayfields. Auk 112:720-730.
Clawson, R. L. 1991. Henslow's Sparrow habitat, site fidelity, and
reproduction in Missouri. Final Report. Federal Aid Project Number
W-13-R-45, Study Number 18, Job Number 1. Missouri Department of
Conservation, Jefferson City, Missouri. 16 pages.
Cully, J. F., Jr., and H. L. Michaels. 2000. Henslow's Sparrow habitat
associations on Kansas tallgrass prairie. Wilson Bulletin 112:115-123.
Eddleman, W. R. 1974. The effects of burning and grazing on bird populations
in native prairie in the Kansas Flint Hills. Unpublished report, National
Science Foundation-Undergraduate Research Program. Kansas State
University, Manhattan, Kansas. 33 pages.
Friedmann, H., and L. F. Kiff. 1985. The parasitic cowbirds and their hosts.
Proceedings of the Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology 2:226-304.
George, J. L. 1952. The birds on a southern Michigan farm. Ph.D. thesis.
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 416 pages.
Graber, J. W. 1968. Western Henslow's Sparrow. Pages 776-777 in A. C. Bent,
editor. Life histories of North American cardinals, grosbeaks, buntings,
towhees, finches, sparrows, and allies, Part 2. Dover Publications,
New York, New York.
Hands, H. M., R. D. Drobney, and M. R. Ryan. 1989. Status of the Henslow's
Sparrow in the northcentral United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Report, Missouri Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University
of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri. 12 pages.
Hanson, L. G. 1994. The Henslow's Sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii) of
Minnesota: population status and breeding habitat analysis. M.S. thesis.
Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant, Michigan. 29 pages.
Hayden, T. J. 1985. Minimum area requirements of some breeding bird species
in fragmented habitats in Missouri. M.A. thesis. University of Missouri,
Columbia, Missouri. 148 pages.
Helzer, C. J. 1996. The effects of wet meadow fragmentation on grassland
birds. M.S. thesis. University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska. 65 pages.
Helzer, C. J., and D. E. Jelinski. 1999. The relative importance of patch
area and perimeter-area ratio to grassland breeding birds. Ecological
Applications 9:1448-1458.
Herkert, J. R. 1991. An ecological study of the breeding birds of grassland
habitats within Illinois. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Illinois,
Urbana, Illinois. 112 pages.
Herkert, J. R. 1994a. Status and habitat selection of the Henslow's Sparrow.
Wilson Bulletin 106:35-45.
Herkert, J. R. 1994b. The effects of habitat fragmentation on midwestern
grassland bird communities. Ecological Applications 4:461-471.
Herkert, J. R., and W. D. Glass. 1999. Henslow's Sparrow response to
prescribed fire in an Illinois prairie remnant. Pages 160-164 in P. D.
Vickery and J. R. Herkert, editors. Ecology and conservation of grassland
birds of the Western Hemisphere. Studies in Avian Biology 19.
Herkert, J. R., R. E. Szafoni, V. M. Kleen, and J. E. Schwegman. 1993.
Habitat establishment, enhancement and management for forest and grassland
birds in Illinois. Illinois Department of Conservation, Division of
Natural Heritage, Natural Heritage Technical Publication 1, Springfield,
Illinois. 20 pages.
Kahl, R. B., T. S. Baskett, J. A. Ellis, and J. N. Burroughs. 1985.
Characteristics of summer habitats of selected nongame birds in Missouri.
Research Bulletin 1056. University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri.
155 pages.
Koford, R. R. 1997. Status of Henslow's Sparrow in the former tall-grass
prairie ecosystem. Progress report submitted to the Biological Resources
Division, U.S. Geological Survey and Region 3, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. 52+ pages.
Mazur, R. 1996. Implication of field management for Henslow's Sparrow habitat
at Saratoga National Historic Park, New York. M.S. thesis. University of
New York, Syracuse, New York. 33 pages.
Melde, P. B., and R. R. Koford. 1996. Henslow's Sparrow nesting observations,
habitat associations and history in Iowa. Iowa Bird Life 66:117-122.
Michaels, H. L. 1997. Landscape and fine scale habitat associations of the
Loggerhead Shrike and Henslow's Sparrow on Fort Riley Military
Installation, Kansas. M.S. thesis. Kansas State University, Manhattan,
Kansas. 109 pages.
National Geographic Society. 1987. Field guide to the birds of North America,
second edition. National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 464 pages.
O'Leary, C. H., and D. W. Nyberg. 2000. Treelines between fields reduce the
density of grassland birds. Natural Areas Journal 20:243-249.
Peck, G. K., and R. D. James. 1987. Breeding birds of Ontario, volume 2:
passerines. Royal Ontario Museum Publications in Life Sciences. Royal
Ontario Museum, Toronto, Ontario. 387 pages.
Peterson, A. 1983. Observations on habitat selection by Henslow's Sparrow in
Broome County, New York. Kingbird 33:155-164.
Piehler, K. G. 1987. Habitat relationships of three grassland sparrow species
on reclaimed surface mines in Pennsylvania. M.S. thesis. West Virginia
University, Morgantown, West Virginia. 78 pages.
Potter, L. H. 1915. Short-billed Marsh Wren and Henslow's Sparrow at
Clarendon. Vermont Botany and Bird Clubs Joint Bulletin 1:19-20.
Pruitt, L. 1996. Henslow's Sparrow status assessment. United States Fish and
Wildlife Services, Bloomington, Indiana. 113 pages.
Reinking, D. L., D. A. Wiedenfeld, D. H. Wolfe, and R. W. Rohrbaugh, Jr. 2000.
Distribution, habitat use, and nesting success of Henslow's Sparrow in
Oklahoma. Prairie Naturalist 32:219-232.
Reinking, D. L., and D. P. Hendricks. 1993. Occurrence and nesting of
Henslow's Sparrow in Oklahoma. Bulletin of the Oklahoma Ornithological
Society 26:33-36.
Robins, J. D. 1971. A study of the Henslow's Sparrow in Michigan. Wilson
Bulletin 83:29-48.
Rotenberry, J. T., and J. A. Wiens. 1980. Habitat structure, patchiness, and
avian communities in North American steppe vegetation: a multivariate
analysis. Ecology 61:1228-1250.
Sample, D. W. 1989. Grassland birds in southern Wisconsin: habitat preference,
population trends, and response to land use changes. M.S. thesis.
University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. 588 pages.
Schulenberg, J. H., G. L. Horak, M. D. Schwilling, and E. J. Finck. 1994.
Nesitng of Henslow's Sparrow in Osage County, Kansas. Kansas
Ornithological Society Bulletin 45:25-28.
Skinner, R. M. 1974. Grassland use patterns and prairie bird populations
in Missouri. M.A. thesis. University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri.
53 pages.
Skinner, R. M. 1975. Grassland use patterns and prairie bird populations in
Missouri. Pages 171-180 in M. K. Wali, editor. Prairie: a multiple
view. University of North Dakota Press, Grand Forks, North Dakota.
Skinner, R. M. 1982. Vegetation structure and bird habitat selection on
Missouri prairies. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Missouri, Columbia,
Missouri. 108 pages.
Skinner, R. M., T. S. Baskett, and M. D. Blendon. 1984. Bird habitat on
Missouri prairies. Terrestrial Series 14. Missouri Department of
Conservation, Jefferson City, Missouri. 37 pages.
Skipper, C. S. 1998. Henslow's Sparrows return to previous nest site in
western Maryland. North American Bird Bander 23:36-41.
Smith, C. R. 1992. Henslow's Sparrow, Ammodramus henslowii. Pages 315-330
in K. J. Schneider and D. M. Pence, editors. Migratory nongame birds of
management concern in the Northeast. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Newton Corner, Massachusetts.
Smith, D. J., and C. R. Smith. 1992. Henslow's Sparrow and Grasshopper
Sparrow: a comparison of habitat use in Finger Lakes National Forest,
New York. Bird Observer 20:187-194.
Swengel, S. R. 1996. Management responses of three species of declining
sparrows in tallgrass prairie. Bird Conservation International 6:241-253.
Temple, S. A., B. M. Fevold, L. K. Paine, D. J. Undersander, and D. W. Sample.
1999. Nesting birds and grazing cattle: accommodating both on midwestern
pastures. Pages 196-202 in P. D. Vickery and J. R. Herkert, editors.
Ecology and conservation of grassland birds of the Western Hemisphere.
Studies in Avian Biology 19.
Volkert, W. K. 1992. Response of grassland birds to a large-scale prairie
planting project. Passenger Pigeon 54:190-196.
Wiens, J. A. 1969. An approach to the study of ecological relationships among
grassland birds. Ornithological Monographs 8:1-93.
Winter, M. 1996. How does fragmentation affect grassland birds in south-
western Missouri prairies? Missouri Prairie Journal 17:15-18.
Winter, M. 1998. Effect of habitat fragmentation on grassland-nesting birds
in southwestern Missouri. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Missouri,
Columbia, Missouri. 215 pages.
Winter, M. 1999. Nesting biology of Dickcissels and Henslow's Sparrows in
Missouri prairie fragments. Wilson Bulletin 111:515-527.
Winter, M., and J. Faaborg. 1999. Patterns of area sensitivity in grassland-
nesting birds. Conservation Biology 13:1424-1436.
Winter, M., D. H. Johnson, and J. Faaborg. 2000. Evidence for edge effects on
multiple levels in tallgrass prairie. Condor 102:256-266.
Zimmerman, J. L. 1997. Avian community responses to fire, grazing, and
drought in the tallgrass prairie. Pages 167-180 in F. L. Knopf and F. B.
Samson, editors. Ecology and conservation of Great Plains vertebrates.
Springer-Verlag, New York, New York.
Zimmerman, J. L. 1988. Breeding season habitat selection by the Henslow's
Sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii) in Kansas. Wilson Bulletin 100:17-24.
Zimmerman, J. L., and E. J. Finck. 1983. Success in a secondary habitat: the
Dickcissel in the tallgrass prairie. Pages 47-49 in R. Brewer, editor.
Proceedings of the eighth North American Prairie Conference. Western
Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan.
U.S. Department of the Interior |
U.S. Geological Survey
URL: http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/literatr/grasbird/hesp/hesp.htm
Page Contact Information: Webmaster
Page Last Modified: Saturday, 02-Feb-2013 05:39:41 EST
Menlo Park, CA [caww54]