Search Field Guide
Advanced Search
MT Gov Logo
Montana Field Guide

Montana Field Guides

Barn Owl - Tyto alba

Native Species

Global Rank: G5
State Rank: S4
(see State Rank Reason below)

Agency Status


External Links

Listen to an Audio Sample
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
    Barn Owl (Tyto alba) Conservation Status Review
    Review Date = 01/27/2009
    Population Size

    ScoreU - Unknown


    Range Extent

    ScoreF - 20,000-200,000 km squared (about 8,000-80,000 square miles)

    Comment165997 square kilometers based on Natural Heritage Program range maps

    Area of Occupancy

    ScoreF - 500-2,000 km squared (about 125,000-500,000 acres)

    Comment1120 square kilometers based on GAP predicted model.

    Long-term Trend

    ScoreE - Relatively Stable (±25% change)

    CommentSpecies appears to be increasing in Montana in recent years and intolerance to cold is probably a key limiting factor so species is either stable within +/- 25% or increasing.

    Short-term Trend

    ScoreE - Stable. Population, range, area occupied, and/or number or condition of occurrences unchanged or remaining within ±10% fluctuation

    CommentNo real trend data available, but species seems to be expanding northward so is at least stable within +/- 10%


    ScoreG - Slightly threatened. Threats, while recognizable, are of low severity, or affecting only a small portion of the population or area.

    CommentVehicle collisions may be greatest threat to the species in Montana with poisoning as an additional concern.

    SeverityLow - Low but nontrivial reduction of species population or reversible degradation or reduction of habitat in area affected, with recovery expected in 10-50 years.

    CommentSpecies uses a wide variety of open habitats near human activities.

    ScopeLow - 5-20% of total population or area affected

    CommentSpecies uses a wide variety of open habitats near human activities.

    ImmediacyLow - Threat is likely to be operational within 5-20 years.

    CommentThreats not well understood.

    Intrinsic Vulnerability

    ScoreC - 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

    ScoreC - Moderate. Generalist. Broad-scale or diverse (general) habitat(s) or other abiotic and/or biotic factors are used or required by the species but some key requirements are scarce in the generalized range of the species within the area of interest.

    CommentOpen habitats, but very widespread in these.

General Description
A medium-sized owl, the Barn Owl is approximately 38 cm (16 inches) in length with a wingspan of 106 cm. They have broad, rounded wings and long legs. The features of dark eyes and a white disk-shaped face rimmed in dark cinnamon are unique to the species. Their head, back, and wings are a pale, tawny, buff color, finely marked with black and white. The tail, which is also tawny and matches the coloration of the wings, is short. The breast is white as are the sparsely feathered legs. The bill is light colored and the lower legs, feet and toes are a light gray, with dark gray claws (Marti 1992). True to most owls, the female is larger than the male (females average 34 to 40 cm, males are 32 to 38 cm) (Marti 1992). The breast of the female is slightly darker in coloration than that of the male and is sometimes heavily spotted (Marti 1992).

Juveniles resemble adults. Males younger than one year may have buff coloration on the breast (whereas adult males almost always lack such coloration) but are not as heavily speckled as females (Bloom 1978).

Vocalizations of the Barn Owl include a long hissing shriek "csssssshhH" (Sibley 2000) or an advertising call, identified as a drawn-out gargling scream "karr-r-r-r-r-ick" (Marti 1992).

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
The white, heart-shaped face with dark eyes, light breast, and tawny-buff back distinguish this species from other owls. The Barn Owl lacks ear tuffs, yellow eyes, and breast barring found in other owl species (Marti 1992, Sibley 2000). Barn Owls may be confused with Short-eared Owls in Montana but Barn Owls are much paler in color and have dark eyes.

Species Range
Montana Range Range Descriptions


Western Hemisphere Range


Observations in Montana Natural Heritage Program Database
Number of Observations: 106

(Click on the following maps and charts to see full sized version) Map Help and Descriptions
Relative Density


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)

Little information is available on the migratory habits of this species, particularly in the western portion of its range (Marti 1992).

One report for the southeast corner of the state indicates the bird observed was foraging over shrub-steppe habitat (Montana Bird Distribution Committee 2012). Other specific information on habitat use in Montana is not documented, although it is likely the Barn Owl uses habitat similar to that which is used where the species is more common: open grassland, marsh, pasture lands, croplands, and hayfields.

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:
    1. 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);
    2. Evaluating structural characteristics and distribution of each ecological system relative to the species' range and habitat requirements;
    3. Examining the observation records for each species in the state-wide point observation database associated with each ecological system;
    4. 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: 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.

Food Habits
No food habit information on Barn Owls is available in Montana. Information from other regions of the species' range state the main prey of the Barn Owl is small mammals (Microtus is principal prey in many areas); Blarina, Thomomys, Spermophilus, Perognathus, Dipodomys, and Peromyscus are locally important and sometimes birds are taken when small mammals are scarce. Introduced rodents provide a majority of the food source in some urban areas and (with bats and birds) in the West Indies. This owl hunts mainly by quartering flights 1.5 to 4.5 meters above the ground (Marti 1989). In northern and eastern North America, the shrew component of the diet has declined over the past several decades; in the northern and central range, the percentage of exotic rats and mice has increased, probably due to human-induced changes in habitats (Clark and Bunck 1991). As much as 5.6 kilometers may be traveled between a nest site and foraging areas, although distances within 1.6 kilometers are more usual (Colvin 1984, Hegdal and Blaskiewicz 1984, Rosenburg 1986).

Typical foraging is done with a relatively low quartering flight that includes frequent hovering intervals (Honer 1963, Burton 1973, Karalus and Eckert 1974, Marti 1974, Rudolph 1978, Bunn et al. 1982, Mikkola 1983, Rosenburg 1986). Some individuals also hunt frequently from a perch, especially along field edges (Byrd 1982, Rosenburg 1986). Highly nocturnal, this owl has extremely keen hearing (Payne 1971, Konishi 1973) and night vision (Dice 1945, Marti 1974). Its ability to capture prey by hearing alone (Payne 1971) is especially advantageous when hunting animals such as voles (Microtus spp.) and shrews (Soricidae), species that are often concealed from view as they travel in runways beneath grass cover.

Numerous pellet analyses throughout north temperate North America and Europe have identified microtines as the primary prey (Ticehurst 1935, Wilson 1938, Pearson and Pearson 1947, Wallace 1948, Campbell et al. 1987, Marti 1988). The Meadow Vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus) is the most important prey animal in the northeastern U.S. and the Short-tailed Shrew (Blarina brevicauda) is an important secondary prey. By frequency, Meadow Voles typically comprise 60 to 90% of the diet (Boyd and Shriner 1954, Rosenburg 1986). The Marsh Rice Rat (Oryzomys palustris) is occasionally an important prey animal in coastal areas (Blem and Pagels 1973, Colvin 1984). In the southern U.S., the Cotton Rat (Sigmodon hispidus) is the primary prey (Baumgartner and Baumgartner 1944, Otteni et al. 1972, Byrd 1982). The foraging behavior of the Barn Owl, which has been closely studied (Colvin 1980, 1984), indicates that prey of a particular size (approximately 40 to 60 grams), provides the most energy efficient diet. The average weights of the Meadow Vole, Marsh Rice Rat, Cotton Rat, and Norway Rat (Rattus norvegicus) juveniles fall into this size range.

The Barn Owl shows greater diet diversity 1) in areas with relatively low microtine or Cotton Rat availability (Ticehurst 1935, Hawbecker 1945, Pearson and Pearson 1947, Glue 1967, Blem and Pagels 1973); 2) during times of poor microtine availability (Fitch 1947, Wallace 1948, Glue 1967, Bethge and Hayo 1979); and 3) when non-microtine prey are readily available (Evans and Emlen 1947, Klaas et al. 1978, Rosenburg 1986). These studies identified birds (mostly blackbirds and sparrows), Short-tailed Shrews, Least Shrews (Cryptotis parva), House Mice (Mus musculus), and Norway Rats as relatively important prey in such situations.

Ecological information is currently unavailable for Barn Owls in the state. Generally, individuals range over large areas; mean home range size, based on the minimum home range method (Mohr and Stumpf 1966) has been reported as 355 hectares in southern Texas (Byrd 1982), 757 hectares and 921 hectares in southwestern New Jersey (Colvin 1984, Hegdal and Blaskiewicz 1984), 414 hectares in eastern Virginia (Rosenburg 1986), 850 hectares in Virginia (Byrd and Johnston 1991), and 198 hectares in western Nebraska (Gubanyi 1989). Overlap of individual home ranges is common, particularly where nest sites and prey are abundant (Smith et al. 1974, Colvin 1984, Rosenburg 1986).

Young disperse widely from natal areas, commonly more than 80 kilometers, with distances of up to 1900 kilometers documented, facilitating colonization of new areas. Juveniles in the northern U.S. migrated south but generally returned to nest somewhere within 50 to 320 kilometers of their natal sites (Stewart 1952, Marti 1990). Cases of dispersal greater than 320 kilometers from natal sites have also been documented (Ehresman et al. 1989). Although Barn Owls may return to breed relatively close to their natal areas, they do exhibit broad dispersal behavior, are very successful at colonizing new areas, and individuals frequently become established great distances away.

During prolonged low temperatures and snow cover Barn Owls are susceptible to starvation (Marti and Wagner 1985). In Utah, most adults survived only one breeding season (Marti 1989). Disease, parasites, and predation are natural factors that may, in part, limit populations. This species of owl appears to be resistant to many diseases that infect other raptors (Schulz 1986). In California, diseases documented include tuberculosis, aspergillosis, and trichomoniasis (Schulz 1986). Toxoplasmosis and eastern equine encephalitis have been detected in New Jersey, although no impact to the birds was apparent (Colvin and Hegdal 1986, 1987). Salmonellosis has been recorded in Pennsylvania (Locke and Newman 1970) and New Jersey (Kirkpatrick and Colvin 1986). Kirkpatrick and Colvin (1986) found Salmonella-positive nestlings at five of the 25 New Jersey nest sites examined, and reported that all infected young apparently fledged.

Dipteran ectoparasites and lice have been found on Barn Owls (Schulz 1986, Kirkpatrick 1989). The endoparasites Trypanosoma, Capillaria, and Porrocaecum have been identified from the feces of New Jersey owls (Colvin and Hegdal 1986).

During the non-breeding season, Barn Owls may be found solitary or in pairs.

Reproductive Characteristics
The first recorded Barn Owl nest in Montana was discovered in Carbon County, near Joliet, in 1989 (Holt et al., 1992). Nests have been reported since then in the Bitterroot Valley near Victor (1995), along the Yellowstone near Miles City (2014), and, between 2006 and 2013, fourteen nests were confirmed in the Mission Valley (another six suspected) during surveys by the Owl Research Institute (

Reproductive information provided is from studies and sources in other areas of the species' range. These studies indicate nesting takes place in cavities without any nesting material or occasionally lined with a scattering of owl pellets (Baicich and Harrison 2005). The Barn Owl usually lays four to seven (Otteni et al. 1972, Reese 1972, Smith et al. 1974) long, subelliptical to elliptical smooth, glossy white eggs (42 x 33 mm); a clutch can sometimes consist of one to 13 eggs (Bent 1938, Parker and Castrale 1990, Baicich and Harrison 2005). The size of the clutch usually depends on local conditions and increases with food supply and after mild winters in some areas.

Barn Owls nest in late winter, spring, and/or early summer in most of North America, and throughout the year in Texas. Nests with eggs and/or young have been found in the northeastern U.S. during every month of the year (Poole 1930, Bent 1938, Scott 1950, Stewart 1952, C. Rosenburg, unpubl. data), with peak egg production occurring during mid-April (Colvin 1984, Byrd and Rosenburg 1986). Second clutches are typically laid between June and September (Wallace 1948, Keith 1964, Reese 1972, Soucy 1979). Across most of their range, Barn Owls usually produce one brood per year, but have been recorded with as many as three broods in one year. Eggs are usually laid two days apart and hatch asynchronously since incubation starts after the laying of the first egg (Wallace 1948, Smith et al. 1974). Incubation is by the female, and lasts 21 to 24 days for a single egg, 29 to 34 days for a full clutch (Smith et al. 1974, Marshall et al. 1986). The peak of hatching in the Northeast occurs in mid-May (Colvin 1984, Byrd and Rosenburg 1986).

The female broods and feeds the young, while the male brings food. Young can fly at 50 to 55 days. The juveniles may return to roost at the nest for several (seven to eight) weeks before dispersing (Otteni et al. 1972, Smith et al. 1974, Marti 1990, Marti 1992). Peak fledging occurs in mid- to late July (Colvin 1984, Byrd and Rosenburg 1986). The male may care for fledged young as the female begins a second clutch. In northern Utah, 71% of all nesting attempts yielded at least one fledgling; reproductive success and productivity were reduced following winters with particularly low temperatures and long periods of deep snow cover (Marti 1994). Breeding density depends on availability of nest sites and on food supply. See Marti (1989) for information on breeding phenology in different areas.

The Barn Owl matures and breeds within its first year (Stewart 1952, Maestrelli 1973, Marti 1990). The species is typically monogamous, but Colvin and Hegdal (1989) reported that as many as 10% of the adult males in their New Jersey study area may be polygynous.

No management activities in Montana specific to Barn Owl are documented. Barn Owls are a Species of Management Concern in Region 6 (USFWS 1995).

  • Literature Cited AboveLegend:   View Online Publication
    • Baicich, P.J. and C.J.O. Harrison. 2005. A guide to the nests, eggs and nestlings of North American birds. Second edition. Academic Press, New York.
    • Baumgartner, A.M., and F.M. Baumgartner. 1944. Hawks and owls in Oklahoma 1939-1942: food habits and population changes. Wilson Bulletin 56:209-15.
    • Bent, A.C. 1938. Life histories of North American birds of prey. Part 2. U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 170. 482 pp., 92 pls.
    • Bethge, E., and L. Hayo. 1979. Feeding ecology and breeding behavior of a barn owl population in the Saarland, West Germany. Abstract. Anz. Ornithol. Ges. Bayern 18:161-70.
    • Blem, C. R., and J. F. Pagels. 1973. Feeding habits of an insular barn owl. Virginia J. Sci. 24:212-24.
    • Bloom, P.H. 1978. Molt and age-sex determination of the barn owl in California. University of California, Berkeley, CA. Unpublished manuscript. 7 pp.
    • Boyd, E.M., and J. Shriner. 1954. Nesting and food of the barn owl in Hampshire County, Massachusetts. Auk 71:199-201.
    • Bunn, D. S., A. B. Warburton, and R. D. S. Wilson. 1982. The barn owl. Buteo Books, Vermillion, South Dakota. 246 (or 264?) pp.
    • Burton, J.A. 1973. Owls of the world: their evolution, structure and ecology. 1st ed., E.P. Dutton & Co., Inc., New York, NY.
    • Byrd, C. L. 1982. Home range, habitat and prey utilization of the barn owl in south Texas. Texas A and I University, Kingsville, Texas. M.S. thesis. 64 pp.
    • Byrd, M.A. and D.W. Johnston. 1991. Birds. In: K. Terwilliger, coord. Virginia's endangered species: proceedings of a symposium. p. 477-537. McDonald and Woodward Publishing Company, Blacksburg, Virginia.
    • Byrd, M.A., and C.P. Rosenburg. 1986. Barn owl investigations. Pages 56-67 in Virginia Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Investigations, 1986 Annual Report. Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fish., Richmond, Virginia. Unpublished.
    • Campbell, R. W., D. A. Manuwal, and A. S. Harestad. 1987. food habits of the common barn-owl in British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Zoology 65:578-86.
    • Clark, D.R., Jr., and C.M. Bunck. 1991. Trends in North American small mammals found in common barn-owl (Tyto alba) dietary studies. Canadian Journal of Zoology 69:3093-3102.
    • Colvin, B. A. 1980. Feeding strategy and habitat requirements of the barn owl in Ohio. John Carroll University, Cleveland, Ohio. M.S. thesis. 97 pp.
    • Colvin, B. A., P. L. Hegdal, and W. B. Hackson. 1984. A comprehensive approach to research and management of common barn owl populations. Pages 270-82 in W. C. McComb (editor). Proceeding of workshop of management of nongame species and ecological communites. University of Kentucky, Lexinton, Kentucky.
    • Colvin, B.A., and P.L. Hegdal. 1986. Summary of 1986 field activities. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wildlife Reservation Center, Denver, Colorado. Unpublished report. 11 pp.
    • Colvin, B.A., and P.L. Hegdal. 1987. Summary of 1987 field activities. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wildlife Reservation Center, Denver, Colorado. Unpublished report. 9 pp.
    • Dice, L.R. 1945. Minimum intensities of illumination under which owls can find dead prey by sight. American Naturalist 79:385-416.
    • Ehresman, B.L., D.A. Reeves, and K.P. Schlarbaum. 1989. Post release survival and movements of captively reared common barn-owls in Iowa. Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Des Moines, Iowa. Unpublished report. 24 pp.
    • Evans, F.C., and J.T. Emlen, Jr. 1947. Ecological notes on the prey selected by a barn owl. Condor 49:3-9.
    • Fitch, H.S. 1947. Predation by owls in the Sierran foothills of California. Condor 49:137-151.
    • Glue, D.E. 1967. Prey taken by the barn owl in England and Wales. Bird Study 14:169-83.
    • Gubanyi, J.A. 1989. Habitat use and diet analysis of breeding common barn-owls in western Nebraska. University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska. M.S. thesis. 86 pp.
    • Hawbecker, A. C. 1945. Food habits of the barn owl. Condor 47:161-6.
    • Holt, D. W., K. Hicks, and W. D. Norton. 1992. First nest record for the Barn Owl in Montana. Prairie Naturalist 24(2):121-122.
    • Honer, M. R. 1963. Observations on the barn owl in the Netherlands in relation to its ecology and population fluctuations. Ardea 51:158-95.
    • Karalus, K.E. and A.W. Eckert. 1974. The owls of North America (north of Mexico). Doubleday, Garden City, N.Y. 278 pp.
    • Keith, A.R. 1964. A thirty year summary of the nesting of the barn owl on Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts. Bird-Banding 35:22-31.
    • Kirkpatrick, C.E. 1989. Ectoparasitic Fly Carnus hemapterus (Diptera: Carnidae) in a Nesting Population of Common Barn-Owls. Journal of Medical Entomology 26:109-12.
    • Kirkpatrick, C.E., and B.A. Colvin. 1986. Salmonella spp. in nestling common barn-owls from southwestern New Jersey. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 22:340-3.
    • Klaas, E.E., S.N. Wiemeyer, H.M. Ohlendorf, and D.M Swineford. 1978. Organochlorine residues, eggshell thickness, and nest success in barn owls from the Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries 1:46-53.
    • Konishi, M. 1973. Locatable and nonlocatable acoustic signals for barn owls. American Naturalist 107:775-85.
    • Locke, L.N., and J.A. Newman. 1970. Paratyphoid in a barn owl. Chesapeake Sci. 11:67-8.
    • Maestrelli, J.R. 1973. Propagation of barn owl in captivity. Auk 90:426-8.
    • Marks, J.S., P. Hendricks, and D. Casey. 2016. Birds of Montana. Arrington, VA. Buteo Books. 659 pages.
    • Marshall, J.D., C.H. Hager, and G., McKee. 1986. The barn owl egg: weight loss characteristics, fresh weight prediction and incubation period. Raptor Res. 20:108-12.
    • Marti, C. D. 1974. Feeding ecology of four sympatric owls. Condor 76:45-61.
    • Marti, C. D. 1988. A long-term study of food-niche dynamics in the common barn-owl: comparisons within and between populations. Canadian Journal of Zoology 66:1803-12.
    • Marti, C. D. 1994. Barn Owl reproduction: Patterns and variation near the limit of the species’ distribution. Condor 96:468-484.
    • Marti, C. D. and P. W. Wagner. 1985. Winter mortality in Common Barn-Owls and its effect on population density and reproduction. Condor 87:111-115.
    • Marti, C.D. 1989. Common barn-owl (Tyto alba). Biographies of North American birds, American Ornithology Union. Draft copy of proposed publication. 12 pp.
    • Marti, C.D. 1990. Sex and age dimorphism in the barn owl and a test of mate choice. Auk 107:246-54.
    • Mikkola, H. 1983. Owls of Europe. Buteo Books, Vermillion, South Dakota. 400 pp.
    • Mohr, C.O. and W.A. Stumpf. 1966. Comparison of methods for calculating areas of animal activity. Journal of Wildlife Management. 30(2):293-304.
    • Montana Bird Distribution Committee. 2012. P.D. Skaar's Montana bird distribution. 7th Edition. Montana Audubon, Helena, Montana. 208 pp. + foldout map.
    • Otteni, L.C., E.C. Bolen, and C. Cottam. 1972. Predator prey relationships and reproduction of the barn owl in southern Texas. Wilson Bulletin 84:434-8.
    • Parker, A.R., and J.S. Castrale. 1990. Barn owl survey and management efforts in 1989. Wildl. Manage. and Res. Notes No. 484. Indiana Department of Natural Resources, Indianapolis, Indiana. 9 pp.
    • Payne, R. S. 1971. Acoustic location of prey by barn owls. Journal of Experimental Biology 54:535-73.
    • Pearson, O.P., and A.K. Pearson. 1947. Owl predation in Pennsylvania with notes on the small mammals of Delaware County. Journal of Mammalogy 28:137-47.
    • Poole, E.L. 1930. Winter nesting of the barn owl. Auk 47:84.
    • Reese, J.G. 1972. A Chesapeake barn owl population. Auk 89:106-14.
    • Rosenburg, C.P. 1986. Barn owl habitat and prey use in agricultural eastern Virginia. College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia. M.S. thesis. 114 pp.
    • Schulz, T. A. 1986. The conservation and rehabilitation of the common barn owl. Wildl. Rehab. 5:146-66.
    • Scott, F.R. 1950. Winter Season - 1949-1950 - Virginia. Raven 21:100-1.
    • Sibley, D.A. 2000. The Sibley guide to birds. National Audubon Society and Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, NY. 544 pp.
    • Smith, D.G., C.R. Wilson, and H.H. Frost. 1974. History and ecology of a colony of barn owls in Utah. Condor 76:131-6.
    • Soucy, L.J., Jr. 1979. Some observations on nesting barn owls in New Jersey. N. Amer. Bird Bander 4:164-5.
    • Stewart, P. A. 1952. Dispersal, breeding behavior, and longevity of banded barn owls in North America. Auk 69:227-45.
    • Ticehurst, M. A. 1935. On the food of the barn-owl and its bearing on barn-owl population Ibis 5:329-35.
    • Wallace, G.J. 1948. The barn owl in Michigan, its distribution, natural history, and food habits. Michigan State College Agricutlral Exp. Sta., Tech. Bull. 208, East Lansing, Michigan. 61 pp.
    • Wilson, K. A. 1938. Owl studies at Ann Arbor, Michigan. Auk 55:187-97.
  • Additional ReferencesLegend:   View Online Publication
    Do you know of a citation we're missing?
    • American Ornithologists Union. 1983. Checklist of North American birds, 6th Edition. 877 PP.
    • American Ornithologists’ Union [AOU]. 1998. Check-list of North American birds, 7th edition. American Ornithologists’ Union, Washington, D.C. 829 p.
    • Ault, J.W. 1971. A quantitative estimate of barn owl nesting habitat quality. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK. 40 pp.
    • Bendel, P. R., and G. D. Therres. 1988. Barn owl nest box use in saltmarsh and offshore habitats. Maryland Forest, Park and Wildlife Service, Program Report No. 1, Wye Mills, Maryland. 11 pp.
    • Brealey, C. J., C. H. Walker, and B. C. Baldwin. 1980. A-esterase activites in relation to the differential toxicity of pirimiphos-methyl to birds and mammals. Pesticide Science 11:546-54.
    • Brett, J. 1987. Northeast region report. Eyas 10:18-22.
    • Butcher, G. S., and J. D. Lowe. 1990. Population trends of twenty species of migratory birds as revealed by Christmas Bird Counts, 1983-1987. Final Report submitted to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Cornell University Ithaca, New York. 64 pp.
    • Colvin, B. A. 1984. Barn owl foraging behavior and secondary poisoning hazard from rodenticide use on farms. Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio. 326 pp. Ph.D. dissertation.
    • Colvin, B. A. 1985. Common barn owl population decline in Ohio and the relationship to agricultural trends. Journal of Field Ornithology 56:224-35.
    • Colvin, B. A., and E. B. McLean. 1986. Food habits and prey specificity of the common barn owl in Ohio. Ohio Journal of Science 86:76-80.
    • Colvin, B. A., and P. L. Hegdal. 1986. Comments on barn owl nest boxes. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wildlife Reservation Center, Denver, Colorado. Unpublished report. 6 pp.
    • Colvin, B. A., and P. L. Hegdal. 1988. Summary of 1988 field activities. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wildlife Reservation Center, Denver, Colorado. Unpublished report. 8 pp.
    • Colvin, B. A., and P. L. Hegdal. 1989. Summary of 1989 field activities. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wildlife Reservation Center, Denver, Colorado. Unpublished report. 6 pp.
    • Cook, R. P. 1985. Barn-owls coming back to Gateway. Park Sci. 5:20-1.
    • Duffy, K. E. 1985. Fall migration of barn owls at Cape May Point, New Jersey. Pages 193-205 in Hawk Migration Conference IV Proceedings. Hawk Migration Assoc. N. Amer., Kempton, Pennsylvania.
    • Duffy, K., and P. Kerlinger. 1992. Autumn owl migration at Cape May Point, New Jersey. Wilson Bull. 104:312-320.
    • Ehresman, B. L. 1984. Common barn-owl restoration in Iowa. Wild. Rehab. 14:10-9.
    • Ehrlich, P., D. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1988. The birder’s handbook: a field guide to the natural history of North American birds. Simon and Schuster Inc. New York. 785 pp.
    • Errington, P. L. 1931. Winter killing of barn owls in Wisconsin. Wilson Bulletin 43:60.
    • Gillihan, SW. and T. VerCauteren. 2015. Pocket Guide to Prairie Birds. Brighton, CO: Bird Conservancy of the Rockies. 91 p.
    • Glue, D. E. 1971. Ringing recovery circumstances of small birds of prey. Bird Study 18:137-46.
    • Glue, D. E. 1974. Food of the barn owl in Britain and Ireland. Bird Study 21:200-10.
    • Gwynn, J. V. 1987. Wildlife disease investigation. Pages 98-106 in Virginia Wildlife Investigations. Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fish., Richmond, Virginia.
    • Hands, H. M., R. D. Drobney, and M. R. Ryan. 1989. Status of the common barn-owl in the northcentral United States. Missouri Coop. Fish Wildl. Res. Unit Rep. 19 pp.
    • Hays, R., R.L. Eng, and C.V. Davis (preparers). 1984. A list of Montana birds. Helena, MT: MT Dept. of Fish, Wildlife & Parks.
    • Hegdal, P. L., and R. W. Blaskiewicz. 1984. Evaluation of the Potential Hazard to Barn Owl of Talon (Brodifacoum bait) Used to Control Rats and House Mice. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 3:167-79.
    • Hejl, S.J., R.L. Hutto, C.R. Preston, and D.M. Finch. 1995. The effects of silvicultural treatments on forest birds in the Rocky Mountains. pp. 220-244 In: T.E. Martin and D.M. Finch (eds). Ecology and Management of Neotropical Migratory Birds. New York, NY: Oxford Univ. Press. 489 p.
    • Henny, C. J. 1972. An analysis of the population dynamics of selected avian species. With special reference to changes during the modern pesticide era. Wildl. Res. Rpt. 1, U. S. Dept. Int.
    • Henny, C. J., L. J. Blus, and T. E. Kaiser. 1984. Heptachlor seed treatment contaminates hawks, owls, and eagles of Columbia Basin, Oregon. Raptor Res. 18:41-8.
    • Hill, E. G., and V. M. Menderhall. 1980. Secondary poisoning of barn owl with famphur, an organophosphate insecticide. Journal of Wildlife Management 44:676-81.
    • Johnsgard, P.A. 1992. Birds of the Rocky Mountains with particular reference to national parks in the northern Rocky Mountain region. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. xi + 504 pp.
    • Johnston, D. W. 1978. Organochlorine pesticide residues in Florida birds of prey, 1969-1976. Pesticides Monitoring Journal 12:8-15.
    • Joslin, Gayle, and Heidi B. Youmans. 1999. Effects of recreation on Rocky Mountain wildlife: a review for Montana. [Montana]: Montana Chapter of the Wildlife Society.
    • Keran, D. 1981. The incidence of man-caused and natural mortalities to raptors. Raptor Research 15:108-12.
    • Knight, R. L., and R. E. Jackman. 1984. Food-niche relationships between great horned owls and common barn-owls in Eastern Washington. Auk 101:175-9.
    • Lenard, S., J. Carlson, J. Ellis, C. Jones, and C. Tilly. 2003. P. D. Skaar's Montana bird distribution, 6th edition. Montana Audubon, Helena, MT. 144 pp.
    • Lenton, G.M. 1984. The feeding and breeding ecology of barn owls Tyto alba in Peninsular Malaysia. Ibis 126:551-75.
    • Lerg, J. M. 1984. Status of the barn owl in Michigan. Jack-Pine Warbler 62:39-48.
    • Lovari, S., A. Renzoni, and R. Fondi. 1976. The predatory habits of the barn owl in relation to vegetation cover. Bollettin Di Zoologica 43:173-91.
    • Marti, C. D. 1973. Ten years of barn owl prey data from a Colorado nest site. Wilson Bulletin 85:85-6.
    • Marti, C. D. 1989. Status report: the common barn-owl. Eyas 12:7-9.
    • Marti, C. D., P. W. Wagner, and K. W. Denne. 1979. Nest boxes for the management of Barn Owls. Wildlife Society Bulletin 7:145-148.
    • Marti, C.D., and J.S. Marks. 1987. Medium-sized owls. Western Raptor Management Symposium and workshop, Tech. Ser. 12:124-33.
    • Marti, Carl D., Alan F. Poole, and L. R. Bevier. 2005. Barn Owl (Tyto alba). Species Account Number 001. 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 database
    • Martin, D. J. 1973. Burrow digging by barn owls. Bird-Banding 42:59-60.
    • Matteson, S., and L. R. Petersen. 1988. Wisconsin common barn-owl managemnt plan. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Endangered Resources. Rep. 37, Madison, Wisconsin. 128 pp.
    • Mendelssohn, H., and U. Paz. 1977. Mass mortality of birds of prey caused by azodrin an organophosphte insecticide. Biological Conservation 11:163-70.
    • Mendenhall, V. M., and L. F. Pank. 1980. Secondary poisoning of owls by aniicoagulant rodenticides. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 8:311-5.
    • Mendenhall, V. M., E. E. Klaas, and M. A. R. McLane. 1983. Breeding success of barn owls fed low levels of DDE and Dieldrin. Archives of Envirnonmental Contamination and Toxicology 12:235-40.
    • Millsap, B. A., and P. A. Millsap. 1987. Burrow nesting by common barn-owls in north central Colorado. Condor 89:668-70.
    • Nero, R.W. 1995. Barn Owl nesting in Manitoba. Blue Jay 53(3):159-166.
    • Newton, I. 1979. Population ecology of raptors. Buteo Books, Vermillion, South Dakota.
    • Newton, I., I. Wyllie, and A. Asher. 1991. Mortality causes in British barn owls Tyto alba, with a discussion of aldrin-dieldrin poisoning. Ibis 133:162-169.
    • Newton, I., Wyllie, I., and L. Dale. 1997. Mortality causes in British Barn Owls (Tyto alba), based on 1,101 carcasses examined during 1963-1996. pp. 299-307 In: Biology and conservation of owls in the Northern Hemisphere (J.R. Duncan, D.H. Johnson, and T.H. Nicholls, eds.). 2nd International Symposium, Winnipeg, MA. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report NC-190.
    • Phillips, R. S. 1951. Food of the barn owl in Hancock County, Ohio. Auk 68:239-41.
    • Pickwell, G. 1948. Barn owl growth and behaviorisms. Auk 65:359-73.
    • Pitkin, P. and L. Quattrini. 2017. Pocket Guide to Sagebrush Birds. Bird Conservancy of the Rockies and Point Blue Conservation Science. 68 p.
    • Rudolph, S. G. 1978. Predation ecology of co-existing great horned and barn owls. Wil. Bull. 90(1)134-137.
    • Russell, R. W., et al. 1991. A visual study of migrating owls at Cape May Point, New Jersey. Condor 93:55-61.
    • Schulz, T. A., and D. Yasuda. 1985. Ecology and management of the common barn owl in the California Central Valley. In Proceedings of the 1985 Raptor Research foundation meeting. Raptor Research Foundation. (abstract).
    • Scott, F. R. 1959. Notes on nesting barn owls on Virginia's Eastern Shore. Raven 30:95.
    • Shrub, M. 1970. Birds and farming today. Bird Study 17:123-44.
    • Sibley, D. 2014. The Sibley guide to birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, NY. 598 pp.
    • Skaar, P. D., D. L. Flath, and L. S. Thompson. 1985. Montana bird distribution. Montana Academy of Sciences Monograph 3(44): ii-69.
    • Skaar, P.D. 1969. Birds of the Bozeman latilong: a compilation of data concerning the birds which occur between 45 and 46 N. latitude and 111 and 112 W. longitude, with current lists for Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, impinging Montana counties and Yellowstone National Park. Bozeman, MT. 132 p.
    • Smith, D. G., and C. D. Marti. 1976. Distributional status and ecology of barn owls in Utah. Raptor Res. 10:33-44.
    • Soucy, L. J., Jr. 1980. Nest boxes for raptors: a helpful management technique. New Jersey Audubon 80:18-20.
    • Soucy, L. J., Jr. 1985. Bermuda recovery of a common barn-owl banded in New Jersey. Journal of Field Ornithology 56:274.
    • Speirs, J. M. 1940. Mortality of barn owls at Champaign, Illinois. Auk 57:571.
    • Stewart, P. A. 1952. Winter mortality of barn owls in central Ohio. Wilson Bulletin 64:164-6.
    • Stewart, P. A. 1980. Population trends of barn owls in North America. American Birds 34:698-700.
    • Stotts, V. D. 1958. Offshore duck blinds: their use by wildlife and how to improve them for wildlife use. Maryland Conservationist 36:227-36.
    • Taylor, D.M. and C.H. Trost. 1987. The status of historically rare of unrecorded birds in Idaho. Unpublished manuscript. 68 p.
    • U.S. Forest Service. 1991. Forest and rangeland birds of the United States: Natural history and habitat use. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Agricultural Handbook 688. 625 pages.
    • Webster, J. A. 1973. Seasonal variation in the mammal contents of barn owl casting. Bird Study 20:185-96.
    • Wright, P.L. 1996. Status of rare birds in Montana, with comments on known hybrids. Northwestern Naturalist 77(3):57-85.
    • Ziesemer, F. 1980. Breeding density and breeding success of barn owls in a study area before and after the erection of nest boxes. Die vogelwelt 101:61-6. Abstract.
  • Web Search Engines for Articles on "Barn Owl"
  • Additional Sources of Information Related to "Birds"
Login Logout
Citation for data on this website:
Barn Owl — Tyto alba.  Montana Field Guide.  .  Retrieved on , from