View in other NatureServe Network Field Guides
NatureServe
Montana
Utah
Wyoming
Idaho
Wisconsin
British Columbia
South Carolina
Yukon
California
New York
American Three-toed Woodpecker - Picoides dorsalis
Native Species Global Rank :
G5
State Rank :
S4
(see State Rank Reason below)
Agency Status USFWS :
MBTA
USFS :
BLM :
PIF :
2
External Links
Listen to an Audio Sample
It seems your browser doesn't support HTML5 audio. Here is a to the audio instead
Copyright by Borror Laboratory of Bioacoustics, Department of Evolution, Ecology, and Organismal Biology, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, all rights reserved.
State Rank Reason (see State Rank above)
Species is apparently secure and not at risk of extirpation or facing significant threats in all or most of its range.
Details on Status Ranking and Review
American Three-toed Woodpecker (Picoides dorsalis ) Conservation Status Review
Population Size
Score U - Unknown
Comment Unknown.
Range Extent
Score F - 20,000-200,000 km squared (about 8,000-80,000 square miles)
Comment 179664 square kilometers based on Natural Heritage Program range maps
Area of Occupancy
Score G - 2,000-20,000 km squared (500,000-5,000,000 acres)
Comment 5311 square kilometers based on GAP predicted model.
Long-term Trend
Score E - Relatively Stable (±25% change)
Comment Mature conifer forests disturbed by fire and insects stable within +/- 25% since European arrival.
Short-term Trend
Score E - Stable. Population, range, area occupied, and/or number or condition of occurrences unchanged or remaining within ±10% fluctuation
Comment Only on three Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) routes in Montana and low credibility for surrounding states. The Landbird Monitoring Program detected them at a higher rate in post fire forests and spruce-fir forests. These habitats seem to be increasing in Montana.
Threats
Score G - Slightly threatened. Threats, while recognizable, are of low severity, or affecting only a small portion of the population or area.
Comment No major threat identified, but need long-term balance of fire and insect disturbance. Need to have groups of large snags on the landscape with recently dead or dying trees.
Severity Low - Low but nontrivial reduction of species population or reversible degradation or reduction of habitat in area affected, with recovery expected in 10-50 years.
Comment Species seems to rely on a mix of habitat resulting from some level of disturbance
Scope Low - 5-20% of total population or area affected
Comment Species seems to rely on a mix of habitat resulting from some level of disturbance
Immediacy Low - Threat is likely to be operational within 5-20 years.
Comment No immediate threats identified
Intrinsic Vulnerability
Score C - Not Intrinsically Vulnerable. Species matures quickly, reproduces frequently, and/or has high fecundity such that populations recover quickly (< 5 years or 2 generations) from decreases in abundance; or species has high dispersal capability such that extirpated populations soon become reestablished through natural recolonization (unaided by humans).
Environmental Specificity
Score B - Narrow. Specialist. Specific habitat(s) or other abiotic and/or biotic factors (see above) are used or required by the Element, but these key requirements are common and within the generalized range of the species within the area of interest.
Comment Need dead or dying trees.
General Description
The adult male has a yellow crown, black forehead that is more or less spotted with dull white, black back and sides that are usually broadly barred with white, secondary feathers that are distinctly spotted with white and quills with white spots (Gabrielson and Lincoln 1959). The adult female is similar to the adult male but without any yellow on the head. The female's forehead and crown is usually spotted or streaked with grayish-white but sometimes is completely black. Immatures are similar to adults. Young woodpeckers are naked and blind when hatched (Gabrielson and Lincoln 1959).
American Three-toed Woodpeckers make tapping sounds while feeding. In the spring and summer you can hear courtship drumming. The call is a rattle similar to that of the Hairy Woodpecker (
Picoides villosus ) (Adams, personal communication) although the intervals between taps are longer at the beginning of calling episodes. The voice consists of a squeal resembling that of a small mammal and a short "quap" or "quip" (Gabrielson and Lincoln 1959).
For a comprehensive review of the conservation status, habitat use, and ecology of this and other Montana bird species, please see
Marks et al. 2016, Birds of Montana. Diagnostic Characteristics
Morphologically American Three-toed Woodpecker is very similar to the Black-backed Woodpecker (Picoides arcticus ) but is smaller. They are sympatric and occur together ecologically. The barred pattern on the back distinguishes it from the Black-backed Woodpecker.
Species Range
Montana Range
Range Descriptions
Year-round
Western Hemisphere Range
Range Comments
American Three-toed Woodpeckers breed in the montane areas of western Montana. Winter range is more restricted to northwest Montana.
Observations in Montana Natural Heritage Program Database
Number of Observations: 3025
(Click on the following maps and charts to see full sized version)
Map Help and Descriptions
Relative Density
Recency
SUMMER (Feb 16 - Dec 14)
Direct Evidence of Breeding
Indirect Evidence of Breeding
No Evidence of Breeding
WINTER (Dec 15 - Feb 15)
Regularly Observed
Not Regularly Observed
(Observations spanning multiple months or years are excluded from time charts)
Habitat
Nesting habitat includes coniferous forests (with spruce, larch, or fir trees), or logged areas and swamps. A cavity nest is dug by both sexes and is placed 1.5 to 15 meters (5 to 50 feet) high in a stump or other dead or dying trees, often near water. The entrance is about 4 centimeters by 5 centimeters (1 3/4 by 2 inches), and the cavity is about 25 to 38 centimeters (10 to 15 inches) deep (Oatman 1985). The eggs lie on beds of chips within the nest and are ovate, pure white, and only moderately glossy (Gabrielson and Lincoln 1959).
Ecological Systems Associated with this Species
Details on Creation and Suggested Uses and Limitations
How Associations Were Made
We associated the use and habitat quality (common or occasional) of each of the 82 ecological systems mapped in Montana for
vertebrate animal species that regularly breed, overwinter, or migrate through the state by:
Using personal observations and reviewing literature that summarize the breeding, overwintering, or migratory habitat requirements of each species (Dobkin 1992, Hart et al. 1998, Hutto and Young 1999, Maxell 2000, Foresman 2012, Adams 2003, and Werner et al. 2004);
Evaluating structural characteristics and distribution of each ecological system relative to the species' range and habitat requirements;
Examining the observation records for each species in the state-wide point observation database associated with each ecological system;
Calculating the percentage of observations associated with each ecological system relative to the percent of Montana covered by each ecological system to get a measure of "observations versus availability of habitat".
Species that breed in Montana were only evaluated for breeding habitat use, species that only overwinter in Montana were only evaluated for overwintering habitat use, and species that only migrate through Montana were only evaluated for migratory habitat use.
In general, species were listed as associated with an ecological system if structural characteristics of used habitat documented in the literature were present in the ecological system or large numbers of point observations were associated with the ecological system.
However, species were not listed as associated with an ecological system if there was no support in the literature for use of structural characteristics in an ecological system,
even if point observations were associated with that system.
Common versus occasional association with an ecological system was assigned based on the degree to which the structural characteristics of an ecological system matched the preferred structural habitat characteristics for each species as represented in scientific literature.
The percentage of observations associated with each ecological system relative to the percent of Montana covered by each ecological system was also used to guide assignment of common versus occasional association.
If you have any questions or comments on species associations with ecological systems, please contact the Montana Natural Heritage Program's Senior Zoologist.
Suggested Uses and Limitations
Species associations with ecological systems should be used to generate potential lists of species that may occupy broader landscapes for the purposes of landscape-level planning.
These potential lists of species should not be used in place of documented occurrences of species (this information can be requested at:
mtnhp.org/requests ) or systematic surveys for species and evaluations of habitat at a local site level by trained biologists.
Users of this information should be aware that the land cover data used to generate species associations is based on imagery from the late 1990s and early 2000s and was only intended to be used at broader landscape scales.
Land cover mapping accuracy is particularly problematic when the systems occur as small patches or where the land cover types have been altered over the past decade.
Thus, particular caution should be used when using the associations in assessments of smaller areas (e.g., evaluations of public land survey sections).
Finally, although a species may be associated with a particular ecological system within its known geographic range, portions of that ecological system may occur outside of the species' known geographic range.
Literature Cited
Adams, R.A. 2003. Bats of the Rocky Mountain West; natural history, ecology, and conservation. Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado. 289 p.
Dobkin, D. S. 1992. Neotropical migrant land birds in the Northern Rockies and Great Plains. USDA Forest Service, Northern Region. Publication No. R1-93-34. Missoula, MT.
Foresman, K.R. 2012. Mammals of Montana. Second edition. Mountain Press Publishing, Missoula, Montana. 429 pp.
Hart, M.M., W.A. Williams, P.C. Thornton, K.P. McLaughlin, C.M. Tobalske, B.A. Maxell, D.P. Hendricks, C.R. Peterson, and R.L. Redmond. 1998. Montana atlas of terrestrial vertebrates. Montana Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, University of Montana, Missoula, MT. 1302 p.
Hutto, R.L. and J.S. Young. 1999. Habitat relationships of landbirds in the Northern Region, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station RMRS-GTR-32. 72 p.
Maxell, B.A. 2000. Management of Montana's amphibians: a review of factors that may present a risk to population viability and accounts on the identification, distribution, taxonomy, habitat use, natural history, and the status and conservation of individual species. Report to U.S. Forest Service Region 1. Missoula, MT: Wildlife Biology Program, University of Montana. 161 p.
Werner, J.K., B.A. Maxell, P. Hendricks, and D. Flath. 2004. Amphibians and reptiles of Montana. Missoula, MT: Mountain Press Publishing Company. 262 p.
Commonly Associated with these Ecological SystemsForest and Woodland Systems
Recently Disturbed or Modified
Wetland and Riparian Systems
Food Habits
Diet consists of primarily of larvae of bark beetles. Also, tree sap and insects.
Ecology
In Glacier National Park, breeding density hit 13.5 birds per 100 acres in lodgepole pine during a pine beetle epidemic, probably due to the ability of birds to nest in lodgepole pine. In Oregon, home ranges for 3 radioed individuals were 751, 351, and 131 acres. Intraspecific home range overlap appeared limited (Goggans et al. 1989). Differences in diet between sexes noted.
Reproductive Characteristics
Nest building was observed in June, with young out of the nest by early August (Davis 1961). Flying young were observed during late July near Fortine.
References
Literature Cited AboveLegend:
Additional ReferencesLegend: Do you know of a citation we're missing? Picoides tridactylus and P. arcticus . American Midland Naturalist 92(2):397-405.Conservation Biology. 9 (5): 1041-1058.Effects of recreation on Rocky Mountain wildlife: a review for Montana . [Montana]: Montana Chapter of the Wildlife Society.Picoides dorsalis ). Species Account Number 588. The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca, NY: Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology; Retrieved 3/25/2008 from The Birds of North America Online databasePicoides arcticus and Picoides tridactylus ). American Museum Novitiates. 2547:1-42.Picoides arcticus , predation on Monochamus oregonensis . Pan-Pacific Entomologist 41(3)162-164.
Web Search Engines for Articles on "American Three-toed Woodpecker"
Additional Sources of Information Related to "Birds"
