Baird’s Sparrow (Ammodramus bairdii): management plan 2025

Official title: Management Plan for the Baird’s Sparrow (Ammodramus bairdii) in Canada 2025

Species at Risk Act

Management Plan Series

Preface

The federal, provincial, and territorial government signatories under the Accord for the Protection of Species at Risk (1996)^Footnote2 agreed to establish complementary legislation and programs that provide for effective protection of species at risk throughout Canada. Under the Species at Risk Act (S.C. 2002, c.29) (SARA), the federal competent ministers are responsible for the preparation of management plans for listed species of special concern and are required to report on progress five years after the publication of the final document on the SAR Public Registry.

The Minister of Environment and Climate Change and Minister responsible for the Parks Canada Agency is the competent minister under SARA for the Baird’s Sparrow and has prepared this management plan as per section 65 of SARA. To the extent possible, the management plan has been prepared in cooperation with the Province of Alberta, the Province of Saskatchewan, the Province of Manitoba, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and the Department of National Defence as per section 66(1) of SARA.

Success in the conservation of this species depends on the commitment and cooperation of many different constituencies that will be involved in implementing the directions set out in this plan and will not be achieved by Environment and Climate Canada and the Parks Canada Agency, or any other jurisdiction alone. All Canadians are invited to join in supporting and implementing this plan for the benefit of the Baird’s Sparrow and Canadian society as a whole.

Implementation of this management plan is subject to appropriations, priorities, and budgetary constraints of the participating jurisdictions and organizations.

Acknowledgments

Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) would like to thank the authors Phillip Rose and Stephen Davis (ECCC) along with the following individuals that reviewed, commented on, and improved earlier versions of this document: Medea Curteanu, Mark Wayland, Lea Craig-Moore, Yeen Ten Hwang, Barry Robinson, Joseph Kotlar, and Megan Stanley (ECCC). Mark Gilchrist (ECCC) assisted with GIS analyses and drafting of figures. The document benefited from reviews and comments received from Joanne Tuckwell (Parks Canada Agency), Brandy Downey (Alberta Environment and Parks) and Tim Poole (Manitoba Agriculture and Sustainable Development). ECCC greatly appreciates the following individuals and agencies for providing the occurrence information used in this document: Alberta Fish and Wildlife Management Information System, Christian Artuso (Bird Studies Canada), Breeding Bird Survey participants, Nathan Clements, Manitoba Conservation Data Center, Saskatchewan Conservation Data Center, Brenda Dale (previously with ECCC), Carolyn Gaudet, Holly Kalyn Bogard, Nicola Koper (University of Manitoba), Grasslands National Park, Allison Henderson, Melissa Mushanski, Nature Saskatchewan, Sarah Ludlow, and Jason Unruh.

Executive summary

Baird’s Sparrow is a small, brownish, streaked songbird, typically 12 cm in length and 19 g in mass. Its breeding range occurs within the mixed-grass prairie of Canada and the northern United States (U.S.). In Canada, Baird’s Sparrows breed in southern Alberta, southern Saskatchewan, and southwestern Manitoba. Approximately 45% of Baird’s Sparrow’s breeding range is within Canada. Baird’s Sparrow winter range occurs in northern Mexico and parts of the southwestern U.S.

The Baird’s Sparrow population in North America is estimated to be 3.4 million individuals. The population has declined approximately 3% per year over a 50 year period commencing in 1970. Baird’s Sparrow was listed as a Species of Special Concern under Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act in 2017 because of long‑term population declines and ongoing threats to its habitat.

The major threats to the species are the loss and degradation of grassland habitat due primarily to conversion of native grassland to cropland and alteration of grazing practices and fire regimes. Other threats include loss and degradation of wintering habitat, nest predation pressure, conversion of native habitat to industrial infrastructure, and inclement or extreme weather conditions.

The objectives of this management plan are to stabilize the long-term population trend in Canada by 2040 and maintain the current distribution. The longer term objective is to increase the 2005 population size over the next 30 years. The short and long-term management objectives should be achievable by conserving core rangeland areas and promoting and implementing management practices that effectively maintain healthy rangelands and improve unhealthy rangeland throughout the species’ Canadian range. However, if population declines are due, in part, to threats on the wintering grounds, the management objectives may not be possible to achieve without international cooperation.

Conservation measures that are required to achieve the management objectives are outlined in this plan along with research required to address knowledge gaps. Such measures will help focus conservation actions. The adoption of best management practices and the conservation of rangeland, as well as outreach and communication programs, ongoing population monitoring, and research that address important knowledge gaps will be key management actions for this species.

1. COSEWIC* species assessment information

Assessment summary: May 2012

Common name (population): Baird’s Sparrow**

Scientific name: Ammodramus bairdii**

Status: Special Concern

Reason for designation: Canada supports about 60% of the breeding population of this prairie songbird. The species was common and perhaps even abundant historically. It suffered declines stemming from agricultural conversion of its native prairie habitat across the Great Plains. There is good evidence for population declines in recent decades, but the species is difficult to monitor effectively, and information on short-term population trends is relatively weak. Loss and degradation of its specialized grassland habitat, on both its breeding and wintering grounds, are believed to pose the most significant threats. Evidence of long-term population declines, coupled with ongoing threats to habitat, are the primary reasons for elevating the status of this species from Not at Risk to Special Concern.

Occurrence: Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba

Status history:Designated Threatened in April 1989. Status re-examined and designated Not at Risk in April 1996. Status re-examined and designated Special Concern in May 2012.

* COSEWIC (Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada)

** Since the time of its legal listing on Schedule 1 in 2017, the scientific name for Baird’s Sparrow has been changed to Centronyx bairdii (Chesser et al. 2018).

2. Species status information

Globally, Baird’s Sparrow (Ammodramus bairdii) was ranked by NatureServe as apparently secure (G4) in 2016 (Table 1, NatureServe 2017). Jurisdictional rankings for Canada and the United States (U.S.) are provided in Table 1. The conservation status in Mexico has not been ranked.

Baird’s Sparrow has been listed as Special Concern under Schedule 1 of the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA) since February 3, 2017. The species is listed provincially as Endangered in Manitoba under the Endangered Species and Ecosystem Act and identified as Sensitive in Alberta; it is not listed in Saskatchewan. Baird’s Sparrow is not listed under the federal Endangered Species Act in the U.S., but is listed as Endangered in Minnesota, Threatened in New Mexico, Sensitive in Wyoming, and Species of Concern in Montana. The species has been identified as a Bird of Conservation Concern in the U.S. indicating that it could become a candidate for listing under the Endangered Species Act if no conservation measures are undertaken (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2008). Baird’s Sparrow is on the Partners in Flight “D” Yellow Watch list for species with population declines and moderate to high threats (Rosenberg et al. 2016) and a priority species in Bird Conservation Region 11 (BCR-11) in Canada (Environment Canada 2013). Baird’s Sparrow is also a potential focal species for habitat conservation implementation by the Intermountain West Joint Venture (IWJV 2013) and listed as a priority species by the Rio Grande Joint Venture (RGJV 2015).

3. Species information

3.1. Species description

Baird’s Sparrow is a small, brownish, streaked songbird, typically 12 cm in length and 19 g in mass. Males and females have similar colouration. Both have a prominent yellow-ochre colour face and median crown stripe, two dark spots behind the cheek/auricular feathers, dark lateral throat stripes, and short dark streaks on the breast and upper flanks. Upperparts are a mixture of blackish and pale-brownish markings and wings have an overall dark tan color (Green et al. 2002, Dunn and Alderfer 2006). Baird’s Sparrows are more readily identified by the male’s song, which is a series of quick, clear introductory notes, usually followed by a single trill (Green et al. 2002), often sung from tufts of grass or small scattered shrubs.

3.2. Species population and distribution

3.2.1 North American range

Baird’s Sparrow is found only in the northern Great Plains of North America. Its breeding range occurs within the mixed-grass prairie of Canada and the northern U.S. (Figure 1) (Green et al. 2002). In Canada, its range coincides with the Prairie Ecozone of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba and is loosely bounded by the aspen parkland to the north and east, and the Rocky Mountains to the west (Jones and Green 1997, COSEWIC 2012). The southern extent of its breeding range occurs in central and eastern Montana, North Dakota, northwestern and north-central South Dakota, and locally in western Minnesota (Stewart 1975, Montana Bird Distribution Committee 1996, Green et al. 2002, Drilling et al. 2016). However, eBird data suggest that the species may also now breed in eastern Wyoming, Nebraska, and Colorado. Indeed, Youngberg et al. (2019) confirmed the species breeding in northern Colorado. Historically, the Baird’s Sparrow’s breeding range was believed to have extended as far east as Winnipeg, Manitoba, northwestern Minnesota (COSEWIC 2012) and as far south as South Dakota (Jones and Green 1997).

During migration Baird’s Sparrows have been reported in Kansas, Oklahoma, eastern Wyoming, and eastern Colorado (Jones and Green 1997). Baird’s Sparrow winter range occurs in northern Mexico (northeastern Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Durango, and northern Zacatecas) (Macías-Duarte et al. 2011, Poole et al. 2012, Avibase 2018) and parts of the southwestern U.S. (southwestern Texas, southern New Mexico), and extreme southeastern Arizona (Gordon 2000a, Green et al. 2002, Williams 2015).

Figure 1. Distribution of Baird’s Sparrow in North America (from Green et al. 2002).

3.2.2 Canadian range

Baird’s Sparrows occur throughout the Mixed Grassland, Moist Mixed Grassland , and to a lesser extent the Cypress Upland and Aspen Parkland ecoregions (COSEWIC 2012). The western limit of the Baird’s Sparrow’s range in Alberta is approximately the 115^th meridian near Edmonton, Red Deer, and Calgary and the northern limit follows the North Saskatchewan River (COSEWIC 2012). Baird’s Sparrows occur throughout prairie Saskatchewan, but are recorded most frequently in the Moist Mixed Grassland ecoregion (Smith 1996, Davis et al. 1999). In Manitoba, recent records of Baird’s Sparrow are restricted primarily to the southwestern corner of the province and the Ellice-Archie and Spy Hill Community Pastures Important Bird Area (Artuso et al. 2018, De Smet 2018). According to Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) data, Baird’s Sparrows are most abundant in southern Alberta, and southwestern and south-central Saskatchewan (Figure 2). These are also the regions where most Baird’s Sparrow occurrences have been recorded from 1985 to 2017 (Figure 3).

Approximately 45% of Baird’s Sparrow’s breeding range is within Canada (COSEWIC 2012). The extent of occurrence (EO)^Footnote3 for Baird’s Sparrow in Canada was estimated to be 410,000 km² and the index area of occupancy (IAO)^Footnote4 was estimated to be greater than 2,000 km² based on a 2 x 2 km grid (COSEWIC 2012).

Figure 2. Relative abundance of Baird’s Sparrow according to Breeding Bird Survey data, 2011‑2015 (Sauer et al. 2017).

Figure 3. Baird’s Sparrow occurrences recorded from 1985 to 2017. Observations are compiled from provincial data repositories, BBS, and researchers across the three Prairie Provinces (Davis unpubl. data).

3.2.3 Population trends in North America

Historically (that is, mid-late 1800s), Baird’s Sparrows were considered one of the most common and abundant grassland birds throughout its breeding range (Green et al. 2002, Luce and Keinath 2003, Wiggins 2006). In recent times, they are considered uncommon but locally abundant (Luce and Keinath 2003). Since the late 1800’s Baird’s Sparrows have also greatly declined in their wintering areas and are now described as rare in Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas (Wiggins 2006).

In North America, the Baird’s Sparrow population is estimated to be 3.4 million individuals Population Estimates . The long-term trend for North America suggests the Baird’s Sparrow breeding population has undergone a decline of 3% per year (Smith et al. 2023). Population trends from 2012 to 2022 suggest the continental population continues to decline at an annual rate of 4.3% (Smith et al. 2023).In the wintering range, Baird’s Sparrow density increased in some parts of the Chihuahuan Desert in Mexico from 2007 to 2011, but in most surveyed areas densities remained relatively stable and low (Poole et al. 2012).

3.2.4 Population trends in Canada

Long-term population trends (1970 to 2021) in Canada indicate a statistically significant national decline of 2.6% per year (95% credible limits, -3.8 and -1.6) (Smith et al. 2023; Figure 4). The species is experiencing long-term population declines in each of the Prairie Provinces, particularly in Manitoba where the species is experiencing a 7.6% annual decline (Smith et al. 2023). Short-term trends (2005 to 2021) are not statistically significant, but there is a 79% chance that the population is declining Smith et al. 2023).

Figure 4. Baird’s Sparrow population trend in Canada, 1970 to 2015 (ECCC 2017). Gray dashed lines represent upper and lower 95% credible limits.

3.3. Needs of the Baird’s Sparrow

3.3.1 Breeding habitat

Baird’s Sparrows breed in native mixed-grass prairie and grasslands dominated by fescue (Vulpia sp.)^Footnote5 grasses (Owens and Myres 1973, Semenchuk 1992, Davis et al. 1999, Winter et al. 2005), as well as other habitats if the vegetation structure is similar to native prairie, such as dry wetland basins, wet meadow, planted tame^Footnote6 pastures, and hayland (Faanes 1982, Sousa and McDonal 1983, Dechant et al. 2002). In grazed mixed-grass areas in North Dakota, abundance of Baird’s Sparrows was positively associated with Prairie Spikemoss (Selaginella densa) cover and plant communities dominated solely by native grasses (Dechant et al. 2002). Moisture plays a key role in the distribution of Baird’s Sparrow throughout their breeding range, with drier areas favoured in wet years, and moister areas in dry years (Kantrud and Faanes 1979, Faanes 1982, George et al. 1992).

Baird’s Sparrows are associated with relatively dense standing dead vegetation of about 10 to 30 cm tall (Owens and Myres 1973, Sousa and McDonal 1983, Sutter and Brigham 1998, Davis et al. 1999, Davis et al. 2014, Henderson and Davis 2014, Rose 2018) and very little bare ground cover (Sousa and McDonal 1983, Sutter et al. 1995, Davis and Duncan 1999). The presence of standing dead vegetation is an important habitat characteristic, although dense cover is avoided (Sousa and McDonal 1983, Sutter and Brigham 1998, Dechant et al. 2002). Litter depths in occupied grasslands range from

0.1-4 cm (Green et al. 2002). Baird’s Sparrow abundance/occurrence can be positively or negatively associated with grass and sedge cover and vegetation height and density depending on the structure and species composition of the grassland (for example, Sutter et al. 1995, Davis and Duncan 1999, Ludlow et al. 2015) that is available to the species (Rose 2018). Baird’s Sparrows have also been associated with forb cover (Madden et al. 2000, Green et al. 2002), but typically use areas with little to no shrub cover (Arnold and Higgins 1986, Madden et al. 2000, Grant et al. 2004). Shrub cover >25% has been proposed to exceed the Baird’s Sparrow tolerance in breeding areas (Sousa and McDonal 1983), although De Smet and Conrad (1991) found Baird’s Sparrows in pastures with >50% shrub cover in Manitoba. However, tolerance to shrubs likely depends on the height, density, and distribution of shrubs in a given area.

Davis (unpubl. data) analyzed occurrence and vegetation data ranging from southwestern to west-central Saskatchewan (Rose 2018) in an attempt to identify vegetation structure that is most favourable to Baird’s Sparrows for ranchers and range extension personnel. Models relating Baird’s Sparrow occurrence to standing dead grass cover, bio-crust cover (spikemoss, lichen, mosses, and bare ground), shrub cover, vegetation density [indexed by visual obstruction readings (Robel et al.1970)], and vegetation height were used to identify thresholds based on quadratic relationships and vegetation levels where predicted probabilities of occurrence declined by 25 to 50%. Based on these preliminary analyses, the most favourable conditions for Baird’s Sparrow are those proposed in Table 2.

Baird’s Sparrows are area-sensitive with a minimum grassland patch-size requirement of 14 to 33 ha of native rangeland (Davis 2004). McMaster and Davis (2001) found a weak, but positive relationship between Baird’s Sparrow occurrence and area of tame grass fields in Canada (McMaster and Davis 2001). In native and planted grasslands, Baird’s Sparrow abundance increases with the amount of native grassland in the landscape (Davis et al. 2013).

Baird’s Sparrows have been associated with undisturbed or idle grasslands (Owens and Myres 1973, De Smet and Conrad 1991, Sutter et al. 1995), but typically use native and tame pastures and to a lesser extent, hayland and cropland (Dechant et al. 2002, Dale et al. 2005, Davis et al. 2016). Tame stands of Smooth Brome (Bromus inermis) and other invasive broad-leaved grasses are typically avoided (Wilson and Belcher 1989), but the species can be as, or more abundant, in tame grasslands containing Crested Wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum) or Kentucky Bluegrass (Poa pratensis) as in native grasslands (Sutter et al. 1995, Davis and Duncan 1999, Grant et al. 2004). However, reproductive success is lower in planted grasslands used for pasture or hay compared to native rangelands (Davis et al. 2016). Despite lower reproductive success in planted grasslands, Baird’s Sparrows may benefit from agricultural programs that convert large amounts of cropland to exotic perennial cover (Johnson and Schwartz 1993, Johnson and Igl 1995, McMaster and Davis 2001) if management practices and plant species yield structurally suitable habitat given the low densities and reproductive success, or lack of nesting in cropland (Green et al. 2002).

Baird’s Sparrows are generally associated with rangelands in good-excellent range condition (Davis et al. 2014). Range condition represents the relative degree to which the current plant community resembles that of the climax plant community^Footnote7 for a given range site based on the estimated percentage dry weight of all increaser and decreaser species (Abouguendia 1990). Increaser and decreaser plant species are those native plants which increase or decrease in percent composition when subjected to continued heavy grazing pressure. Response to grazing likely varies depending upon growing conditions (Green et al. 2002), but heavy grazing typically makes habitat unattractive unless pockets of denser vegetation are available (Owens and Myres 1973, Kantrud and Kologiski 1982). Moderate changes in grazing intensity appear to have little influence on Baird’s Sparrow nest success (Lusk and Koper 2013). Baird’s Sparrow abundance decreases initially after grasslands are burned, but return to or exceed pre‑burn densities after three years (Pylypec 1991, Madden et al. 1999). Prescribed burns can improve habitat by reducing excess litter, decreasing shrub encroachment, and maintaining native grass communities (Dechant et al. 2002).

Baird’s Sparrows typically arrive on the Canadian prairies during the first two weeks of May and depart between mid-August and mid-September (Green et al. 2002). Territory sizes generally range from 0.4 to 1.5 ha across studies, although they can be up to 2 ha (Green et al. 2002). Peak nest initiation occurs in the first two weeks of June (Davis 2003). Baird’s Sparrows build their nests on the ground in a natural depression, cattle footprint, or a scrape likely excavated by the female. Nests contain an outer lining of coarse grass, forb stems, and leaves and an inner lining of fine narrow-leaf grasses and rootlets; fur, string, and moss are often incorporated into the nest lining as well (Davis and Sealy 1998). Nests are typically placed beside a tuft of grass or small forb (for example, Pasture Sage [Artemisia frigida]) with an overhanging canopy (Davis and Sealy 1998) of relatively dense and tall vegetation (<30 cm) composed mostly of dead grasses (Davis 2005). Nest locations have less bare ground, greater litter depth and grass cover, and taller and denser vegetation than elsewhere within a bird’s territory (Dieni and Jones 2003, Davis 2005, Jones and Dieni 2007). Clutch size is 4 to 5 eggs with incubation lasting 11 to 12 days after the laying of the last egg; the young leave the nest 8 to 11 days after hatching (Davis and Sealy 1998). The adult and nestling diet during the breeding season consists mostly of spiders and insects such as grasshoppers [Orthoptera], beetles [Coleoptera], and caterpillars [Lepidoptera larvae] (Maher 1974,1979, Ahlering 2005). Adults also consume a wide variety of grass and forb seeds (Maher 1974).

A spatial habitat model developed by Canadian Wildlife Service (Davis unpubl. data) determined that Baird’s Sparrow was more likely to occur in landscapes with a greater proportion of grassland (native and tame combined) and reduced amounts of cropland, woodland and waterbodies. Predicted probability of occurrence declined by 50% when tall shrub and tree cover reached 20%. In addition, relative probability of occurrence in Prairie Canada increased from east to west and north to south. Furthermore, occurrence decreased as topographical slope increased. Predicted probability of occurrence declined by 50% when slope reached 8 to 11 degrees. Occurrence was greatest in areas with intermediate amounts of growing vegetation as determined by a normalized difference vegetation index. The resulting predictive map revealed that the species has the greatest probability of occurring in large grassland complexes in southeastern Alberta and southwestern Saskatchewan as well as the Missouri Coteau region of south-central Saskatchewan (Figure 5). These results are consistent with Fedy et al. (2018) who modelled Baird’s Sparrow occurrence using BBS data from Prairie Canada.

Figure 5. Predicted probability of occurrence of Baird’s Sparrows in Prairie Canada based on occurrences recorded from 2006 to 2016.

3.3.2 Winter habitat

Baird’s Sparrows are solitary and sedentary on their wintering grounds and individuals establish fixed home ranges (Grzybowski 1983, Gordon 2000a). Baird’s Sparrows appear to have a preference for native grasslands on their wintering range with relatively flat or rolling topography (Panjabi et al. 2010, Macías-Duarte et al. 2011, COSEWIC 2012). The species has been associated with increased grass cover and taller grass (Carter et al. 1998, Macías-Duarte et al. 2009, 2017). Fire and grazing were found to have similar effects on Baird’s Sparrow habitat as they do in breeding areas (Gordon 2000b). Grasslands occupied by Baird’s Sparrow in Arizona were dominated by several species of bunchgrasses (Bouteloua spp. and Eragrostris spp.) and sparse woody vegetation (that is, Prosopis velutina) (Gordon 2000a).

4. Threats

The Baird’s Sparrow threat assessment is based on the IUCN-CMP (World Conservation Union–Conservation Measures Partnership) unified threats classification system. Threats are defined as the proximate activities or processes that have caused, are causing, or may cause in the future the destruction, degradation, and/or impairment of the entity being assessed (population, species, community, or ecosystem) in the area of interest (global, national, or subnational). Limiting factors are not considered during this assessment process. For purposes of threat assessment, only present and future threats are considered. Historical threats, indirect or cumulative effects of the threats, or any other relevant information that would help understand the nature of the threats are presented in the Description of Threats section.

4.1. Threat assessment

^a Impact – The degree to which a species is observed, inferred, or suspected to be directly or indirectly threatened in the area of interest. The impact of each threat is based on Severity and Scope rating and considers only present and future threats. Threat impact reflects a reduction of a species population or decline/degradation of the area of an ecosystem. The median rate of population reduction or area decline for each combination of scope and severity corresponds to the following classes of threat impact: Very High (75% declines), High (40%), Medium (15%), and Low (3%). Unknown: used when impact cannot be determined (for example, if values for either scope or severity are unknown); Not Calculated: impact not calculated as threat is outside the assessment timeframe (for example, timing is insignificant/negligible or low as threat is only considered to be in the past); Negligible: when scope or severity is negligible; Not a Threat: when severity is scored as neutral or potential benefit.

^b Scope – Proportion of the species that can reasonably be expected to be affected by the threat within 10 years. Usually measured as a proportion of the species’ population in the area of interest. (Pervasive = 71 to 100%; Large = 31 to 70%; Restricted = 11 to 30%; Small = 1 to 10%; Negligible < 1%).

^c Severity – Within the scope, the level of damage to the species from the threat that can reasonably be expected to be affected by the threat within a 10-year or three-generation timeframe. Usually measured as the degree of reduction of the species’ population. (Extreme = 71 to 100%; Serious = 31 to 70%; Moderate = 11 to 30%; Slight = 1 to 10%; Negligible < 1%; Neutral or Potential Benefit ≥ 0%).

^d Timing – High = continuing; Moderate = only in the future (could happen in the short term [< 10 years or 3 generations]) or now suspended (could come back in the short term); Low = only in the future (could happen in the long term) or now suspended (could come back in the long term); Insignificant/Negligible = only in the past and unlikely to return, or no direct effect but limiting.

4.2. Description of threats

Threats ranked in Table 3 as “negligible” impact are not described in this section.

IUCN Threat 2 - Agriculture and aquaculture

2.1 Annual and perennial non-timber crops

A major threat to Baird’s Sparrows on the breeding and wintering grounds is habitat destruction and degradation through conversion of native grassland to fields used for annual cropping (Green et al. 2002, Macías-Duarte et al. 2009, 2011). By 1996, cropland, summer fallow, and improved pasture accounted for about 70% of all land use in the Canadian prairies (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 2000). Using 2009 crop‑mapping data, Roch and Jaeger (2014) found that approximately 19% of the Prairie Ecozone is composed of grassland. It is important to note that this may not be an accurate estimate of the proportion of native prairie remaining in this region because of land classification errors, the inability to differentiate native and tame grasslands using remote sensing, and the estimate assumes that grasslands completely covered the ecozone. Regardless, it is clear that the grasslands in Prairie Canada are a fraction of what they were in the 1800s. Furthermore, while most of the prime land has already been converted to agriculture, further conversion of native grasslands to cropland continues to occur (Prairie Conservation Forum 2019). The breaking up of grassland patches to smaller parcels has caused grasslands in Canada to become highly fragmented (Roch and Jaeger 2014). Conversion of native grasslands to cropland have dire consequences for Baird’s Sparrow because individuals rarely occur in cropland (Green et al. 2002) and those that do occur, are likely unmated or unsuccessful breeders. Baird’s Sparrows require grassland parcels of 14 to 33 ha (Davis 2004) and are most abundant in grassland parcels that are surrounded by native rangeland (Davis et al. 2013, 2016). Habitat fragmentation not only reduces grassland patch size and increased isolation of grassland patches, it also exacerbates other threats, such as the spread of invasive vegetation (Threat 8.1) (Trombulak and Frissell 2000) and increased predation risk by nest predators and brood parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds (Molothrus ater) (Threat 8.2) (Davis and Sealy 1998).

Baird’s Sparrows typically avoid fields planted with broad-leaf invasive grasses such as Smooth Brome (Wilson and Belcher 1989). However, the species commonly occurs in fields planted with invasive narrow-leaf grasses (for example, Crested Wheatgrass and Kentucky Bluegrass) that are used for pasture or hay (Dechant et al. 1998, Sutter and Brigham 1998, Davis and Duncan 1999). Although tame pasture and hayfields are more attractive to Baird’s Sparrows than cropland (Davis et al. 1999, McMaster and Davis 2001) the species may fledge 1.4-4.5 fewer young per nest in tame grasslands compared to native grasslands (Davis et al. 2016). Furthermore, abundance is lower in native pastures that are surrounded by planted grassland (Davis et al. 2013). Fields that are mowed for hay may be particularly detrimental to Baird’s Sparrows if the timing of haying operations overlaps with the nesting season and because of increased predation prior to haying (Davis et al. 2016). However, haying may be required to create suitable habitat for Baird’s Sparrows in some regions (Dale et al. 1997), but regular haying may prevent sufficient litter accumulation and discourage future occupancy (De Smet and Conrad 1991). Overall, conversion of native rangeland to tame grassland will likely have a negative effect on Baird’s Sparrow populations. On the other hand, conversion of cropland to tame grassland will likely benefit Baird’s Sparrow populations as long as birds are not drawn from productive habitats to planted grasslands where reproductive success is lower (that is, from source habitats to sink habitats; Pulliam 1986).

Loss of native grasslands in wintering habitat through agricultural conversion, urbanization, desertification, and shrub encroachment (Macías-Duarte et al. 2009, 2011, Texas Land Trends 2014) and overgrazing on remaining grasslands are two of the largest threats to Baird’s Sparrows on the winter range (Gordon 2000b, Wiggins 2006). Forty-four percent of the U.S. winter distribution of Baird’s Sparrow is on public land; however, only 13% of grasslands in the U.S. are publicly owned (North American Bird Conservation Initiative United States Committee [NABCIUSC ] 2011). In Texas, approximately 445,000 ha of private rangeland has been converted to non-agricultural uses from 1997 to 2012 (Texas Land Trends 2014). Poole et al. (2014) documented a loss of 69,240 ha of valley-bottom grasslands and shrub lands in the Valles Centrales from 2006 to 2011. Expansion of centre-pivot irrigated cropland was the primary driver of grassland loss with much of the land not permitted for land-use change to cropland.

2.3 Livestock farming and ranching

Baird’s Sparrows may occur in undisturbed grasslands in some areas (Owens and Myres 1973, De Smet and Conrad 1991, Sutter et al. 1995), but typically some form of grazing management is required to maintain the vegetative structure required by the species (Dechant et al. 1998, Madden et al. 1999, Wiggins 2006). Although grazing is required for the habitat to be suitable in most regions of Canada, stocking densities that are too high can reduce habitat suitability (Sliwinski and Koper 2015). Grazing that is too intensive and frequent reduces residual vegetation and litter regardless of the grazing system employed (Dechant et al. 1998, Davis et al. 2014) and is detrimental to the species in both moist and dry parts of their breeding range (Owens and Myres 1973, Kantrud 1981, Dale 1983, De Smet and Conrad 1991, Sutter et al. 1995). Range condition strongly influenced the abundance of Baird’s sparrow in Saskatchewan; the species reached its highest abundance in pastures categorized as high-good to low-excellent range condition (Davis et al. 2014). In some regions, current livestock grazing practices are more intensive, regular, and uniform than the grazing by natural herbivores was historically (Wiggins 2006, Askins et al. 2007, Toombs and Roberts 2009), but the current state of rangelands in Canada is unknown.

IUCN Threat 3 - Energy Production and Mining

3.1 Oil and gas drilling

The infrastructure associated with energy extraction, such as roads, transmission lines, and pipelines contributes to habitat loss and degradation. The overall amount of disturbance in the landscape increases with the density of well pads (Kalyn Bogard 2011). The impact that oil and gas development have on Baird’s Sparrow varies among studies, but the overall results suggest that natural gas development may have a neutral or negative effect on Baird’s Sparrow populations (COSEWIC 2012). In particular, Baird’s Sparrow abundance has been shown to decrease with increasing density of natural gas wells (Dale et al. 2009), while other studies have found that abundance, density, and nest survival was not influenced by proximity to or density of gas wells (Bogard and Davis 2014, Ludlow et al. 2015, Rodgers et al. 2017). Changes to vegetation structure during natural gas development likely have a stronger influence on Baird’s Sparrows than the gas wells themselves (Bogard and Davis 2014). Oil development may pose more of a threat to Baird’s Sparrows than natural gas development. Linnen (2008) found that Baird’s Sparrow abundance and occurrence was lower within 450 m of oil wells and access roads and decreased to a lesser extent with proximity to gas development. Neninger and Koper (2018) found that Baird’s Sparrow abundance was nearly three times greater at control sites than at sites with oil infrastructure present. Furthermore, the authors found that abundance increased with increasing distance from wells and that the avoidance of well sites was likely a result of the vertical infrastructure and not noise or traffic. Unruh (2015) also found Baird’s Sparrow abundance to increase farther from oil wells, particularly those that were active. Abundance also declined as the total area of well pads within a 259 ha buffer increased (Unruh 2015). Ludlow et al. (2015) found that Baird’s Sparrow nests occurred > 100 m from trails associated with oil and gas development and that the number of young fledged from successful nests was lower near trails.

IUCN Threat 4 – Transportation and Service Corridors

4.1 Roads and railroads

Roads are associated with lower densities of Baird’s Sparrows compared to trails, possibly due to unsuitable vegetation adjacent to roads (Sutter et al. 2000, Wellicome et al. 2014). Roads also fragment grasslands and may create grassland patches that do not meet the minimum size requirements of the species (Davis 2004). Individuals may also be susceptible to direct mortality from vehicle collisions, although the extent to which this occurs is unknown.

IUCN Threat 7 - Natural system modifications

7.1 Fire and fire suppression

Fire renders habitat unsuitable for Baird’s Sparrow for at least the first year after burning, but the species may return to or exceed pre-burn densities after 1 to 3 years (Pylypec 1991, Johnson 1997, Madden et al. 1999, Danley et al. 2004). In a North Dakota wildlife refuge, Baird’s Sparrow abundance was greater in areas experiencing a greater burn frequency (4 fires in 15 years) than areas receiving 0 to 2 burns in 15 years (Madden et al. 1999). However, few landowners use prescribed burning as a management tool and the desire to protect life and property leads to extinguishing or, attempting to extinguish all prairie fires. Fire suppression promotes the build-up of residual vegetation (Grant et al. 2004) and the encroachment of trees and shrubs into grassland areas (Collins and Gibson 1990), which reduces habitat quality (Arnold and Higgins 1986, Davis 2004, 2005).

IUCN Threat 8 - Invasive and other problematic species and genes

8.1 Invasive non-native/alien species

The spread of invasive exotic plants such as Kentucky Bluegrass, Smooth Brome, Crested Wheatgrass, and Leafy Spurge (Euphorbia esula) may reduce habitat suitability for Baird’s Sparrow (Wilson and Belcher 1989, Sutter and Brigham 1998, Davis and Duncan 1999) through changes in prey composition, biomass, and accessibility or via changes in vegetation structure that limit suitable or safe nesting and foraging sites. However, the mechanisms that reduce habitat suitability are unknown as well as the amount of exotic plant species invasion that Baird’s Sparrows tolerate.

8.2 Problematic native species

Predation is the primary source of failure for Baird’s Sparrow nests (Davis 2003, Jones et al. 2010, Davis et al. 2016). However, it is unknown whether nest predation rates are greater than historical levels or the extent to which nest predator communities have changed over the years. Predation rates are typically high in ground-nesting birds (Martin 1993) and predators of grassland songbird nests are extremely diverse and opportunistic (Pietz et al. 2012). Predators of northern mixed-grass prairie songbird nests include small (for example, mice and ground squirrels), medium (for example, Striped Skunk [Mephitis mephitis]) and large (for example, White-tailed Deer [Odocoileus virginanus]) mammals, along with snakes, and birds such as raptors, corvids, and songbirds (for example, Western Meadowlark [Sturnella neglecta] and Brown-headed Cowbird) (Pietz and Granfors 2000, Davis et al. 2012).

Brown-headed Cowbirds may reduce reproductive success in Baird’s Sparrow nests by removing the host egg(s) and out-competing the host young. Cowbird eggs are readily accepted by Baird’s Sparrow females, presumably because females have difficulty differentiating cowbird eggs from their own (Klippenstine and Sealy 2008, 2010). However, parasitism by Brown-headed Cowbirds can vary greatly over time and space. Parasitism rates (proportion of nests containing one or more cowbird eggs) were relatively high in southwestern Manitoba (36%; Davis and Sealy 1998) and southeastern Saskatchewan (16 to 21%; Davis 2003, Klippenstine and Sealy 2008) but rare (2%: Lusk 2009, 4%: Jones et al. 2010, 6%: Ludlow et al. 2014) or non-existent (Maher 1973, Gaudet 2013) farther west. Unlike neotropical songbirds that have not evolved with cowbirds, the cost of parasitism is relatively low as Baird’s Sparrows typically fledge their own young instead of, or along with, the cowbird young (Davis and Sealy 1998, Davis 2003). Although cowbird parasitism is likely a low threat overall, the cumulative effect of nest predation and parasitism in highly fragmented grasslands in the eastern parts of their range could be of great concern in those areas.

IUCN Threat 9 - Pollution

9.3 Agricultural and forestry effluents

The impact of pesticides on Baird’s Sparrow populations is unknown. Although studies have shown poisoning and/or reduced reproductive success of grassland songbirds from insecticide exposure (McEwen et al. 1972, Martin et al. 2000), the extent to which individual Baird’s Sparrows are exposed to harmful insecticides is unknown. Initial analyses of grassland bird declines across the U.S. suggested they were most severe in regions with heavier pesticide use (Mineau et al. 2005, Mineau and Whiteside 2013). However, re-analysis of the same data indicates that habitat loss and degradation is more strongly correlated with population declines (Hill et al. 2014).

Given the ban of many of the pesticides used in previous grassland bird studies coupled with few individual Baird’s Sparrows occupying cropland habitats, the threat posed by pesticides in Canada is likely low.

IUCN Threat 11 - Climate change and severe weather

11.2 Droughts, 11.3 Temperature extremes, 11.4 Storms and flooding

Climate change models predict more variable and severe weather events (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2001). Prolonged drought or prolonged periods of cool and wet weather may reduce productivity of grassland songbirds (George et al. 1992, Öberg et al. 2015, Conrey et al. 2016). Flooding of nests and exposure of nestlings to cool, wet weather have been cited as causes of reproductive failure in other mixed-grass prairie songbirds (Davis 2003, 2018). Overall, the impact of climate and weather at a population level is unknown. However, Wilsey et al. (2019) determined that Baird’s Sparrow was highly vulnerable to climate change on the breeding and wintering grounds. Modelled breeding distribution based on a 1.5, 2, and 3-degree Celsius increase in global mean temperature were predicted to shift northward with a substantial loss of their southern distribution at the 1.5 and 2-degree increase scenario. Over 95% of the modelled distribution was predicted to be lost under a 3-degree temperature increase scenario which represents the current commitment under the Paris Accord.

5. Management objective

The objectives of this management plan are as follows:

Distibution objective:

• maintain the the current distribution of Baird’s Sparrow in Canada

Short-term population objective:

• stabilize the long-term population trend in Canada by 2045

Long-term population objective:

• increase the 2005 population size and trend in Canada over the next 30 years

The 2005 survey represents the year of the largest population size (mean = 3.82; 95% credible limit = 2.7 – 5.0 birds/route) since the population declines in the 1990s (Figure 4).

This species is threatened by degradation and alteration of grassland habitat on the breeding and wintering grounds, and its propensity to breed in grasslands planted with invasive species, thus making Baird’s Sparrow susceptible to reduced reproduction and survival.

This management objective should be achievable by conserving core rangeland areas (Figure 6) and by promoting and implementing management practices that effectively maintain healthy rangelands and improve unhealthy rangeland throughout its Canadian range. Working with cattle producers (individuals and groups) will be particularly important since approximately 90% of the Baird’s Sparrow core area is, or will likely become (for example, former federal and Saskatchewan community pastures) privately managed. However, if population declines are due, in part, to threats on the wintering grounds, this management objective may not be possible to achieve without international cooperation, even if the suite of conservation measures described below are implemented throughout the Canadian range. Results from full life-cycle research initiatives are likely going to be the best source of information to identify which stage of the species’ life history and geographic region (for example, wintering versus breeding grounds) is limiting population growth. Until such information is available (and likely thereafter), Canadians will need to ensure that the species has enough productive breeding habitat to sustain the population given Canada’s large conservation responsibility for the species.

Figure 6. Distribution of Baird’s Sparrow core habitat across the three Prairie Provinces. Core habitat is represented by pixels with predicted probability of occurrence values in the top 50% of all pixels within the Canadian range. Note, core areas in Manitoba represent the top 50% of pixels within the province because no core areas were identified for the province at the national level.

6. Broad strategies and conservation measures

6.1. Actions already completed or currently underway

A number of conservation actions have taken place since the last status report (COSEWIC 2012).

Monitoring and surveys

1. Canadian Wildlife Service has collected Baird’s Sparrow observation data and integrated it into a spatial database. Observations have been compiled from various agencies and researchers across Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. The data compiled has assisted in the development of an improved distribution map for the species and has been used to develop and test predictive models of occurrence across the species’ range.

2. Breeding populations continue to be monitored by the North American BBS (ECCC 2017a, Sauer et al. 2017) while wintering populations are monitored by the Christmas Bird Count (CBC) (National Audubon Society 2010). Starting in 2017, the Canadian Wildlife Service initiated the Grassland Bird Monitoring Program (GBMP), which collects off-road point count data from large tracts of intact grasslands in southern Alberta and Saskatchewan. These large tracts of grasslands have few public roads, so they are not sampled by the roadside-based BBS. The GBMP will provide an annual source of count data from Baird’s Sparrow breeding populations, which are used to validate and improve spatially-explicit density models.

Conservation planning and implementation

3. A multi-species action plan for southwestern Saskatchewan (South of the Divide) has been developed for 13 listed species in southwestern Saskatchewan (ECCC 2017). Although Baird’s Sparrow was not formally included in the action plan, the biology, threats, and conservation and management actions recommended for a number of these species, particularly Sprague’s Pipit (Anthus spragueii), directly overlaps with those relevant to Baird’s Sparrow. Discussions are underway for similar grassland planning initiatives in the other Prairie Provinces.

4. Stakeholders and grassland stewards across the three Prairie Provinces have initiated a number of conservation activities and multi-year programs with support from the Habitat Stewardship Program for Species-at-Risk, Species-at Risk Partnerships on Agricultural Land and Aboriginal Fund for Species-at Risk. These programs include a variety of projects such as working with producers to enhance rangelands (for example, grazing management, water development, on-farm planning, fencing, seeding native plants, etc.), establishing conservation easements, conducting avian surveys and inventories, and providing education and extension activities. Although only a limited number of these projects are targeted specifically at Baird’s Sparrow, many projects benefit the species through the conservation and management of native rangelands and raising awareness of the importance of native rangelands to grassland species.

5. Approximately 71% of the 3.98 million ha of land identified as core areas for Baird’s Sparrow are under some form of protection (for example, Crown leases, Indigenous lands, community pastures, conservation easements, land purchases by Environmental Non‑Government Organizations, parks, National Wildlife Areas, military lands, etc.) (Figure 7).

Figure 7. Land ownership of Baird’s Sparrow core areas in Prairie Canada.

Research

6. Most of our knowledge of Baird’s Sparrows in Canada has come from studies that typically involved counts/surveys and involved the grassland songbird community; few studies have focused directly on the species’ breeding ecology (Davis and Sealy 1998) or population vital rates such as reproduction, recruitment and survival (adult and juvenile). There is wealth of information on habitat selection at various spatial scales (Green et al. 2002, Davis 2004, Davis et al. 2016) and effects of management (for example, Dechant et al. 1998, Sliwinski and Koper 2015) and anthropogenic disturbances (for example, Bogard and Davis 2014, Ludlow et al. 2016, Rodgers et al. 2017, Nenninger and Koper 2018, ABMI 2018) on the abundance, density or occurrence of the species. Information regarding the extent to which Baird’s Sparrows tolerate anthropogenic disturbances (for example, ecological thresholds) is needed to inform identification of activities likely to destroy its habitat. Information regarding vegetation thresholds is also needed to develop management targets and develop and refine best management practices throughout its range. More research is required on the effects of management and anthropogenic disturbance on the vital rates of the species to gain a better understanding into the population dynamics of the species across its entire range. A full life cycle study is currently underway that should provide some of this information (Bird Conservancy of the Rockies 2019).

6.2. Broad strategies

To achieve the objectives of this management plan, four broad strategies are recommended:

1. Habitat assessment, management, conservation and protection. Adopt land management practices that are beneficial to Baird’s Sparrow by working collaboratively with land managers and land-users to conserve, manage, restore, and protect rangeland through effective stewardship programs
2. Research. Undertake research projects to address knowledge gaps
3. Monitoring and assessment. Continue to monitor populations to assess changes in population abundance and distribution
4. Outreach and communication. Conduct outreach and communication programs to inform target audiences such as land managers of Baird’s Sparrow habitat requirements and management strategies

6.3. Conservation measures

^a “Priority” reflects the degree to which the measure contributes directly to the conservation of the species or is an essential precursor to an measure that contributes to the conservation of the species. High priority measures are considered those most likely to have an immediate and/or direct influence on attaining the management objective for species. Medium priority measures may have a less immediate or less direct influence on reaching the management objective, but are still important for management of the population. Low priority conservation measures will likely have an indirect or gradual influence on reaching the management objective, but are considered important contributions to the knowledge base and/or public involvement and acceptance of species.

6.4. Narrative to support conservation measures and implementation schedule

Conservation activities that prevent native grasslands from being converted to other land uses on the breeding and wintering grounds are essential for recovering Baird’s Sparrow populations. Conservation and restoration of native prairie may be realized through incentive programs, stewardship and management agreements, conservation easements, and land purchase. Extensive programs, such as extension, policy reform, and tax incentives, will also play a large role in conserving and maintaining good quality grassland habitat. Communication and outreach are required because of the limited public profile and awareness of Baird’s Sparrow. Education programs targeted to youth, landowners and managers, and the general public are needed to increase awareness of Baird’s Sparrow and its habitat requirements. Research and monitoring will play important roles in the adaptive management process by ensuring that management practices and conservation programs have the desired outcomes. Although >75% of the native grassland has been lost, the amount of potentially suitable habitat is still great. Baird’s Sparrows require habitat that overlaps that of other species-at-risk such as Sprague’s Pipit, Chestnut-collared Longspur (Calcarious ornatus), Ferruginous Hawk (Buteo regalis), and Swift Fox (Vulpex velox). Therefore conservation and management activities that are targeted to any one of these species have great potential to benefit the other species.

7. Measuring progress

Success in implementing this management plan will be measured against the following performance indicators derived from population trend data from the BBS (ECCC 2017a) and the Partners In Flight population database (Population Estimates). Population trends will be monitored annually with formal reviews occurring in 2045 and 2055:

• By 2045, the recent population (since 2005) and current distribution of Baird’s Sparrow in Canada is maintained (species has a 45 to 50% chance of having an increasing population trend)
• By 2055, the recent population (since 2005) of Baird’s Sparrow in Canada is improved (species has a >50% chance of having an increasing population trend) and the current distribution is maintained

8. References

Abouguendia, Z. M. 1990. A practical guide to planning for management and improvement of Saskatchewan rangeland: range plan development. Saskatchewan Research Council Report E-2520-1-E-90.

Alberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute. 2018. Baird's Sparrow (Ammodramus bairdii). Website: https://abmi.ca/home/data-analytics/biobrowser-home/species-profile?tsn=179339

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. 2000. Prairie agricultural landscapes: a land resource review. Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration, Agriculture and Agri‑Food Canada, Regina, Saskatchewan.180 pp.

Ahlering, M. A. 2005. Settlement cues and resource use by Grasshopper Sparrows and Baird’s Sparrows in the upper Great Plains. Dissertation, University of Missouri‑Columbia, Missouri.Arnold, T. W. and K. F. Higgins. 1986. Effects of shrub coverages on birds of North Dakota mixed-grass prairies. Canadian Field‑Naturalist 100:10-14.

Artuso, C., A. R. Couturier, K. D. De Smet, R. F. Koes, D. Lepage, J. McCracken, R. D. Mooi, and P. Taylor. 2018. The Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Manitoba, 2010-2014. Bird Studies Canada. Winnipeg, MB. Website: http://www.birdatlas.mb.ca/ (Accessed March 21, 2018).

Askins, R. A., F. Chavez-Ramirez, B. C. Dale, C. A. Haas, J. R. Herkert, F. L. Knopf, and P. D. Vickery. 2007. Conservation of grassland birds in North America: understanding ecological processes in different regions. Ornithological Monographs 64:1-46.

Avibase. 2018. Baird’s Sparrow.Website: http://avibase.bsc-eoc.org/species.jsp?lang=ENandavibaseid=67EFC0619A89B656&sec=map (Accessed March 22, 2018).

Bird Conservancy of the Rockies. 2019. A baird’s life. Website: https://birdconservancy.org/a-bairds-life/ (Accessed October 30, 2019).

Brouillet, L., F. Coursol, S.J. Meades, M. Favreau, M. Anions, P. Bélisle and P. Desmet. 2010+. VASCAN, the Database of Vascular Plants of Canada. Available at: https://data.canadensys.net/vascan/search (Accessed: February 21, 2020).

Carter, M. F., T. Leukering, and S. Hutchings. 1998. Distribution and habitat associations of the Mexican Plateau winter grassland bird community. Unpublished report for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 2, and the U.S./Mexico Affairs Office, National Park Service. Website: http://www.rmbo.org/v2/web/International/Wintering_birds_in_mexican_grasslands_1998_final_report.pdf (Accessed March 22, 2018).

Chesser, R.T., K.J. Burns, C. Cicero, J.L. Dunn, A.W. Kratter, I.J. Lovette, P.C. Rasmussen, J.V. Remsen, Jr., D.F. Stotz, B.M. Winger, and K. Winker. 2018. Fifty-ninth supplement to the American Ornithological Society’s check-list of North American Birds. Auk 135: 798–813. DOI: 10.1642/AUK-18-62.

Clements, F.E. 1936. Nature and structure of the climax. The Journal of Ecology 24:252-284.

Collins, S. L., and D. J. Gibson. 1990. Effects of fire on community structure in tall‑grass and mixed-grass prairie. Pages 81-98 in S. L. Collins and L. L. Wallace (eds.). Fire in North American Tallgrass prairies. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.

Conrey, R. Y., S. K. Skagen, A. A. Yackel Adams, and A. O. Panjabi. 2016. Extremes of heat, drought and precipitation depress reproductive performance in shortgrass prairie passerines. Ibis 158:614-629.

COSEWIC. 2012. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Baird’s Sparrow Ammodramus bairdii in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa, ON. Website: http://registrelep-sararegistry.gc.ca/default_e.cfm (Accessed March 22, 2018).

COSEWIC. 2019a. COSEWIC definitions and abbreviations. Website: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/committee-status-endangered-wildlife/definitions-abbreviations.html (Accessed October 30, 2019).

COSEWIC. 2019b. Guidelines for use of the index area of occupancy in COSEWIC assessments. Website: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/committee-status-endangered-wildlife/guidelines-index-area-occupancy.html (Accessed October 30, 2019).

Dale, B. C. 1983. Habitat relationships of seven species of passerine birds at Last Mountain Lake, Saskatchewan. Master’s thesis, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.

Dale, B. C., P. A. Martin, and P. S. Taylor. 1997. Effects of hay management regimes on grassland songbirds in Saskatchewan. Wildlife Society Bulletin 25:616-626.

Dale, B., M. Norton, C. Downes, and B. Collins. 2005. Monitoring as a means to focus research and conservation – the Grassland Bird Monitoring example. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-GTR-191.

Dale, B. C., T. S. Wiens, and L. E. Hamilton. 2009. Abundance of three grassland songbirds in an area of natural gas infill drilling in Alberta, Canada. Proceedings of the Fourth International Partners in Flight Conference: Tundra to Tropics 194-204.

Danley, R. F., R. K. Murphy, and E. M. Madden. 2004. Species diversity and habitat of grassland passerines during grazing of a prescribe-burned, mixed-grass prairie. Western North American Naturalist 64: 72-77.

Davis, S. K. 2003. Nesting ecology of mixed-grass prairie songbirds in southern Saskatchewan. Wilson Bulletin 115:119-130.

Davis, S. K. 2004. Area sensitivity in grassland passerines: effects of patch size, patch shape, and vegetation structure on bird abundance and occurrence in southern Saskatchewan. Auk 121:1130-1145.

Davis, S. K. 2005. Nest-site selection patterns and the influence of vegetation on nest survival of mixed-grass prairie passerines. Condor 107:605-616.

Davis, S. K. 2003. Nesting ecology of mixed-grass prairie songbirds in southern Saskatchewan. Wilson Bulletin 115:119-130.Davis, S. K., B. C. Dale, T. Harrison, and D. C. Duncan. 2014. Response of grassland songbirds to grazing system type and range condition. Proceedings of the North American Prairie Conference 23:110-119.

Davis, S. K. and D. C. Duncan. 1999. Grassland songbird occurrence in native and crested wheatgrass pastures of southern Saskatchewan. Studies in Avian Biology 19:211-218.

Davis, S. K., D. C. Duncan, and M. Skeel. 1999. Distribution and habitat associations of three endemic grassland songbirds in southern Saskatchewan. Wilson Bulletin 111:389-396.

Davis, S. K., S. L. Jones, K. M. Dohms, and T. G. Holmes. 2012. Identification of Sprague’s Pipit nest predators. Studies in Avian Biology 43:173-182.

Davis, S. K., R. J. Fisher, S. L. Skinner, T. L. Shaffer, and R. M. Brigham. 2013. Songbird abundance in native and planted grassland varies with type and amount of grassland in the surrounding landscape. Journal of Wildlife Management 77:908-919.

Davis, S. K., B. C. Dale, T. Harrison, D. C. Duncan. 2014. Response of grassland songbirds to grazing system type and range condition. Proceedings of the North American Prairie Conference 23:110-119.

Davis, S. K., S. M. Ludlow., and D. G. McMaster. 2016. Reproductive success of songbirds and waterfowl in native mixed-grass pasture and planted grasslands used for pasture and hay. Condor 118:815-834.

Davis, S. K. and S. G. Sealy 1998. Nesting biology of the Baird’s Sparrow in southwestern Manitoba. Wilson Bulletin 110:262-270.

De Smet, K. D. and M. P. Conrad. 1991. Management and research needs for Baird’s Sparrows and other grassland songbird species in Manitoba. Proceedings of the second endangered species and prairie conservation workshop. Provincial Museum of Alberta Natural History Occasional Paper No. 15.

De Smet, K. D. 2018. Baird's Sparrow in Artuso, C., A. R. Couturier, K. D. De Smet, R. F. Koes, D. Lepage, J. McCracken, R. D. Mooi, and P. Taylor (eds.). The Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Manitoba, 2010-2014. Bird Studies Canada. Winnipeg, Manitoba. Webiste: http://www.birdatlas.mb.ca/accounts/speciesaccount.jsp?sp=BAIS&lang=en (Accessed February 5, 2020).

Dechant, J. A., M. L. Sondreal, D. H. Johnson, L. D. Igl, C. M. Goldade, M. P. Nenneman, B. R. Euliss. 2002. Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Baird’s Sparrow. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown, ND.

Dieni, J. S. and S. L. Jones. 2003. Grassland songbird nest site selection patterns in northcentral Montana. Wilson Bulletin 115:388-396.

Drilling, N. E., R. A. Sparks, B. J. Woiderski, and J. P. Beason. 2016. South Dakota Breeding Bird Atlas II: Final Report. Tech. Rep. M-SDBBA2-07. Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory, Brighton, CO.

Dunn, J. L. and J. Alderfer. 2006. Field Guide to the Birds of North America, 5^th ed. National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C.

Environment and Climate Change Canada, 2017a. North American Breeding Bird Survey - Canadian Trends Website, Data-version 2015. Environment and Climate Change Canada, Gatineau, Quebec.

Environment and Climate Change Canada. 2017b. Action plan for multiple species at risk in southwestern Saskatchewan: South of the Divide. Species at Risk Act Action Plan Series. Environment Canada, Ottawa.xi +127 pp.

Environment Canada. 2013. Bird conservation strategy for bird conservation Region 11 in the Prairie and Northern Region: Prairie Potholes. Website: https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/eccc/migration/main/mbc-com/47d1fa51-5caf-4da4-a3db-5632526c0966/barts20111_bcr_11_pnr_-_english_final_pdf.pdf (Accessed March 22, 2018).

Faanes, C. A. 1982. Avian use of Sheyenne Lake and associated habitats in central North Dakota. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Resource Publication No. 144.

Fedy, B., J. H. Devries, D. W. Howerter, and J. R. Row. 2018. Distribution of priority grassland bird habitats in the Prairie Pothole Region of Canada. Avian Conservation and Ecology 13(1):4. Website: https://doi.org/10.5751/ACE-01143-130104.

Gaudet, C. A. 2013. The effects of natural gas development on density, reproductive success and nest survival of grassland songbirds in south-western Saskatchewan. Master’s thesis, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.George, T. L., A. C. Fowler, R. L. Knight, and L. C. McEwen. 1992. Impacts of severe drought on grassland birds in western North Dakota. Ecological Applications 2: 275-284.

Gordon, C. E. 2000a. Movement patterns of wintering grassland sparrows in Arizona. Auk 117:748-759.

Gordon, C. E. 2000b. Fire and cattle grazing on wintering sparrows in Arizona grasslands. Journal of Range Management 53:384-389.

Grant, T. A., E. Madden, and G. B. Berkey. 2004. Tree and shrub invasion in northern mixed-grass prairie: implications for breeding grassland birds. Wildlife Society Bulletin 32:807-818.

Green, M. T., P. E. Lowther, S. L. Jones, S. K. Davis, and B. C. Dale. 2002. Baird’s Sparrow (Ammodramus bairdii), Version 2.0. In The Birds of North America (A.F. Poole and F.B. Gill, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY. Website: https://doi.org/10.2173/bna.638 (Accessed March 22, 2018).

Grzybowski, J. A. 1983. Patterns of space use in grassland bird communities during winter. Wilson Bulletin 95:591-602.

Henderson, A. E. and S. K. Davis. 2014. Rangeland health assessment: a useful tool for linking range management and grassland bird conservation? Rangeland Ecology and Management 67:88-98.

Hill, J. M., J. F. Egan, G. E. Stauffer, and D. R. Diefenbach. 2014. Habitat availability is a more plausible explanation than insecticide acute toxicity for U.S. grassland bird species declines. PLoS ONE 9(5): e98064. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0098064.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2001. Climate change 2001: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Intermountain West Joint Venture [IWJV]. 2013. Implementation plan – strengthening science and partnerships. Intermountain West Joint Venture, Missoula, MT.

Johnson, D. H. 1997. Effects of fire on bird populations in mixed-grass prairie. Pages 181-206 in F. L. Knopf and F. B. Samson, editors. Ecology and conservation of Great Plains vertebrates. Springer-Verlag, New York, New York.

Johnson, D. H. and L. D. Igl. 1995. Contributions of the Conservation Reserve Program to populations of breeding birds in North Dakota. Wilson Bulletin 107:709-718.

Johnson, D. H. and M. D. Schwartz. 1993. The Conservation Reserve Program and grassland birds. Conservation Biology 7:934-937.

Jones, S. L. and J. S. Dieni. 2007. The relationship between predation and nest concealment in mixed-grass prairie passerines: an analysis using program Mark. Studies in Avian Biology 34:117-123.

Jones, S. L. and M. T. Green. 1997. Baird’s Sparrow status assessment and conservation plan. Admin. Rep., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Denver, CO. Website: https://nctc.fws.gov/resources/knowledge-resources/bird-publications/bairds-sparrow.html (Accessed March 22, 2018).

Kalyn Bogard, H. J. 2011. Influence of gas development on grassland bird abundance in south western Saskatchewan. Master’s thesis, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.

Kalyn Bogard, H. J. and S. K. Davis. 2014. Grassland songbirds exhibit variable responses to the proximity and density of natural gas wells. Journal of Wildlife Management 78: 471-482.

Kantrud, H. A. and C. A. Faanes. 1979. Range expansion of Baird’s Sparrow in South Dakota. Prairie Naturalist 11:111-112.

Kantrud, H. A. and R. L. Kologiski. 1982. Effects of soils and grazing on breeding birds of uncultivated upland grasslands of the northern Great Plains. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Research Report 15. Washington, D.C.

Klippenstine, D. R. and S. G. Sealy. 2008. Differential ejection of cowbird eggs and non‑mimetic eggs by grassland passerines. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 120:667-673.

Klippenstine, D. R. and S. G. Sealy. 2010. Assessing generalized egg mimicry: a quantitative comparison of eggs of Brown-headed Cowbird and grassland passerines. The Wilson Journal of Ornithology 122:346-353.

Linnen, C. G. 2008. Effects of oil and gas development on grassland birds. Prepared for Petroleum Technology Alliance Canada, Calgary, AB.

Luce, R. and D. Keinath. 2003. Species assessment for Baird’s Sparrow (Ammodramus bairdii) in Wyoming. United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Wyoming State Office, Cheyenne, WY. Website: http://www.uwyo.edu/wyndd/_files/docs/reports/speciesassessments/bairdssparrow-dec2003.pdf (Accessed March 22, 2018).

Ludlow, S. M, R. M. Brigham, and S. K. Davis. 2014. Nesting ecology of grassland songbirds: effects of predation, parasitism, and weather. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 126: 686-699.

Ludlow, S. M, R. M. Brigham, and S. K. Davis. 2015. Oil and natural gas development has mixed effects on the density and reproductive success of grassland songbirds. Condor 117: 64-75.

Lusk, J. 2009. The effects of grazing on songbird nesting success in Grasslands National Park of Canada. Master’s thesis, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba. 86 pp.Lusk, J. S. and N. Koper. 2013. Grazing and songbird nest survival in southwestern Saskatchewan. Rangeland Ecology and Management 66: 401-409.

Macías-Duarte, A., A. B. Montoya, C. E. Méndez-González, J. R. Rodríguez-Salazar, W. G. Hunt, and P. G. Krannitz. 2009. Factors influencing habitat use by migratory grassland birds in the State of Chihuahua, Mexico. Auk 126:896-905.

Macías-Duarte, A., A. O. Panjabi, D. Pool, E. Youngberg, and G. Levandoski. 2011. Wintering grassland bird density in Chihuahuan Desert Grassland Priority Conservation Areas, 2007-2011. Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory, Brighton, CO, RMBO Technical Report I-NEOTROP-MXPLAT-10-2.

Macías-Duarte, A., A. O. Panjabi, E. H. Strasser, G. Levandoski, I. Ruvalcaba-Ortega, P. F. Doherty, C. I. Ortega-Rosas. 2017. Winter survival of North American grassland birds is driven by weather and grassland condition in the Chihuahuan Desert. Journal of Field Ornithology 88:374-386. DOI: 10.1111/jofo.12226.

Madden, E. M., A. J. Hansen, and R. K. Murphy. 1999. Influence of prescribed fire history on habitat and abundance of passerine birds in northern mixed-grass prairie. Canadian Field-Naturalist 113:627-640.

Madden, E. H., R. K. Murphy, A. J. Hansen, and L. Murray. 2000. Models for guiding Management of Prairie Bird Habitat in Northwestern North Dakota. American Midland Naturalist 144:377-392.

Maher, W. J. 1974. Birds III: Food Habits. University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon: Canadian Committee for International Biological Programme (Matador Project).

Maher, W. J. 1979. Nestling diets of prairie passerine birds at Matador, Saskatchewan, Canada. Ibis 121:437-452.

Martin, T. E. 1993. Nest predation among vegetation layers and habitat types: revising the dogmas. American Naturalist 141:897–913.

Martin, P. A., D. L. Johnson, D. J. Forsyth, and B. D. Hill. 2000. Effects of two grasshopper control insecticides on food resources and reproductive success of two species of grassland songbirds. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 19:2987–2996.

Martin, P. A. and D. J. Forsyth. 2003. Occurrence and productivity of songbirds in prairie farmland under conventional versus minimum tillage regimes. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 96:107-117.

McEwen, L. C, C. E. Knittle, and M. L. Richmond. 1972. Wildlife effects from grasshopper Insecticides sprayed on short-grass range. Journal of Range Management 25:188-194.

McMaster, D. G. and S. K. Davis. 2001. An evaluation of Canada’s Permanent Cover Program: habitat for grassland birds? Journal of Field Ornithology 72:195-210.

Mengel, R. M. 1972. The North American central plains as an isolating agent in bird speciation. Pages 280-340 in W. Dort and J. K. Jones (eds.), Pleistocene and recent environments of the central Great Plains. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence, KS.

Mineau, P., C. M. Downes, D. A. Kirk, E. Bayne, and M. Csizy. 2005. Patterns of bird species abundance in relation to granular insecticide use in the Canadian prairies. Ecoscience 12:267-278.

Mineau P. and M. Whiteside. 2013. Pesticide acute toxicity is a better correlate of U.S. grassland bird declines than agricultural Intensification. PLoS ONE 8:e57457. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0057457.Montana Bird Distribution Committee [MBDC]. 1996. P.D. Skaar’s Montana Bird Distribution, 5^th ed. Special Publication No. 3. Montana Natural Heritage Program, Helena, MT. Website: https://ia800303.us.archive.org/25/items/pdskaarsmontanab1996montrich/pdskaarsmontanab1996montrich.pdf (Accessed March 22, 2018).

National Audubon Society. 2010. The Christmas Bird Count Historical Results [Online]. Available http://www.christmasbirdcount.org.

NatureServe. 2017. NatureServe Explorer: an online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, VA. Website: http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed March 22, 2018).

Nenninger, H. R. and N. Koper. 2018. Effects of conventional oil wells on grassland songbird abundance are caused by presence of infrastructure, not noise. Biological Conservation 218:124-133.

Nernberg, D. and D. Ingstrup. 2005. Prairie Conservation in Canada: The Prairie conservation action plan experience. USDA Forest Service. General Technical Report PSW-GTR-191.

North American Bird Conservation Initiative U.S. Committee [NABCIUSC]. 2011. The state of birds 2011 report on public lands and water. U.S. Department of the Interior: Washington, D.C. Website: http://www.stateofthebirds.org/2011/State%20of%20the%20Birds%202011.pdf (Accessed: March 21, 2018).

Öberg, M., D. Arlt, T. Pärt, A. T. Laugen, S. Eggers, and M. Low. 2015. Rainfall during parental care reduces reproductive and survival components of fitness in a passerine bird. Ecology and Evolution 5:345-356.

Owens, R. A. and M. T. Myres. 1973. Effects of agriculture upon populations of native passerine birds of an Alberta fescue grassland. Canadian Journal of Zoology 51: 697-713.

Panjabi, A., G. Levandoski, and R. Sparks. 2010. Wintering bird density and habitat use in Chihuahuan Desert grasslands. Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory, Brighton, CO, RMBO Technical Report I-MXPLAT-08-02.Partners in Flight Science Committee. 2013. Population Estimates Database, version 2013. Website: http://pif.birdconservancy.org/PopEstimates. (Accessed March 22, 2018).

Pietz, P. J., and D. A. Granfors. 2000. Identifying predators and fates of grassland passerine nests using miniature video cameras. Journal of Wildlife Management 64:71–87.

Pietz, P. J., D. A. Granfors, and C. A. Ribic. 2012. Knowledge gained from video‑monitoring grassland passerine nests. Studies in Avian Biology 43:3-22.

Pool, D. B., A. Macías-Duarte, A. O. Panjabi, G. Levandoski, and E. Youngberg. 2012. Chihuahuan Desert Grassland Bird Conservation Plan, version 1.0. Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory, Brighton, CO, RMBO Technical Report I-RGJV-11-01.

Prairie Conservation Forum. 2019. State of the Prairie. Prairie Conservation Forum Technical Report. 99pp. Website: http://www.albertapcf.org/rsu_docs/state-of-the-prairietechnical-report_final-including-summary.pdf (Accessed February 5).

Pulliam, H. 1986. Sources, sinks, and population regulation. American Naturalist 132:652–661.

Pylypec, B. 1991. Impacts of fire on bird populations in a Fescue prairie. Canadian Field-Naturalist 105:346-349.

Rio Grande Joint Venture [RGJV]. 2015. Priority birds of the Chihuahuan Desert. Website: http://www.rgjv.org/birds.html (Accessed March 22, 2018).

Robel, R. J., J. N. Briggs, A. D. Dayton, and L. C. Hulbert. 1970. Relationships between visual obstruction measurements and weight of grassland vegetation. Journal of Range Management 23:295-297.

Roch, L., and J. A.G Jaegar. 2014. Monitoring an ecosystem at risk: What is the degree of grassland fragmentation in the Canadian Prairies? Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 186:2505-2534.

Rodgers, J. A., and N. Koper. 2017. Shallow gas development and grassland songbirds: the importance of perches. Journal of Wildlife Management 81:406-416.

Rose, P. K. Developing grassland songbird management targets for multi-species conservation on native mixed-grass prairie. Master’s thesis, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan, Rosenberg, K. V., J. A. Kennedy, R. Dettmers, R. P. Ford, D. Reynolds, J. D. Alexander, C. J. Beardmore, P. J. Blancher, R. E. Bogart, G. S. Butcher, A. F. Camfield, A. Couturier, D. W. Demarest, W. E. Easton, J. J. Giocomo, R. H. Keller, A. E. Mini, A. O. Panjabi, D. N. Pashley, T. D. Rich, J. M. Ruth, H. Stabins, J. Stanton, and T. Will. 2016. Partners in Flight Landbird Conservation Plan: 2016 Revision for Canada and Continental United States. Partners in Flight Science Committee.

Sauer, J. R., D. K. Niven, J. E. Hines, D. J. Ziolkowski, Jr., K. L. Pardieck, J. E. Fallon, and W. A. Link. 2017. The North American Breeding Bird Survey, results and analysis 1966-2015. Version 2.07.2017 USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD.

Semenchuk, G.P. 1992. The Atlas of Breeding Birds of Alberta. Federation of Alberta Naturalists, Edmonton. 390 pp.

Sliwinski, M. S. and N. Koper. 2015. Managing mixed-grass prairies for songbirds using variable cattle stocking rates. Rangeland Ecology and Management 68:470-475.

Smith, A.C., Hudson, M-A.R. Aponte, V.I., English, W.B., and Francis, C.M. 2023. North American Breeding Bird Survey – Canadian Trends Website, Data-version 2021. Environment and Climate Change Canada, Gatineau, Quebec, K1A 0H3.

Smith, A. R. 1996. Atlas of Saskatchewan birds. Environment Canada, Nature Saskatchewan, and Saskatchewan Natural History Society, Regina, Saskatchewan. 456 pp.

Sousa, P. J. and W. N. McDonal. 1983. Habitat suitability index models: Baird’s Sparrow. U.S. Dept. Int., Fish Wildl. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/10.44.

Stewart, R. E. 1975. Breeding birds of North Dakota. Tri-college Center for Environmental Studies, Fargo, North Dakota. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center Online, Jamestown, ND. Website: https://web.archive.org/web/20070609092338/http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/bbofnd/ (Accessed March 22, 2018).

Sutter, G. C. and R. M. Brigham. 1998. Avifaunal and habitat changes resulting from conversion of native prairie to crested wheat grass: patterns at songbird community and species levels. Canadian Journal of Zoology 76 869-875.

Sutter, G. C., T. Troupe, and M. Forbes. 1995. Abundance of Baird’s Sparrows, Ammodramus bairdii, in native prairie and introduced vegetation. Ecoscience 2: 344-348.

Texas Land Trends. 2014. Status update and trends of Texas rural working lands. Texas A&M Institute of Renewable Natural Resources, College Station, Texas. Volume 1, Issue 1. Website: http://txlandtrends.org.

Toombs, T. P. and M. G. Roberts. 2009. Are natural resources conservation service range management investments working at cross-purposes with wildlife habitat goals on western United States rangelands? Rangeland Ecology and Management 62:351-355.

Trombulak, S. C. and C. A. Frissell. 2000. Review of ecological effects of roads on terrestrial and aquatic communities. Conservation Biology 14:18-30.

Unruh, J. H. 2015. Effects of oil development on grassland songbirds and their avian predators in southeastern Saskatchewan. Master’s thesis. University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Birds of conservation concern 2008. United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Arlington, Virginia. Website: https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/grants/BirdsofConservationConcern2008.pdf (Accessed March 22, 2018).

Watmough, M. D. and M. J. Schmoll. 2007. Environment Canada’s Prairie and Northern Region Habitat Monitoring Program Phase II. Recent habitat trends in the Prairie Habitat Joint Venture. Technical Report Number 493. Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, Edmonton, AB.

Wellicome, T. I., K. J. Kardynal, R. J. Franken, and C. S. Gillies. 2014. Off-road sampling reveals a different grassland bird community than roadside sampling: Implications for survey design and estimates to guide conservation. Avian Conservation and Ecology 9:4. Website: http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ACE-00624-090104 (Accessed November 6, 2019).

Williams, S. O. 2015. Checklist of New Mexico bird species. New Mexico Bird Records Committee.

Wilson, S. D. and J. W. Belcher. 1989. Plant and bird communities of native prairie and introduced Eurasian vegetation in Manitoba, Canada. Conservation Biology 3:39‑44.

Wiggins, D. A. 2006. Baird’s Sparrow (Ammodramus bairdii): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Wesbite: https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5182050.pdf (Accessed March 20, 2018).

Winter, M., D. H. Johnson, and J. A. Shaffer. 2005. Variability in vegetation effects on density and nesting success of grassland birds. Journal of Wildlife Management 69:185-197.

Wilsey, C., L. Taylor, B. Bateman, C. Jensen, N. Michel, A. Panjabi, G. Langham. 2019. Climate policy action needed to reduce vulnerability of conservation-reliant grassland birds in North America. Conservation, Science and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.21.

Youngberg, E.N., A.R. Bankert, A.O. Panjabi, R.Y. Conrey, A. Meyer, and M.D. Correll. 2019. Southward breeding range expansion of the Baird’s Sparrow. Scientific Naturalist.Website: https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2872 (Accessed November 6, 2019).

Appendix A: Effects on the environment and other species

A strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is conducted on all SARA recovery planning documents, in accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals^Footnote8. The purpose of a SEA is to incorporate environmental considerations into the development of public policies, plans, and program proposals to support environmentally sound decision-making and to evaluate whether the outcomes of a recovery planning document could affect any component of the environment or achievement of any of the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy’s^Footnote9 (FSDS) goals and targets.

Recovery planning is intended to benefit species at risk and biodiversity in general. However, it is recognized that implementation of management plans may inadvertently lead to environmental effects beyond the intended benefits. The planning process based on national guidelines directly incorporates consideration of all environmental effects, with a particular focus on possible impacts upon non-target species or habitats. The results of the SEA are incorporated directly into the management plan itself, but are also summarized below in this statement.

Rangeland conservation, a key aspect of this management plan, does not negatively impact other wildlife. In fact, it will positively benefit many federally listed species at risk such as Sprague's Pipit, Chestnut-collared Longspur (Calcarious ornatus), Lark Bunting (Calamospiza melanocorys), Greater Sage Grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), Ferruginous Hawk (Buteo regalis), Long-billed Curlew (Numenius americanus), and Swift Fox (Vulpes velox). Since Baird’s Sparrows require vegetation of intermediate height (10-30 cm) and density and minimal bare ground, species that breed in short, sparse vegetation (for example, McCown’s Longspur [Rhynchophanes mccownii]), or taller and denser vegetation (for example, Bobolink [Dolichonyx oryzivorus]) may not benefit greatly from specific management practices aimed at enhancing Baird’s Sparrow habitat. Furthermore, control of woody vegetation in Baird’s Sparrow nesting habitat may reduce nesting and foraging habitat for some species such as Loggerhead Shrike (Lanius ludovicianus).

The development and promotion of agricultural best management practices, another important aspect of this management plan, will be beneficial not only to Baird’s Sparrow but to other species that use similar habitat.