Restoration Potential: Currently reported as common and stable throughout its range with only a few speculations of decline. Population restoration is currently not an issue. However, efforts should be made to maintain populations, thus eliminating the need restoration in the future.
Preserve Selection and Design Considerations: Typically found in relatively small tracts of forest, being absent only from areas less than 1-5 ha (Bushman and Therres 1988). However, block sizes of greater than or equal to 100 ha are probably necessary for maximum densities and/or population sizes (Bushman and Therres 1988).
At this time, specific habitat requirements are not documented. However, suggestions for conserving area-sensitive birds in forest landscapes were offered by Robbins et al. (1989). They concluded that forest areas under 10 ha are unsuitable and 3,000 ha is the minimum forest size that may retain all the species of forest-interior avifauna of eastern North America. However, critical habitat features that influence species success have not been thoroughly investigated (Martin 1992). These habitat features will have a great influence on future preserve designs.
Management Requirements: May occupy clearcut areas as early as 12 years after cutting if some small trees are left uncut. Group selection logging, which creates a mosaic of even-aged patches, may create favorable conditions. Tolerates small or narrow clearcuts, thinning of "overmature" trees, and selection cutting (Bushman and Therres 1988).
Developing and implementing conservation plans will be dependent upon understanding the relationships between landscape structure and the distribution and probability of extinction of local species (Freemark and Collins 1992, Reed 1992). Past management and research investigations correlated landscape features with species presence and abundance. Presence and abundance information does not directly correlate with habitat features. However, species fitness is directly correlated with habitat features by supplying resources (Martin 1992). Martin (1992) suggested that management plans need to consider specific habitat features that have a direct effect on fitness through reproduction and survival.
Reed (1992) suggested that a ranking scheme is needed for future management efforts and research needs. He stated that a scheme that is biologically based (i.e., based on characteristics of species abundance and distribution) can be used to organize research and prioritize conservation efforts. Rankings can include habitat information from breeding and wintering ranges and can be integrated with other ranking systems, such as economic considerations.
Management Research Needs: In order to understand specific management needs, additional life history information is needed. In addition, effects of forest loss and fragmentation need to be addressed. Issues of primary concern are: 1) effects of habitat loss in wintering versus breeding range, 2) specific habitat features (e.g., habitat size, composition, etc) and associated resources that directly influence reproduction and survival, and 3) consequences of those features for coexisting species and any interacting species, and the effects they have on one another (biodiversity approach) (Martin 1992).
Biological Research Needs: Has not been extensively studied in most areas (Senesac 1993). Additional information is needed on breeding behavior, diet and foraging, winter range, and habitat relationships. Is this bird monogamous? How extensive is cowbird parasitism? How many broods per season?