Bartramia longicauda

(Bechstein, 1812)

Upland Sandpiper

G5Secure Found in 7 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G5SecureGlobal Rank
Least concernIUCN
HighThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.102059
Element CodeABNNF06010
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNLeast concern
Endemicoccurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassAves
OrderCharadriiformes
FamilyScolopacidae
GenusBartramia
Other Common Names
Maçarico-do-Campo (PT) Maubèche des champs (FR) upland sandpiper (EN) Zarapito Ganga, Batitú (ES)
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/.
Conservation Status
Rank MethodExpertise without calculation
Review Date2016-04-06
Change Date1996-11-25
Edition Date2014-07-21
Edition AuthorsJue, Dean K.
Threat ImpactHigh
Range Extent>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences81 to >300
Rank Reasons
Still numerous with the core of its range in the central and northern Great Plains, but has suffered major historical declines as a result of over-hunting and habitat loss and degradation, both on its breeding and wintering grounds. More recently, Breeding Bird Survey data indicate a 20 per cent decline from 1980-2000, across all regions.
Range Extent Comments
BREEDING: Contiguous portion of breeding range extends from southern Alberta east of Rocky Mountains; across southern Canada to southern Ontario (isolated populations in Thunder Bay and Rainy River areas) and southern Quebec (isolated populations in Lake St.-Jean lowlands and in Abitibi region); south to Montana, northeastern Colorado, northern Oklahoma, western Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Pennsylvania, central New York, and Vermont. Also extends south through portions of Maryland to extreme northern Virginia and the mountains of West Virginia, and is spottily distributed along Atlantic Coast from Canadian Maritime Provinces south to Delaware. Largely absent from central south Michigan, northeastern Indiana, and northwestern Ohio, and from portions of north and east Pennsylvania, southeastern New York, and the Adirondack Mountains. Disjunct populations in the west: north-central Alaska, Yukon, southwestern Northwest Territories, northeastern British Columbia, Oregon, and western Idaho (summarized in Houston and Bowen 2001).

NON-BREEDING: South America east of Andes, from Suriname and northern Brazil south to central Argentina and Uruguay (AOU 1983, Houston and Bowen 2001); the largest concentrations occur in Argentina and Uruguay (White 1988). Casual or accidental in Greenland, Iceland, the British Isles and continental Europe, Azores, and Australia (Houston and Bowen 2001).
Occurrences Comments
Indiividuals tend to be dispersed on wintering and breeding habitats, With an estimated global population of 350,000 individuals (Houston, Cameron, and Bowen, 2011), there would easily be 81 or more element occurrences.
Threat Impact Comments
HUNTING: Initial declines were due largely to market hunting, beginning about 1870 and continuing until well into the 1920s (Houston and Bowen 2001); it was "destroyed by the hundreds of thousands" and "nearly extirpated from the land" (Forbush and May 1939).

HABITAT LOSS/DEGRADATION: Later declines associated with plowing of natural grasslands (Houston and Bowen 2001). At present, loss, degradation, and fragmentation of habitat due to increased urbanization, changes in farming practices and natural forest succession pose the most serious threats to populations. Frequent disturbance of pastures and hayfields (cut too often to allow breeding) is a problem in some areas. Extensive row-cropping and early crop-cutting probably pose threats to breeders (Byrd and Johnston 1991). Some western populations may have declined due to overgrazing. Much of the wintering habitat has been usurped by agriculture (Ehrlich et al. 1992).

PESTICIDES: May be threatened by pesticides, especially those used to kill grasshoppers on wintering grounds. Many Swainson's Hawks have been killed in Argentina through ingestion of monocrotophos in grasshoppers, although there have been no confirmed deaths of Upland Sandpipers (Goldstein et al. 1996, Houston and Bowen 2001).

PREDATION: Eggs and chicks are vulnerable to predation by coyotes (Canis latrans), badgers (Taxidea taxus) (Herman et al. 1984), raccoons (Procyon lotor) (Kirsch and Higgins 1976), mink (Mustela vison), skunks (Mephitis mephitis) (Buss and Hawkins 1939), domestic dogs, cats, and humans. American crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos) (Buss and Hawkins 1939), golden eagles (Aquila chrysaetos), northern goshawks (Accipiter gentilis) sharp-shinned hawks (A. striatus) (Buss 1951), Cooper's hawks (A. cooperii), northern harriers (Circus cyaneus) (Herman et al. 1984), American kestrels (Falco sparverius) (White and Melvin 1985) and snowy owls (Nyctea scandiaca) (N. Smith, pers. comm.) represent avian threats to adults, eggs and young. Livestock trampling and mowing cause damage to nests and eggs (Ailes 1980; J. Carter, pers. obs.).
Ecology & Habitat

Description

Ranges from 27.9-32.5 cm in size and is the most terrestrial of North American shorebirds. The sexes are outwardly alike; females average slightly larger than males (Forbush 1925, Prater et al. 1977). Breeding adults are overall scaly-brown in appearance above with a long slender neck, small rounded head, and relatively long tail. The upper neck is buff-streaked brown with sharply defined V-shaped markings becoming more barred on the lower breast and flanks. The throat and abdomen are white. The eye is large with a dark iris. The bill is short, slightly decurved and dusky at the tip. The tail feathers are barred, dark brown with outer tertials pale orange-brown basally, tipped with white. Legs and feet are yellow-grey (Forbush 1925, Roberts 1955, Prater et al. 1977). Adults captured at the nest may be sexed by wing chord and tail length. This method of sex determination is estimated to be 88.3% accurate for mated pairs (Peterson 1983).

Downy young are a fine, mixed pattern of black, white and buff yellowish-brown above. A black stripe runs from the base of the bill over the top of the head. There is a band of buff or yellowish-brown across the upper breast. The sides of the head, chin and underparts are generally white (Forbush 1925).

Juveniles resemble adults, but the upperparts are darker and scalier with the buffy color of the neck, breast and wings much deeper and the streaks of the foreneck and breast less distinct. The wing coverts have clear buffy edges and dark submarginal lines. The scapulars are uniformly dark with narrow, defined buff-white fringes. The tail feathers are notched with pale buff. Following the first prenuptial molt the young become indistinguishable from adults (Forbush 1925, Hayman et al. 1986).

Winter plumage is similar to that of the breeding adult, but paler (Forbush 1925).

VOCALIZATIONS: The unique vocalizations include a rapid, liquid "quip-ip-ip-ip" series of alarm notes and a penetrating "whip-whee-ee-you" windy whistle (Johnsgard 1981).

NESTS: The nest is a shallow depression in the ground approximately 10-13 cm in diameter and five cm deep, lined with pieces of dry grass (Bent 1929). Nests are usually well hidden, frequently by vegetation that hangs over the nest hiding it from above (Johnsgard 1981). The eggs are cinnamon to pale olive-buff or greenish-white in color, spotted with brown and underlaying spots of ecru or pale grey. Clutch size is normally four eggs, sometimes three, and rarely five (Bent 1929).

Diagnostic Characteristics

The behavioral habit of momentarily holding wings straight up when alighting (Forbush 1925) and the distinctive calls are diagnostic (Johnsgard 1981).

Habitat

BREEDING: Restricted primarily to extensive, open tracts of short grassland habitat. Nest in native prairie, dry meadows, pastures, domestic hayfields, short-grass savanna, plowed fields, along highway rights-of-way and on airfields, and (in the north) peatlands and scattered woodlands near timberline (Forbush 1925, Higgins et al. 1969, AOU 1983, Osborne and Peterson 1984, Godfrey 1986). Nesting is also known to occur in dry patches of wet meadows (Stewart 1975, Herman et al. 1984) and in blueberry (VACCINIUM spp.) barrens (J. Albright, pers. comm.). A survey of nesting habitats in Wisconsin (White 1983) suggests that upland sandpipers favor a level topography with a minimum of tall vegetation edges and proportionately high acreages of agricultural crops which duplicate prairie grasslands in terms of structure.

Preferred habitat includes large areas of short grass for feeding and courtship with interspersed or adjacent taller grasses for nesting and brood cover; in the northeastern U.S., airfields currently provide the majority of suitable habitat, though grazed pastures and grassy fields also are used (Carter 1992). Nests on ground among grasses; sometimes along prairie sloughs (Terres 1980).

The quality of a particular habitat is best indicated by the total number of birds present during May and June. Observations by Buss and Hawkins (1939) suggest a delicate distinction between acceptable and unacceptable sites. A slight change in an accepted field may cause it to become unacceptable, i.e., heavy or early grazing, standing water, burning, and manuring may reduce or exclude nesting from fields accepted the previous year. Abandoned fields with invading shrubs and trees may sometimes exclude upland sandpipers (Laughlin and Kibbe 1985), although at a site in Massachusetts, they nest in fields with scattered shrubs and one to two m tall pine trees (PINUS spp.) (White and Melvin 1985).

Airports and airfields offer excellent habitat for breeding colonies, providing level expanses of short grass fields attractive to upland sandpipers. Nesting surveys in the mid-1980s in Ohio (Osborne and Peterson 1984) and in Massachusetts (White and Melvin 1985) showed that airport habitats in these states were utilized over all other habitats with respect to the number of sites and number of individuals per site. The short grassy strips along runways and taxiways are used for feeding, loafing, nesting, brood-rearing and pre-migratory flocking. Upland sandpipers are believed to pose little threat to aircraft at airports because of their small size, typical behavioral patterns, and tendency to remain mostly on the ground. Flight is usually low and direct (White and Melvin 1985).

Vegetation height is an important factor in the selection of nesting sites (Kirsch and Higgins 1976). Nesting studies by Ailes (1980) in Wisconsin recorded 54% of nests in cover between 25-40 cm in height, not exceeding 70 cm at the time of egg hatching. In North Dakota nesters were found in cover between 15.5-30.8 cm in height, and appeared to avoid cover over 61.5 cm (Kirsch and Higgins 1976). White and Melvin (1985) reported that vegetation surrounding six active nests located on a Massachusetts airfield ranged from 8.0-25.0 cm in height.

Agricultural land use patterns and farming practices influence the choice of nesting sites. In central Wisconsin, Ailes (1980) found that idle fields and hayfields accounted for the majority of nesting habitats. Nesting studies in North and South Dakota indicated the majority of nests were in ungrazed grasslands of medium density with abundant ground litter (Higgins et al. 1969). A five-year survey (1969-74) of intensively cultivated areas in the prairie pothole region of east-central North Dakota recorded 57% of nests in untilled habitats, which comprised only 7% of the total study area (Higgins 1975). In Illinois, Buhnerkempe and Westemeir (1988) reported that sandpipers selected stands of grass and forbs for nesting and avoided fields of uniform grass and legumes.

In North Dakota, Kirsch and Higgins (1976) recorded their lowest mean nest densities in annually tilled croplands and their highest mean nest densities in native grasslands the second season after a prescribed burn. Seeded grass/legume mixtures generally grew too tall and dense. Kirsch and Higgins (1976) found that the majority of North Dakota nests were located in either thin, uniform vegetative cover or in scattered clumps of fairly dense cover characterized by standing stubble fields, moderately grazed pastures, mowed areas with heavy regrowth, brush clumps with some understory vegetation, and undisturbed vegetation on poor soils. Residual vegetation from the previous growing seasons accounted for 25% of the cover at 54% of sandpiper nests.

Upland sandpipers use grassy fields of low vegetation height for feeding and brood rearing. Ailes (1980) observed 66% of adults with young in Wisconsin in grazed pastures, 13% in ungrazed pastures, and 11% in hayfields. Ailes (1980) found a large percentage of adults with young in Wisconsin in heavily grazed fields with vegetation ranging from zero to ten cm in height. Buhnerkempe and Westemeir (1988) reported that, in Illinois, they selected brood habitats of wheat stubble fields, recently hayed legumes, old redtop meadows (AGROSTIS spp.), and moderately grazed pastures. A South Dakota grasslands management study showed habitat use (nesting was not documented) to be highest in recently burned fields with short, open, new growth and no litter or old growth (Huber and Steuter 1984).

Upland sandpipers accept a variety of native and introduced grasses (Buss and Hawkins 1939). Timothy (PHLEUM spp.), bluegrass (POA spp.), needlegrass (STIPA spp.), bluestem (ANDROPOGON spp.), quackgrass (AGROPYRON spp.), Junegrass (KOELERA spp.), and bromegrass (BROMUS spp.) are among the grasses associated with nesting fields (Buss and Hawkins 1939, Meanley 1943, Buss 1951, Higgins et al. 1969, Kirsch and Higgins 1976, Ailes 1980).

NON-BREEDING: Very rarely in migration along shores and mudflats (AOU 1983). On wintering grounds in South America, have been observed in pastures of remote estancias (Wetmore 1927), harvested and burnt-over canefields, football fields, airfields (Haverschmidt 1966), and on sandy beaches where the vegetation is open or recently burned (Spanns 1978).

Changes in land use and agricultural practices may be critical to the limited numbers (White 1988). In the province of Cordoba, Argentina, where the greatest numbers have been reported to date, native espinal (scrub trees) have been converted to dairy farms planted in pasture and alfalfa. Upland sandpipers possibly prefer the drier climate and planted grasses to historically utilized wetter, native grasslands found farther south and southeast (White 1988).

Ecology

Tend to be loosely colonial while breeding (Bowen 1976), often occupying the same nesting fields in successive years (Buss and Hawkins 1939, Ailes 1980). Density varies from 0.6-6.1 ha/nest in loosely spaced "colonies" (Harrison 1979). Nest territories are generally grouped and consist of a nesting site, plus a loafing and feeding area near or adjacent to the nest territory which is shared communally (Buss and Hawkins 1939). In the central portion of the range in North Dakota, breeding densities of up to 20 pairs/mi squared (2.59/km squared) have been recorded (Stewart and Kantrud 1972). Limited studies on home ranges of breeding birds; in Wisconsin, one female occupied 85.6 hectares and one male occupied only 8.5 hectares (Ailes and Toepfer 1977).
Studies by Bowen (1976) and Ailes (1980) suggest that adults may exhibit some degree of site faithfulness, although Ailes (1980) found that none of the 61 young he banded returned to their natal grounds the following year. In nonbreeding season, solitary or in small scattered groups.

Reproduction

Courtship is exhibited in spectacular soaring displays while ascending in great circles high into the sky accompanied by a long, drawn-out "whip-whee-ee-you" whistle, and in low over-the-ground flight on stiff, quivering wings (Buss and Hawkins 1939). On the ground, the male will sometimes approach the female, raising his tail and running towards her while giving a short, guttural whistle (Ailes 1976). This pre-copulatory behavior is sometimes followed by mating.

Initial nesting activity, which is thought to be somewhat synchronous (Higgins and Kirsch 1975), begins two to three weeks after spring arrival in breeding areas, from mid-April to early May (Forbush 1925, Buss and Hawkins 1939, Ailes 1980). The maximum period between the earliest initiated nests and the latest hatched nests in North Dakota (Higgins and Kirsch 1975), Wisconsin (Ailes 1980), and Massachusetts (White and Melvin 1985) ranged from eight to ten weeks. Some late nesting, or renesting, due to early nest failure may occur (Ailes 1980).

Clutch size is normally four eggs, sometimes three, and rarely five (Bent 1929). Eggs layed mostly May-June (late April to early June in Virginia). Incubate eggs an average of 24 days (Higgins and Kirsch 1975), with extremes of 21-28 days reported by some investigators (Johnsgard 1981). Both sexes incubate. Chicks are precocial and leave the nest within 24 hours after hatching (Ailes 1980). Broods are tended by one (Ailes 1980) or both adults (Buss 1951) until the young attain adult weight and are capable of flight at 30-34 days (Buss and Hawkins 1939, Ailes 1980). Ailes (1980) reported that adults with young in Wisconsin utilized brood-rearing fields within a short distance of the nesting site for several weeks following hatching. In contrast, Buss (1951) found that adults with young in the Yukon Territory required a large home range, up to 3.2 km in diameter. Family groups tend to stay together at least until postbreeding migration.

Estimates of nesting success in Northern Plains states range from 63% (Lindmeier 1960) to 100% (Lokemoen and Duebbert 1974). Using the Mayfield (1961) method to determine seasonal nest success rates, Buhnerkempe and Westemeier (1988) calculated nest success in Jasper County, Illinois to be 48%.

The time elapsed between arrival and departure from breeding areas has been observed to be as brief as 100 days (Higgins and Kirsch 1975) and as long as 165 days (Buss and Hawkins 1939). Higgins and Kirsch (1975) correlated the average, frost-free period with dates of first nest initiation and final departure from breeding areas in North Dakota and Wisconsin, and suggested that some breeding ground activities may be directly or indirectly related to temperature at northern latitudes. Buss (1951) correlated the timing of fall migration in the Yukon with decreasing numbers of available insects.

Data obtained from marked birds in Kansas suggest that upland sandpipers first breed when they are one year old (D. Bowen, pers. comm.). The natural longevity is not known. The longest known survival of a banded bird is five years (Clapp et al. 1982).
Terrestrial Habitats
Grassland/herbaceousOld fieldCropland/hedgerow
Palustrine Habitats
Bog/fen
Other Nations (2)
CanadaN5B
ProvinceRankNative
Northwest TerritoriesSUYes
AlbertaS4BYes
OntarioS2BYes
British ColumbiaS2BYes
Prince Edward IslandS1BYes
SaskatchewanS5BYes
Nova ScotiaSNAYes
ManitobaS4BYes
QuebecS3BYes
Yukon TerritoryS4BYes
New BrunswickS1BYes
United StatesN5B
ProvinceRankNative
MontanaS4BYes
IllinoisS2Yes
IdahoS1BYes
WisconsinS2BYes
WashingtonSHBYes
Rhode IslandS1B,S1NYes
AlabamaS3NYes
District of ColumbiaS1NYes
IowaS3BYes
IndianaS3BYes
MinnesotaS4BYes
ConnecticutS1BYes
MississippiSNAYes
OregonS1BYes
MichiganS3Yes
VermontS2BYes
MissouriS3Yes
LouisianaS2MYes
North CarolinaSNAYes
KentuckySHBYes
KansasS4BYes
MarylandS1BYes
OklahomaS3Yes
OhioS2Yes
DelawareSHB,S1NYes
MaineS3BYes
New YorkS3BYes
North DakotaSNRBYes
VirginiaSHBYes
ArkansasSNAYes
New MexicoS4NYes
West VirginiaS1BYes
GeorgiaSNRNYes
New JerseyS1B,S1NYes
ColoradoS3BYes
New HampshireS1BYes
AlaskaS4BYes
NebraskaS5Yes
FloridaS2MYes
TexasS3B,S4NYes
MassachusettsS1B,S1NYes
South CarolinaSNAYes
TennesseeSNAYes
CaliforniaSNAYes
WyomingS4BYes
PennsylvaniaS2B,S2MYes
South DakotaS5BYes
Roadless Areas (7)
Montana (2)
AreaForestAcres
Bear - Marshall - Scapegoat - SwanLewis and Clark National Forest344,022
North AbsarokaCuster National Forest21,063
North Dakota (3)
AreaForestAcres
DurlerDakota Prairie Grasslands12,464
Kinley PlateauDakota Prairie Grasslands16,900
VenloDakota Prairie Grasslands5,317
South Dakota (2)
AreaForestAcres
Cheyenne RiverBuffalo Gap National Grassland7,572
Red ShirtBuffalo Gap National Grassland17,007
References (97)
  1. Ailes, I.W. 1976. Ecology of the upland sandpiper in central Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point, Wisconsin. M.S. thesis.
  2. Ailes, I.W. 1980. Breeding biology and habitat use of the upland sandpiper in central Wisconsin. Passenger Pigeon 42:53-63.
  3. Ailes, I. W., and J. E. Toepfer. 1977. Home range and daily movement of radio-tagged Upland Sandpipers in central Wisconsin. Inland Bird Banding News 49:203-212.
  4. American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1983. Check-list of North American Birds, 6th edition. Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas. 877 pp.
  5. 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/.
  6. Barrows, W. B. 1884. Birds of the Lower Uruguay. Auk 1:313-319.
  7. Bent, A.C. 1929. Life histories of North American shorebirds (Part II). U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull. 146. Washington, D.C.
  8. BirdLife International. 2004b. Threatened birds of the world 2004. CD ROM. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK.
  9. Bornschein, M. R., B. L. Reinert, and M. Pichorim. 1997. Notas sobre algumas aves novas ou pouco conhecidas no sul do Brasil. Ararajuba 5:53-59.
  10. Bowen, D. E. 1976. Coloniality, reproductive success and habitat interactions in upland sandpipers (BARTRAMIA LONGICAUDA). Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. 127 pp.
  11. Braun, M. J., D. W. Finch, M. B. Robbins, and B. K. Schmidt. 2000. A field checklist of the birds of Guyana. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
  12. Buhnerkempke, J. E., and R. L. Westemeier. 1988. Breeding biology and habitat of upland sandpipers on prairie-chicken sanctuaries in Illinois, USA. Trans. Ill. State Acad. Sci. 81:153-162.
  13. Buss, I. O. 1951. The upland plover in southwestern Yukon Territory. Arctic 4:204-13.
  14. Buss, I. O., and A. S. Hawkins. 1939. The upland plover at Faville Grove, Wisconsin. The Wilson Bulletin 51:202-20.
  15. Byrd, M. A., and D. W. Johnston. 1991. Birds. Pages 477-537 in K. Terwilliger, coordinator. Virginia's endangered species: proceedings of a symposium. McDonald and Woodward Publ. Co., Blacksburg, Virginia.
  16. Cadman, M.D., P.F.J. Eagles, and F.M Helleiner, compilers. 1987. Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario. Federation of Ontario Naturalists and the Long Point Bird Observatory. Universtiy of Waterloo Press, Waterloo, Ontario.
  17. Carter, J. W. 1992. Upland sandpiper, BARTRAMIA LONGICAUDA. Pages 235-252 in K. J. Schneider and D. M. Pence, editors. Migratory nongame birds of management concern in the Northeast. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton Corner, Massachusetts. 400 pp.
  18. Clapp, R. B., M. K. Klimkiewicz, and J. H. Kennard. 1982. Longevity records of North American birds: Gaviidae through Alcidae. J. Field Ornithol. 53:81-124.
  19. DeGraaf, R. M., and D. D. Rudis. 1986. New England wildlife: habitat, natural history, and distribution. USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Expt. Station, Broomall, Pennsylvania, Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-108. 491 pp.
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. Forbush, E. H. 1925. Birds of Massachusetts and other New England states. Part 1: Water birds, marsh birds and shore birds. Massachusetts Department of Agriculture, Boston, Massachusetts. 486 pp.
  23. Forbush, E. H. and J. B. May. 1939. Natural History of Birds of Eastern and Central North America. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.
  24. Godfrey, W. E. 1986. The birds of Canada. Revised edition. National Museum of Natural Sciences, Ottawa. 596 pp. + plates.
  25. Goldstein, M. I., B. Woodbridge, M. A. Zaccagnini, S. B. Canavelli, and A. Lanusse. 1996. An assessment of mortality of Swainson's Hawks on wintering grounds in Argentina. Journal of Raptor Research 30:106-107.
  26. Hagan, J. M., III, and D. W. Johnston, editors. 1992. Ecology and conservation of neotropical migrant landbirds. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. xiii + 609 pp.
  27. Harrison, H. H. 1979. A field guide to western birds' nests. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston. 279 pp.
  28. Haverschmidt, F. 1966. The migration and wintering of the upland sandpiper in Surinam. Wilson Bulletin 78:319-320.
  29. Hayman, P., J. Marchant, and T. Prater. 1986. Shorebirds: an identification guide to the waders of the world. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston.
  30. Herkert, J. R., editor. 1992. Endangered and threatened species of Illinois: status and distribution. Vol. 2: Animals. Illinois Endangered Species Protection Board. iv + 142 pp.
  31. Herman, S. G., J. W. Scoville, and S. G. Waltcher. 1984. The upland sandpiper in Bear Valley and Logan Valley, Grant County, Oregon. Special Report submitted to Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 23 pp.
  32. Higgins, K.F. 1975. Shorebird and game bird nests in North Dakota croplands. Wild. Soc. Bull. 3:176-179.
  33. Higgins, K.F. 1986. A comparison of burn season effects on nesting birds in North Dakota mixed-grass prairie. Prairie Naturalist 18(4):219-28.
  34. Higgins, K.F., and L.M. Kirsch. 1975. Some aspects of the breeding biology of the upland sandpiper in North Dakota. Wilson Bulletin 87:96-102.
  35. Higgins, K.F., et al. 1977. Construction and operation of cable-chain drag for nest searches. Wildlife Leaflet 512, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
  36. Higgins, K.F., H.F. Duebbert, and R.B. Oetting. 1969a. Nesting of the upland plover on the Missouri Couteau. Prairie Naturalist 1:45-8.
  37. Higgins, K.F., L.M. Kirsch, and I.J. Ball, Jr. 1969b. A cable-chain device for locating duck nests. Journal of Wildlife Management 33(4):166-171.
  38. Houston, C. S. 1999. Decline in Upland Sandpipier populations: history and interpretations. Blue Jay 57:136-142.
  39. Houston, C. S., and D. E. Bowen, Jr. 2001. Upland Sandpiper (<i>Bartramia longicauda</i>). <i>In </i>the Birds of North America, No. 580 (A. Poole and F. Gill, editors). The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 32pp.
  40. Houston, C.S., C.R. Jackson, and D.E. Brown. 2011. Upland Sandpiper (<i>Bartramia longicauda</i>). The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, ed.). Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca. Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu.bnaproxy.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/580/doi:10.2173/bna.580.
  41. Howell, S. N. G., and S. Webb. 1995. A guide to the birds of Mexico and northern Central America. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
  42. Huber, G.E., and A.A. Steuter. 1984. Vegetation profile and grassland bird response to spring burning. Prairie Naturalist 16(2):55-61.
  43. Igl, L. D., and D. H. Johnson. 1997. Changes in breeding bird populations in North Dakota: 1967 to 1992-93. Auk 114:74-92.
  44. Jehl, J. R., Jr. 1973. Breeding biology and systematic relationships of the stilt sandpiper. Wilson Bulletin 85:115-147.
  45. Johnsgard, P. A. 1981. The plovers, sandpipers, and snipes of the world. Univ. Nebraska Press, Lincoln. 493 pp.
  46. Jones, A.L., and P.D. Vickery. 1997. Conserving grassland birds: managing agricultural lands including hayfields, crop fields, and pastures for grassland birds. Massachusetts Audubon Society, Lincoln, MA.
  47. Kirsch, L. M. 1974. Habitat management considerations for prairie chickens. Wild. Soc. Bull. 2:124-129.
  48. Kirsch, L. M., and K. F. Higgins. 1976. Upland sandpiper nesting and managmenent in North Dakota. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 4:16-20.
  49. Kirsch, L. M., J. F. Duebert, and A. D. Kruse. 1978. Grazing and haying effects on habitats of upland nesting birds. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 43:486-497.
  50. Knopf, F.L. 1996. Mountain Plover (<i>Charadrius montanus</i>). In A. Poole and F. Gill, editors. The Birds of North America, No. 211. The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and The American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, DC. 16 pp.
  51. Knopf, F.L., and J.R. Rupert. 1996. Productivity and movements of mountain plovers breeding in Colorado. Wilson Bulletin 108:28-35.
  52. Laughlin, S. B., and D. P. Kibbe, editors. 1985. The atlas of breeding birds of Vermont. University Press of New England, Hanover Vermont. 456 pp.
  53. Lindmeier, J. P. 1960. Plover, rail, and godwit nesting on a study area in Mahnomen County, Minnesota. Flicker 32:5-9.
  54. Lokemoen, J. T., and H. F. Duebbert. 1974. Summer birds for South Dakota prairie. South Dakota Cons. Digest 41:18-21.
  55. Lowen, J. C., J. Mazar Barnett, M. Pearman, R. Clay, and B. López Lanús. 1997. New distributional information for 25 species in eastern Paraguay. Ararajuba 5:240-243.
  56. Mayfield, H. 1961. Nesting success calculated from exposure. Wilson Bulletin 73:255-261.
  57. Meanley, B. 1943. Nesting of the upland plover in Baltimore County, Maryland. The Auk 60:603.
  58. Morrison, R.I.G. 1993/1994. Shorebird population status and trends in Canada. Bird Trends (3):3-5. Canadian Wildlife Service.
  59. Morrison, R. I. G., R. E. Gill, Jr., B. A. Harrington, S. Skagen, G. W. Page, C. L. Gratto-Trevor, and S. M. Haig. 2001. Estimates of shorebird populations in North America. Occasional Paper Number 104, Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, Ottawa, ON. 64 pages.
  60. Nol, E., and M. S. Blanken. 1999. Semipalmated Plover (<i>Charadrius semipalmatus</i>). No. 444 IN A. Poole and F. Gill, eds. The birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 24pp.
  61. Osborne, D. R., and A. T. Peterson. 1984. Decline of the upland sandpiper (BARTRAMIA LONGICAUDA) in Ohio: an endangered species. Ohio J. Sci. 84(1):8-10.
  62. 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.
  63. Paxton, R. O., W. H. Boyle, Jr., and D. A. Cutler. 1988. Continental survey. American Birds 42:1265-1344.
  64. Peterjohn, B. G., J. R. Sauer, and W. A. Link. 1994. The 1992 and 1993 summary of the North American Breeding Bird Survey. Bird Populations 2:46-61.
  65. Peterson, A. T. 1983. Techniques for aging and sexing upland sandpipers (BARTRAMIA LONGICAUDA). Abstr. Wader Study Group 39:60.
  66. Plage, P. J. 1988. Upland Sandpiper project: 1987 breeding survey. New Jersey Department of Fish, Game and Wildlife, Spec. Report, Trenton, New Jersey.
  67. Poole, A. F. and F. B. Gill. 1992. The birds of North America. The American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. and The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA.
  68. Prater, A. J., J. H. Marchant, and J. Vuorinen. 1977. Guide to the identificaton and aging of Holarctic waders. Field Guide 17. British Trust for Ornithology, Tring, Herts, England.
  69. Queal, L. 1973. Fire-tool or tyrant. Kansas Game and Fish 30(1):7-9.
  70. Raffaele, H. A. 1983a. A guide to the birds of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Fondo Educativo Interamericano, San Juan, Puerto Rico. 255 pp.
  71. 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.
  72. Ridgely, R. S. 2002. Distribution maps of South American birds. Unpublished.
  73. Ridgely, R. S. and J. A. Gwynne, Jr. 1989. A Guide to the Birds of Panama. 2nd edition. Princeton University Press, Princeton, USA.
  74. Roberts, T. S. 1936. The birds of Minnesota. Volume 1. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
  75. Roberts, T. S. 1955. A manual for the identification of the birds of Minnesota and neighboring states. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 738 pp.
  76. Rubega, M. A., D. Schamel, and D. M. Tracy. 2000. Red-necked Phalarope (<i>Phalaropus lobatus</i>). No. 538 IN A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 28pp.
  77. Sauer, J.R., and S. Droege. 1992. Geographical patterns in population trends of Neotropical migrants in North America. Pages 26-42 in J.M. Hagan, III, and D.W. Johnston, editors. Ecology and conservation of Neotropical migrant landbirds. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.
  78. Sauer, J. R., J. E. Hines, and J. Fallon. 2001. The North American Breeding Bird Survey, Results and Analysis 1966 - 2000. Version 2001.2, USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD.
  79. Schneider, K.J., and D.M. Pence, editors. 1992. Migratory nongame birds of management concern in the Northeast. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton Corner, MA. 400 pp.
  80. Sibley, D. A. 2000a. The Sibley guide to birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
  81. Smith, S. A. 1996c. Upland Sandpiper. Pages 150-151<i> in</i> Atlas of the breeding birds of Maryland and the District of Columbia (C. S. Robbins, editor). Univ. of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, PA.
  82. Spanns, A. L. 1978. Status and numerical fluctuations of some North American waders along the Surinam coast. Wilson Bulletin 90:60-83.
  83. Stewart, R. E. 1975. Breeding Birds of North Dakota. Tri-College Center for Environmental Studies, Fargo ND.
  84. Stewart, R.E., and H.A. Kantrud. 1972. Population estimates of breeding birds in North Dakota. The Auk 89:766-788.
  85. 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.
  86. Tate, J., and D. J. Tate. 1982. The blue list for 1982. Am. Birds 36:126-135.
  87. Tate, J., Jr. 1986. The Blue List for 1986. American Birds 40:227-236.
  88. Terres, J. K. 1980. The Audubon Society encyclopedia of North American birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
  89. Tester, J. R., and W. H. Marshall. 1962. Minnesota prairie management techniques and their wildlife implications. Trans. N. Amer. Wildl. Nat. Resour. Conf. 27:267-87.
  90. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1987. Migratory nongame birds of management concern in the United States: the 1987 list. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Migratory Bird Management, Washington, D.C. 63 pp.
  91. van den Driessche, R., S. D. McConnell, and T. D. Hooper. 1994. First confirmed breeding record for the Upland Sandpiper (<i>Bartramia longicauda</i>) in British Columbia. Canadian Field-Naturalist 108:89-91.
  92. Wells, J. V., and K. V. Rosenberg. 1999. Grassland bird conservation in northeastern North America. Studies in Avian Biology 19:72-80.
  93. Wetmore, A. 1927. Our migrant shorebirds in southern South America. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Technical Bulletin No. 26, Washington, D.C. 24 pp.
  94. White, R.P. 1983. Distribution and habitat preferences of the upland sandpiper. (Bartramia longicauda) in Wisconsin. Amer. Birds, 37 (1): 16-22.
  95. White, R. P. 1988. Wintering grounds and migration patterns of the Upland Sandpiper. American Birds 42:1247-1253.
  96. White, R.P., and S.M. Melvin. 1985. Rare grassland birds and management recommendations at Camp Edwards/Otis Air National Guard Base. Special Report submitted to Massachusetts National Guard. 34 pp.
  97. Zook, J. L. 2002. Distribution maps of the birds of Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama. Unpublished.