Empidonax traillii

(Audubon, 1828)

Willow Flycatcher

G5Secure Found in 66 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G5SecureGlobal Rank
Least concernIUCN
PSESA Status
Medium - lowThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.103270
Element CodeABPAE33040
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNLeast concern
Endemicoccurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassAves
OrderPasseriformes
FamilyTyrannidae
GenusEmpidonax
USESAPS
Other Common Names
Mosquero Saucero (ES) Moucherolle des saules (FR) willow flycatcher (EN)
Concept Reference
American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American birds. Seventh edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. [as modified by subsequent supplements and corrections published in The Auk]. Also available online: http://www.aou.org/.
Taxonomic Comments
Sometimes treated as E. brewsteri, a junior synonym. Formerly regarded as conspecific with E. alnorum as E. traillii, Traill's Flycatcher (AOU 1998). See Phillips (1948) for a review of geographic variation in morphology, with the original descriptions of subspecies alascensis and extimus. Unitt (1987) reviewed infraspecific variation and concluded that four subspecies (brewsteri, extimus, adastus, and traillii) are recognizable. Paxton (2000) concluded that E. t. extimus is genetically distinct from other subspecies. Sedgwick (2001) demonstrated that E. t. adastus and E. t. extimus each have distinctive songs and used vocal signatures to determine distributional limits of the two subspecies. The two song types seem to be largely allopatric, separated by latitude and/or elevation. The two groups appear to be evolving independently of one another and warrant at least subspecific status.
Conservation Status
Rank Method Rank calculation - Biotics v2
Review Date2022-08-11
Change Date1996-12-02
Edition Date2022-08-11
Edition AuthorsHammerson, G. (2005), rev. B. Young (2022)
Threat ImpactMedium - low
Range Extent>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences> 300
Rank Reasons
This species has a large range and large population; however, it has declined over the short and long-term rangewide, especially in the Southwest (see subspecies extimus) and in the Pacific states and British Columbia.
Range Extent Comments
Breeding: central British Columbia across southern Canada and northern U.S. to New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia, south to southern California, northern Baja California, northern Sonora, southern Arizona and New Mexico, western and central Texas, Arkansas, northern Georgia, and eastern Virginia (AOU 1998).
Non-breeding: Nayarit and southwestern Oaxaca, Mexico, south to Panama and northwestern Colombia (Stiles and Skutch 1989, AOU 1998).

Subspecies brewsteri: Breeding distribution is west of the Cascades and in the Sierra Nevada from southwestern California to southwestern British Columbia (Sedgwick 2000).
Occurrences Comments
There are hundreds if not thousands of occurrences of this species throughout its breeding range
Threat Impact Comments
Threats include factors that destroy or degrade shrubby riparian vegetation. Riparian areas are particularly vulnerable to high-intensity livestock grazing, recreation and development pressure, flooding of nesting sites, and water diversions and flood control that prevent shrub and tree regeneration (Ohmart 1996, Saab and Rich 1997).

Habitat Loss and Fragmentation: Habitat loss and alteration is thought to be the principle cause of decline in the West. Riparian habitats, particularly cottonwood and willow (Salix spp.) communities, have been dramatically reduced and degraded by urban development, roads, off-road vehicle use, recreation, livestock grazing, agriculture, water development projects, channelization, willow control, and encroachment by non-native species (USFWS 1996). In California, high quality habitat has nearly disappeared and remaining habitat is widely dispersed and isolated, mostly as montane meadows in the Sierra Nevada and along a few river courses (USDA Forest Service 1994). In Arizona, as much as 90 percent of lowland riparian habitat has been lost or altered (USFWS 1996). These patterns are continuing throughout the western states.

Non-native Vegetation: Tamarisk or saltcedar (Tamarix spp.) and Russian olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia) have invaded riparian areas throughout the West, and particularly the southwest, and are likely factors in the flycatcher's decline. Tamarisk has replaced some riparian communities completely, but is less common in others. Tamarisk replaces the preferred multi-layered shrub community with a monotypic stand with one shrub layer, decreases plant and insect diversity, and can increase the frequency and intensity of fire. Dams and flood control, and irrigation water high in salts also give tamarisk a competitive edge over native vegetation. Although may nest in tamarisk where it provides the right vegetation structure, tamarisk may provide poor quality habitat and some studies have documented low breeding densities and low reproductive success in tamarisk (USFWS 1995, 1996; Sogge et al. 1997).

Livestock: Placement of nests near the edges of shrubs makes them vulnerable to direct disturbance or destruction by livestock (Sanders and Flett 1989). Cattle and sheep browse on shrubs in the mid-level preferred by willow flycatchers, and consume or trample young woody plants (Sanders and Flett 1989). Heavy or poorly timed livestock grazing damages deciduous shrubs and can prevent shrub regeneration, reducing flycatcher habitat. Cattle prefer willow and cottonwood shoots to tamarisk and other non-natives, further depleting flycatcher habitat. Streambank trampling and soil compaction also adversely affect the water table, reduce free water, and discourage shrub growth (Flett and Sanders 1987). In Oregon, populations increased after reduction in cattle grazing and cessation of poisoning and removal of riparian willows (Taylor and Littlefield 1986).

Brood Parasitism: This species is a common host to brood parasitism by the brown-headed cowbird (Molothrus ater; Bent 1942, King 1955, Walkinshaw 1966, Flett and Sanders 1987, Ehrlich et al. 1988, Sedgwick and Knopf 1988, Sanders and Flett 1989). Brood parasitism may pose a significant threat, particularly in its western range where habitat is limited and fragmented, and where livestock are often present in meadows and riparian habitats. In California, parasitism rates are high in the lowlands (e.g., 13 of 19 nests; Harris 1991), but much less in the Sierra Nevada (e.g., 1 of 22 nests; Sanders and Flett 1989). High parasitism rates (11 of 27 nests) were recorded at high elevations in north-central Colorado, but cowbird eggs were accepted by the hosts at only 2 of these nests (Sedgwick and Knopf 1988). In Arizona, cowbirds were documented at all 12 known breeding locations and parasitism documented at 50 percent of the sites (USFWS 1996). In the Grand Canyon, cowbirds occur at all flycatcher breeding sites and typically 50 percent of nests are parasitized (Brown 1994, Sogge et al. 1997). In hundreds of monitored nests of southwestern willow flycatcher, brood parasitism caused either nest failure or successful rearing of only cowbird chicks (Sogge et al. 1997). There is, however, evidence of adaptive behavior toward cowbird parasitism in some populations. Parasitized nests may be abandoned or dismantled; renesting may occur in some cases (Sedgwick and Knopf 1988, Harris 1991), although fewer eggs may be laid (Holcomb 1974). Flycatchers will chase female cowbirds near nests, and some may respond to cowbird calls by becoming quieter and less conspicuous (Uyehara and Narins 1995).

Water Development: Impoundments, channelization, and water diversions have greatly reduced and modified native riparian habitats. Reservoirs flood native riparian communities, and regulated flows reduce the seasonal flooding that many riparian plants need for regeneration. Non-native plants (such as tamarisk in the southwest) often invade new habitat created along reservoir shorelines, or riparian communities of rivers with controlled or reduced flows from water diversion and dams. Channelization also alters the river system dynamics needed to maintain riparian communities (USFWS 1996). Some remaining populations in Arizona are threatened by fluctuating reservoir levels and flooding (Latta et al. 1999).

Subspecies brewsteri: While there appear to be moderate populations in early-seral upland forest habitats the species is especially threatened by population declines in valley habitats, lower nest success in these valley habitats than in early-seral forest, and continual loss of riparian habitat (Altman 2003).
Ecology & Habitat

Description

A flycatcher with brownish-olive upperparts (slightly grayer in the east), a whitish throat that contrasts with the pale olive breast, a pale yellow belly, and two light wing bars; generally lacks a conspicuous eye ring; as in other flycatchers, the bill is depressed and wide at the base (NGS 1983).

Diagnostic Characteristics

Generally indistinguishable from the Alder Flycatcher (E. ALNORUM), but tends to lack a conspicuous eye ring (Alder tends to have one), have a slightly longer bill, and is less green above (NGS 1983). Reliably distinguished from the Alder Flycatcher only by voice. Song is a sneezy "fitz-bew," with accent on the first syllable (Alder Flycatcher song is "rrree-BEEa" or "fee-bee-o" with accent on the second syllable) (Kaufman 1990, McCabe 1991). Breeding habitats of the two species differ somewhat, with Willow Flycatcher in more southern and western regions of North America and in more open habitats and Alder Flycatcher a more northern bird, generally breeding in shrub and alder thickets of boreal forests in the eastern U.S., Canada, and Alaska (McCabe 1991).

Habitat

BREEDING: Strongly tied to brushy areas of willow (SALIX spp.) and similar shrubs. Found in thickets, open second growth with brush, swamps, wetlands, streamsides, and open woodland (AOU 1983). Common in mountain meadows and along streams; also in brushy upland pastures (especially hawthorn) and orchards (NGS 1983). The presence of water (running water, pools, or saturated soils) and willow, alder (ALNUS spp), or other deciduous riparian shrubs are essential habitat elements (Sanders and Flett 1989, USDA Forest Service 1994). Occurs in both mesic and drier upland conditions, but apparently reaches highest densities on wet sites (Sedgwick and Knopf 1992). It is associated with dense riparian deciduous shrub cover separated by open areas, but large contiguous willow thickets without openings are typically avoided; it does not occur in dense tree cover but will use scattered trees for song and foraging perches and gleaning substrate (USDA Forest Service 1994). Habitat preferences may overlap with alder (EMPIDONAX ALNORUM) and least flycatchers (EMPIDONAX MINIMUS), to include deciduous woods and thickets, bottomlands and swamps (Griggs 1997). Foraging habitat may overlap with western flycatcher (EMPIDONAX DIFFICILIS; Frakes and Johnson 1982).

In southwestern Ontario, generally occurs in more xeric upland sites, but in some areas uses boggy alder thickets, overlapping with alder flycatcher (Barlow and McGillivray 1983). In the Sierra Nevada of California, broad, flat meadows with willows and water are essential (Sanders and Flett 1989). In the Northern Rockies, is apparently restricted to riparian areas with adequate shrub cover (Hutto and Young 1999).

In Colorado, males and females were found to select for different habitat attributes: female-selected nest sites typically had dense willows and were similar in patch size and bush height, male-selected song perch sites were characterized by large central shrubs and high variability in shrub size. On an increasing scale, breeding sites were respectively characterized by greater willow density, larger willow patches with smaller gaps, and greater percent willow coverage than non-willow coverage (Sedgwick and Knopf 1992).

Southwestern willow flycatcher (E. T. EXTIMUS) breeds only in dense riparian vegetation near water or saturated soil. Habitat typically contains dense vegetation in the patch interior, often interspersed with small openings, sparser vegetation, or open water that creates a habitat mosaic of variable density. It nests in shrub and tree thickets 4-7 meters tall, with dense foliage 0-4 meters above the ground, and usually a high canopy coverage (USFWS 1995). The dominant plant species, size and shape of habitat patch, canopy structure and other habitat variables vary from monotypic to mixed-species stands and from simple to complex vegetation structures (Sogge et al. 1997). Habitats include dense high-elevation willow; native broadleaf shrubs and trees composed of willow, cottonwood (POPULUS spp.), boxelder (ACER NEGUNDO), ash (FRAXINUS spp.), alder, or buttonbush (CEPHALANTHUS OCCIDENTALIS); monotypic closed-canopy stands of tamarisk (TAMARIX spp.) or Russian olive (ELAEAGNUS ANGUSTIFOLIA); or a mix of native shrubs and exotic species (Sogge et al. 1997). Along the Virgin River, Utah, is restricted to shrub communities with shrub densities ranging from 70 percent to 100 percent (Whitmore 1977).

NEST SITE: Nests primarily near slow streams, standing water or seeps, swampy thickets, especially of willow and buttonbush (AOU 1983, USDA Forest Service 1994), also dogwood (CORNUS spp.), elderberry, hawthorn, rose, tamarisk, and others; in fork or on horizontal limb of shrub, usually 1-3 meters above ground (see Harris 1991). In montane habitats, nests are usually in willows at least 2 meters high with foliage density of 50-70 percent and about 1 meter of cover above the nest (Sanders and Flett 1989). Also see Sedgwick and Knopf (1992) for information on nest sites and song perches in northcentral Colorado.

Historically, southwestern willow flycatcher primarily in willows, buttonbush, and BACCHARIS spp. with a scattered cottonwood overstory. With changes in riparian plant communities, non-native tamarisk and Russian olive provide nesting habitat in some areas (Brown 1988, USFWS 1995). Along the Colorado in the Grand Canyon, for example, the flycatcher nests in tall tamarisk within 30 meters of water (Brown 1988, Sogge et al. 1997); however it is not known if nesting success differs in tamarisk compared to native vegetation (USFWS 1996). Where E. T. EXTIMUS nests in tamarisk, the tamarisk are usually taller (more than 5 meters) and denser (90 percent canopy closure) than in tamarisk-dominated areas where the flycatcher has been extirpated, and broadleaf shrubs may also be an important part of the community (Sogge et al. 1997).

NON-BREEDING: Uses same types of habitats during migration and winter as breeding season (McCabe 1991). Occurs in dense scrub, deciduous broadleaf forest, streamside gallery forest, and freshwater wetlands (Rappole et al. 1995). In western Mexico and Central America, found in humid to semi-arid scrubby fields with hedges, fences woodland and edge, plantations; frequents low to mid-vegetation levels and often comes into open (Howell and Webb 1995).

Ecology

BREEDING: Conduct most of their activity within their defended territory, but both male and female will also use adjacent areas, especially when feeding young; territory defense declines once young are fledged (USDA Forest Service 1994). In Ontario, territory size ranged from about 0.1 hectares to 0.47 hectares and averaged 0.35 hectares (Prescott and Middleton 1988); in southern Michigan, territories averaged 0.7 hectares (Walkinshaw 1966). In California, territories ranged from 0.1 hectares to 0.9 hectares, and averaged 0.2 hectares in Fresno County and 0.4 hectares on the Truckee River (USDA Forest Service 1994). Where breeding range overlaps with alder flycatchers (EMPIDONAX ALNORUM), may show territorial defense toward the other species (Prescott 1987).

NON-BREEDING: In Panama, winter home range estimated to be about 1100 square meters (Gorski 1969).

Reproduction

A late breeder, eggs usually laid in mid- to late-June and young fledge in August (USDA Forest Service 1994). Clutch size is three to four. Incubation lasts 12-15 days, by female. Young are tended by both parents, leave nest at 12-15 days. Site fidelity strong in both males and females (Walkinshaw 1966). May incur a high rate of cowbird parasitism (e.g., Sedgwick and Knopf 1988, Harris 1991, Brown 1988). Sometimes polygynous and may maintain polygynous trios, possibly a response to narrow habitats with high habitat productivity or other factors (Prescott 1986, Sedgwick and Knopf 1989). Singing, unmated males may be present on breeding grounds, and single pairs may breed in absence of other individuals (USDA Forest Service 1994). On one study in Ohio and Nebraska, 91 nests had 272 eggs from which 99 young fledged (36.4 percent success) and 39.5 percent of nests produced at least one young; 96 eggs and 41 nestlings were depredated (50.4 percent; Holcomb 1972).
Terrestrial Habitats
Woodland - HardwoodWoodland - MixedShrubland/chaparralOld field
Palustrine Habitats
FORESTED WETLANDRiparian
Other Nations (2)
United StatesN5B
ProvinceRankNative
KentuckyS3BYes
GeorgiaS3Yes
WashingtonS4BYes
WyomingS5BYes
New MexicoS4NYes
MichiganS5Yes
KansasS2BYes
New JerseyS4B,S4NYes
PennsylvaniaS4B,S5MYes
TexasS1BYes
TennesseeS2Yes
NebraskaS4Yes
AlabamaS1BYes
MontanaS4BYes
MinnesotaSNRBYes
New HampshireS5BYes
MississippiSNAYes
WisconsinS4BYes
IllinoisS5Yes
VirginiaS4BYes
MissouriS3Yes
District of ColumbiaSNRBYes
MaineS3BYes
NevadaS3BYes
IowaS4B,S4NYes
South CarolinaS4Yes
OklahomaSNRNYes
OhioS5Yes
IdahoS4BYes
ArkansasS1BYes
UtahS4BYes
CaliforniaS3Yes
New YorkS5BYes
Navajo NationS1BYes
West VirginiaS4BYes
FloridaSNAYes
North DakotaSNRBYes
ArizonaS3BYes
South DakotaS5BYes
ConnecticutS5BYes
MassachusettsS4BYes
IndianaS4BYes
Rhode IslandS3B,S3NYes
OregonS3BYes
LouisianaSNAYes
MarylandS4BYes
VermontS4BYes
DelawareS3BYes
ColoradoS4Yes
North CarolinaS3BYes
CanadaN5B
ProvinceRankNative
ManitobaS2BYes
British ColumbiaS4BYes
SaskatchewanS4BYes
QuebecS4BYes
New BrunswickS1BYes
Island of NewfoundlandSNAYes
OntarioS4BYes
AlbertaS4BYes
Nova ScotiaS2BYes
Threat Assessments
ThreatScopeSeverityTiming
2 - Agriculture & aquacultureRestricted (11-30%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
2.3 - Livestock farming & ranchingRestricted (11-30%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
7 - Natural system modificationsPervasive (71-100%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
7.2 - Dams & water management/usePervasive (71-100%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
8 - Invasive & other problematic species, genes & diseasesLarge (31-70%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
8.1 - Invasive non-native/alien species/diseasesLarge (31-70%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
8.2 - Problematic native species/diseasesLarge - restrictedModerate - slightHigh (continuing)

Roadless Areas (66)
Alaska (1)
AreaForestAcres
HyderTongass National Forest121,723
Arizona (4)
AreaForestAcres
Catalina St. Pk. Roadless AreaCoronado National Forest951
MuldoonPrescott National Forest5,821
Sierra Ancha Wilderness ContiguousTonto National Forest7,787
Upper Romero WsrCoronado National Forest150
California (18)
AreaForestAcres
AgnewSequoia National Forest9,561
Barker ValleyCleveland National Forest11,940
Caples CreekEldorado National Forest17,854
Chips CreekLassen National Forest29,089
Cucamonga CSan Bernardino National Forest4,106
Dry LakesLos Padres National Forest17,043
Excelsior (CA)Inyo National Forest45,607
Glass MountainInyo National Forest52,867
Horse Mdw.Inyo National Forest5,687
MatilijaLos Padres National Forest5,218
Mill CreekSequoia National Forest27,643
North LakeInyo National Forest2,406
RinconSequoia National Forest54,610
San DimasAngeles National Forest7,160
Slate Mtn.Sequoia National Forest12,299
Soldier CanyonInyo National Forest40,589
Table Mtn.Inyo National Forest4,215
White LedgeLos Padres National Forest18,632
Idaho (2)
AreaForestAcres
Italian PeakCaribou-Targhee National Forest141,158
SeceshPayette National Forest248,088
Montana (13)
AreaForestAcres
Bear - Marshall - Scapegoat - SwanLewis and Clark National Forest344,022
Bear - Marshall - Scapegoat - SwanLolo National Forest118,485
Bmss Ra 1485Flathead National Forest334,275
BridgerGallatin National Forest45,059
Buckhorn Ridge (MT)Kootenai National Forest34,716
Cabinet Face East #671Kootenai National Forest50,326
Cube Iron - SilcoxLolo National Forest36,998
ElkhornHelena National Forest75,468
Freezeout MountainBeaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest97,305
Jerico MountainHelena National Forest8,445
Patricks Knob - North CutoffLolo National Forest16,970
South Siegel - South CutoffLolo National Forest13,474
Teepee - Spring CreekLolo National Forest13,902
Nevada (2)
AreaForestAcres
Pine Grove SouthHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest88,945
West Walker (NV)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,683
New Mexico (1)
AreaForestAcres
South Guadalupe MountainsLincoln National Forest20,930
North Carolina (1)
AreaForestAcres
Lost CovePisgah National Forest5,944
Oregon (6)
AreaForestAcres
Crane MountainFremont National Forest23,096
Hebo 1aSiuslaw National Forest13,930
HellholeUmatilla National Forest65,679
Hurricane CreekWallowa-Whitman National Forest1,606
ReservoirWallowa-Whitman National Forest13,641
Sky Lakes AWinema National Forest3,940
Virginia (2)
AreaForestAcres
Bear CreekJefferson National Forest18,274
Laurel ForkGeorge Washington National Forest9,967
Washington (7)
AreaForestAcres
Glacier Peak KMt Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest47,269
Granite MountainOkanogan National Forest27,428
Higgins MountainMt Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest13,185
Mt. Baker Noisy - DiobsudMt Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest56,039
Mt. BonaparteOkanogan National Forest10,891
TaneumWenatchee National Forest26,140
Willow SpringsUmatilla National Forest10,414
Wyoming (9)
AreaForestAcres
Beartooth Proposed WildernessShoshone National Forest16,837
Grayback RidgeBridger-Teton National Forest295,113
Monument RidgeBridger-Teton National Forest17,720
South Beartooth HighwayShoshone National Forest105,570
Spread Creek - Gros Ventre RiverBridger-Teton National Forest166,097
Sulphur CreekShoshone National Forest30,221
Teton Corridor TrailheadsBridger-Teton National Forest286
West Slope TetonsTarghee National Forest47,448
Windy MountainShoshone National Forest31,283
References (92)
  1. Altman, B. 2003. Willow Flycatcher. Pages 378-381 in D. B. Marshall, M. G. Hunter, and A. L. Contreras, editors. Birds of Oregon: a general reference. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon.
  2. American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1983. Check-list of North American Birds, 6th edition. Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas. 877 pp.
  3. American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American birds. Seventh edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. [as modified by subsequent supplements and corrections published in <i>The Auk</i>]. Also available online: http://www.aou.org/.
  4. Arizona Partners in Flight. 1999. Southwestern willow flycatcher web site. Online. Available: http://www.usgs.nau.edu/swwf/. Administered by USGS Forest & Rangeland Ecosystem Science Center, Colorado Plateau Field Station, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.
  5. Balda, R. P., and G. C. Bateman. 1971. Flocking and annual cycle of the piñon jay, <i>Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus</i>. Condor 73:287-302.
  6. Barlow, J. C. and W. B. McGillivray. 1983. Foraging and habitat relationships of the sibling species Willow flycatcher (EMPIDONAX TRAILLII) and Alder flycatcher (E. ALNORUM) in southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Zoology 61:1510-1516.
  7. Bent, A.C. 1942. Life histories of North American flycatchers, larks, swallows, and their allies. U.S. National Museum Bulletin 179. Washington, DC.
  8. Biosystems Analysis, Inc. 1989. Endangered Species Alert Program Manual: Species Accounts and Procedures. Southern California Edison Environmental Affairs Division.
  9. BirdLife International. 2004b. Threatened birds of the world 2004. CD ROM. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK.
  10. Brown, B. T. 1988. Breeding ecology of a willow flycatcher population in Grand Canyon, Arizona. Western Birds 19:25-33.
  11. Brown, B. T. 1994. Rates of brood parasitism by brown-headed cowbirds on riparian passerines in Arizona. Journal of Field Ornithology 65:160-168.
  12. Browning, M. R. 1993. Comments on the taxonomy of <i>Empidonax traillii</i> (Willow Flycatcher). Western Birds 24:241-257.
  13. Canadian Wildlife Service. 1999. Personal communication on Breeding Bird Survey data analysis for willow flycatcher in Canada, 1967-1998. Canadian Wildlife Service, Hull, Quebec.
  14. Carothers, S.W., and B.T. Brown. 1991. The Colorado River through the Grand Canyon. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ.
  15. Deshler, E. T., M. K. Sogge, and R. M. Marshall. 1997. An annotated bibliography for the southwestern willow flycatcher. USDI National Park Service, Colorado Plateau Field Station, Technical Report NPS/NAUCPRS/NRTR-97/13, Flagstaff, AZ.
  16. Droege, S., and J.R. Sauer. 1990. North American Breeding Bird Survey, annual summary, 1989. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 90(8). 22 pp.
  17. eBird. 2022. eBird: An online database of bird distribution and abundance. eBird, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Available: http://www.ebird.org.
  18. Ehrlich, P. R., D. S. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1988. The birder's handbook: a field guide to the natural history of North American birds. Simon and Shuster, Inc., New York. xxx + 785 pp.
  19. Ehrlich, P. R., D. S. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1992. Birds in Jeopardy: the Imperiled and Extinct Birds of the United States and Canada, Including Hawaii and Puerto Rico. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 259 pp.
  20. Flett, M. A. and S. D. Sanders. 1987. Ecology of a Sierra Nevada population of willow flycatchers. Western Birds 18:37-42.
  21. Frakes, R. A. and R. E. Johnson. 1982. Niche convergence in <i>Empidonax </i>flycatchers. Condor (84):286-291.
  22. Gorski, L. J. 1969. Traill's flycatcher of the "fitz-bew" songform wintering in Panama. Auk 86:745-747.
  23. Griggs, J. 1997. American Bird Conservancy's field guide to all the birds of North America. Harper Perennial, New York.
  24. Harris, J. H. 1991. Effects of brood parasitism by brown-headed cowbirds on willow flycatcher nesting success along the Kern River, California. Western Birds 22:13-26.
  25. Harris, J. H., S. D. Sanders, and M. A. Flett. 1987. Willow flycatcher surveys in the Sierra Nevada. Western Birds 18:27-36
  26. Harrison, C. 1978. A Field Guide to the Nests, Eggs and Nestlings of North American Birds. Collins, Cleveland, Ohio.
  27. Harrison, H. H. 1979. A field guide to western birds' nests. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston. 279 pp.
  28. Holcomb, L. C. 1972. Nest success and age-specific mortality in Traill's flycatchers. Auk (89):837-841.
  29. Holcomb, L. C. 1974. The influence of nest building and egg laying behavior on clutch size in renests of the willow flycatcher. Bird-Banding (45) 4: 320-325.
  30. Horn, H. S. 1968. The adaptive significance of colonial nesting in the Brewer's Blackbird. Ecology 49:682-694.
  31. Howell, S. N. G., and S. Webb. 1995. A guide to the birds of Mexico and northern Central America. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
  32. Hussell, D. J. T. 1990. Implications of age-dependent bill length variation in EMPIDONAX for identification of immature alder and willow flycatchers. Journal of Field Ornithology 61:54-63.
  33. Hussell, D. J. T. 1991a. Fall migrations of alder and willow flycatchers in southern Ontario. Journal of Field Ornithology 62(2):260-270.
  34. Hussell, D. J. T. 1991b. Spring migrations of alder and willow flycatchers in southern Ontario. Journal of Field Ornithology 62(1):69-77.
  35. Hutto, R. L., and J. S. Young. 1999. Habitat relationships of landbirds in the Northern Region, USDA Forest Service. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-32.
  36. Kaufman, K. 1990. A field guide to advanced birding. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. xiv + 299 pp.
  37. King, J. R. 1955. Notes on the life history of Traill's flycatcher (EMPIDONAX TRAILLII) in southeastern Washington. Auk(72):148-173.
  38. Latta, M. J., C. J. Beardmore, and T. E. Corman. 1999. Arizona Partners in Flight bird conservation plan. Version 1.0. Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Technical Report 142. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, AZ.
  39. Ligon, J. D. 1971. Late summer-autumnal breeding of the piñon jay in New Mexico. Condor 73:147-153.
  40. McCabe, R. A. 1991. The little green bird: ecology of the willow flycatcher. Rusty Rock Press, Madison, Wisconsin. xv + 171 pp.
  41. McKinney, R. G. 1988. Banders' guide to identification of EMPIDONAX flycatchers in northeastern North America. North American Bird Bander July-Sept:67-68.
  42. Moore, W. S., and R. A. Dolbeer. 1989. The use of banding recovery data to estimate dispersal rates and gene flow in avian species: case studies in the Red-winged Blackbird and Common Grackle. Condor 91:242-253.
  43. National Geographic Society (NGS). 1983. Field guide to the birds of North America. National Geographic Society, Washington, DC.
  44. Ohmart, R. D. 1996. Historical and present impacts of livestock grazing on fish and wildlife resources in western riparian habitats. Pp. 245-279 in Society for Range Management. Rangeland Wildlife. Society for Range Management, Denver, CO.
  45. Parker III, T. A., D. F. Stotz, and J. W. Fitzpatrick. 1996. Ecological and distributional databases for neotropical birds. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
  46. Paxton, E. H. 2000. Molecular genetic structuring and demographic history of the willow flycatcher <i>(Empidonax trailli</i>i). Master's Thesis. Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff. 42 pp.
  47. Phillips, A., J. Marshall, and G. Monson. 1964. The birds of Arizona. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ.
  48. Phillips, A. R. 1948. Geographic variation in <i>Empidonax traillii</i>. Auk 65:507-514.
  49. Prescott, D. R. C. 1986. Polygyny in the willow flycatcher. Condor(88):385-386.
  50. Prescott, D. R. C. 1987. Territorial responses to song playback in allopatric and sympatric populations of alder (EMPIDONAX ALNORUM) and willow (E. TRAILLII) flycatchers. Wilson Bull. 99(4):611-619.
  51. Prescott, D. R. C., and A. L. A. Middleton. 1988. Feeding-time minimization and the territorial behavior of the willow flycatcher (EMPIDONAX TRAILLII). Auk 105:17-28.
  52. Raffaele, H., J. Wiley, O. Garrido, A. Keith, and J. Raffaele. 1998. A guide to the birds of the West Indies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. 511 pp.
  53. Rappole, J. H., E. S. Morton, T. E. Lovejoy III, and J. L. Rous. 1995. Nearctic avian migrants in the Neotropics: Maps, Appendices, and Bibliography (Second edition). Conservation and Research Center, National Zoological Park, Front Royal, Virginia. 324 pp.
  54. Ridgely, R. S. 2002. Distribution maps of South American birds. Unpublished.
  55. Ridgely, R. S. and J. A. Gwynne, Jr. 1989. A Guide to the Birds of Panama. 2nd edition. Princeton University Press, Princeton, USA.
  56. Rosenberg, K.V, A.M. Dokter, P.J. Blancher, J.R. Sauer, A.C. Smith, P.A. Smith, J.C. Stanton, A. Panjabi, L. Helft, M. Parr, P.P. Marra. 2019. Decline of the North American avifauna. Science. Published online. 19 Sep 2019.
  57. Rosenberg, K.V., R.D. Ohmart, W.C. Hunter, and B.W. Anderson. 1991. Birds of the Lower Colorado River valley. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson. 416 pp.
  58. Saab, V.A., and T.D. Rich. 1997. Large-scale conservation assessment for neotropical migratory land birds in the Interior Columbia River Basin. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Research Station, General Technical Report PNW-GTR-399. Portland, OR.
  59. Sanders, S. D. and M. A. Flett. 1989. Montane riparian habitat and willow flycatchers: threats to a sensitive environment and species. IN: Proceedings of the California riparian systems conference: protection, management, and restoration for the 1990's. Sept. 22-24, 1988, Davis, CA. Berkeley, CA: U. S. Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station; June 1989. 544 p. GTR-PSW-110.
  60. Sauer, J.R., J.E. Hines, G. Gough, I. Thomas, and B.G. Peterjohn. 1997b. July 29-last update. The North American Breeding Bird Survey Results and Analysis. Version 96.4. Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD. Online. Available: http://www.mbr.nbs.gov/bbs/bbs.html.
  61. Sedgwick, J. A. 2000. Willow Flycatcher (EMPIDONAX TRAILLII). No. 533 IN A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 32pp.
  62. Sedgwick, J. A. 2001. Geographic variation in the song of Willow Flycatchers: differentiation between EMPIDONAX TRAILLII ADASTUS and E. T. EXTIMUS. Auk 118:366-379.
  63. Sedgwick, J. A., and F. L. Knopf. 1988. A high incidence of brown-headed cowbird parasitism of willow flycatchers. Condor 90:253-256.
  64. Sedgwick, J. A., and F. L. Knopf. 1989. Region-wide polygyny in willow flycatchers. Condor(91):473-475.
  65. Sedgwick, J. A., and F. L. Knopf. 1992. Describing willow flycatcher habitats: scale perspectives and gender differences. Condor 94:720-733.
  66. Seutin, G. 1987. Female song in Willow flycatchers (EMPIDONAX TRAILLII). Auk 104:329-330.
  67. Seutin, G. 1991. Morphometric identification of Traill's flycatchers: an assessment of Stein's formula. Journal of Field Ornithology 62:308-313.
  68. Seutin, G. and J. P. Simon. 1988. Genetic variation in sympatric willow flycatchers (EMPIDONAX TRAILLII) and alder flycatchers (E. ALNORUM). Auk 105(2):235-243.
  69. Sibley, D. A. 2000a. The Sibley guide to birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
  70. Sogge, M.K. 1995. Southwestern willow flycatcher in the Grand Canyon. Pages 89-91 in E.T. LaRoe, G.S. Farris, C.E. Puckett, P.D. Doran, and M.J. Mac, editors. Our living resources: a report to the nation on the distribution, abundance, and health of U.S. plants, animals and ecosystems. USDI National Biological Service, Washington, DC.
  71. Sogge, M. K., R. M. Marshall, S. J. Sferra, and T. J. Tibbets. 1997. A southwestern willow flycatcher natural history summary and survey protocol. USDI National Park Service, Colorado Plateau Research Station, Technical Report NPS/NAUCPRS/NRTR-97/12, Flagstaff, AZ.
  72. Stein, R. C. 1963. Isolating mechanisms between populations of Traill's flycatchers. Proc. American Philosophical Soc. 107:21-50.
  73. Stiles, F. G. and A. F. Skutch. 1989. A guide to the birds of Costa Rica. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, USA. 511 pp.
  74. Tarvin, K. A., and G. E. Woolfenden. 1999. Blue Jay (<i>Cyanocitta cristata</i>). No. 469 IN A. Poole and F. Gill, editors. The birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 32pp.
  75. Taylor, D. M., and C. D. Littlefield. 1986. Willow flycatcher and yellow warbler response to cattle grazing. American Birds 40:1169-1173.
  76. Terres, J. K. 1980. The Audubon Society encyclopedia of North American birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
  77. Thompson, F. R., III. 1994. Temporal and spatial patterns of breeding brown-headed cowbirds in the midwestern United States. Auk 111:979-990.
  78. Unitt, P. 1987. <i>Empidonax traillii extimus</i>: an endangered subspecies. Western Birds 18:137-162.
  79. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1995. Final rule determining endangered status for the southwestern willow flycatcher. Federal Register 60(38):10694-10715.
  80. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1996. Southwestern willow flycatcher web site. Online. Available: http://bluegoose.arw.r9.fws.gov/NWRSFiles...WWillowFlycatche r/SWWillowFlycatcher.html. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Phoenix, AZ.
  81. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1997a. Final determination of critical habitat for the southwestern willow flycatcher. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register 62(140)39129-39147.
  82. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1997b. Final determination of critical habitat for the southwestern willow flycatcher; correction. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Federal Register 62(161):44228.
  83. U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 1994. Neotropical Migratory Bird Reference Book. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region. 832 pp.
  84. Uyehara, J. C. and P. M. Narins. 1995. Nest defense by willow flycatchers to brood-parasitic intruders. Condor(97):361-368.
  85. Walkinshaw, L. H. 1966b. Summer biology of Traill's flycatcher. Wilson Bulletin 78:31-46.
  86. Walkinshaw, L. H. 1971. Additional notes on summer biology of Traill's flycatcher. Bird-Banding(42):275-278.
  87. Weydemeyer, W. 1973. Singing habitats of Traill's flycatcher in northwestern Montana. Wilson Bull. 85(3):276-282.
  88. Whitmore, R. C. 1977. Habitat partitioning in a community of passerine birds. Wilson Bulletin 89:253-265.
  89. Williams, L. 1952b. Breeding behavior of the Brewer blackbird. Condor 54:3-47.
  90. Willson, M. F. 1966. Breeding ecology of the Yellow-headed Blackbird. Ecological Monographs 36:51-77.
  91. Winkler, K. 1994. Divergence in the mitochondrial DNA of EMPIDONAX TRAILLII and E. ALNORUM, with notes on hybridization. Auk 111:710-713.
  92. Zook, J. L. 2002. Distribution maps of the birds of Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama. Unpublished.