The Piping Plover is a small, stocky, sandy-colored bird resembling a sandpiper that lives on the beaches along the Atlantic Ocean. Fully grown it will reach approximately seven to eight inches in height. The adult has a short and stout bill, yellow-orange legs, a black band across the forehead from eye to eye, and a black ring around the base of its neck. Males are often a bit brighter in their coloring than females. The Piping Plover runs in short starts and stops and when still blends easily into the sandy beaches where it feeds and nests. Because of this, it is often heard before it is seen, a plaintive bell-like whistle from which its name is derived. Plovers are foragers feeding on marine worms, crustaceans, and insects they gather from the sand.

After establishing their nesting territories and performing their courtship rituals, a pair of plovers will form a nest out of a shallow depression in the sand, sometimes lined with small stones or shell fragments. The pair lays a clutch of four well-camouflaged eggs which is incubated continuously as parents trade places, hatching in about 25 days. Chicks will fledge and learn to fly about 30 days after hatching. If the first clutch does not survive, the pair may try again, or separate and try again with a new mate, in the same season. These chicks may not fly until late August. At the end of the season plovers may congregate on undisturbed beaches in large groups of up to 100 before flying south in many small groups of about three to six. They may breed the first spring after hatching.

The Piping Plover lives along the Atlantic Coast from Newfoundland to North Carolina from late March till mid-September, when it migrates to more southern beaches ranging from North Carolina to Florida, some even traveling as far south as the Bahamas.

The breeding season begins in late April and extends into late August (7), and young and adult plovers generally return to the same nesting area year after year (8). Males compete with each other for female attention by performing elaborate aerial and ground displays (8) (9). After this, the males scrape nests in the sand, tossing shells and small stones and twigs into them with their beaks and then stand beside them with their wings partially spread and tails fanned, repeating this behaviour until a female indicates interest. Once he has her attention, he continues the courtship ritual by performing a high-stepping "dance”, and the female eventually selects one of the scrapes to lay her eggs in (8) (9). Most birds remain paired throughout the breeding season but change mates between years, although mate retention from the previous year is fairly frequent (6). The female lays 3-5 (usually 4) speckled sand-coloured eggs that are incubated by both adults for 25-31 days (7), with parents trading places every 30 - 45 minutes (6). Both the eggs and the young birds are well camouflaged. When predators or other intruders come too close, the young squat motionless on the sand while the parents attempt to attract the attention of intruders to themselves, often by feigning a broken wing (4). Gulls, crows, raccoons, foxes and skunks are threats to the eggs and falcons may prey on the adult birds (8). Young often leave the nest after hours of hatching but are tended until they fledge 21 to 35 days later (6). Both adults care for the young, but females commonly stop caring for the young after 14 to 20 days, while males often remain with them until they can fly (8). Females can begin to breed at one year of age and one brood per year is typical, although they are capable of laying several clutches if a nest is destroyed (6). The diet consists of worms, crustaceans, insects, larvae, and molluscs, which are plucked from the sand (4) (7). Chicks begin feeding on smaller sizes of these same foods shortly after they hatch (4).

The piping plover is a small, sandy coloured shorebird that is effectively camouflaged in its preferred beach habitat (2). In spring and summer, a distinctive breeding plumage develops, with a black band appearing across the forehead and encircling the base of the neck (4). At this time, the legs also turn from a light yellow to a bright orange colour and an orange ring appears at the base of the short black beak (5). Piping plovers can also be recognised by their characteristic, plaintive sounding "peep-lo" whistle (2).

Charadrius melodus breeds in the USA and Canada, with the 2001 range-wide breeding census recording 5,945 mature individuals²⁰. Populations occur along the Atlantic coast (a preliminary estimate of 3,350 birds in 2003¹⁶; 52% of the total), in the Great Plains (2,953 birds in 2001¹⁷; 46% of the total) and in the Great Lakes region (110 breeding birds in 2004¹⁸; 2% of the total). Totals in 1991, 1996 and 2001 respectively were 1,892, 2,581 and 2,920 breeding birds on the Atlantic Coast, 2,744, 3,284 and 2,953 in the Prairie Canada/U.S. northern Great Plains, and 32, 48 and 72 in the Great Lakes. These data indicate a total population increase of 8.4% since 1991 but an increase of just 0.2% since 1996. However, it must be noted that these increases are the result of sustained management initiatives, upon which populations remain dependent. Small numbers also nest on St Pierre and Miquelon (to France)¹¹. Less than 60% of birds are recorded in winter^3,7,8,9, from the Carolinas, USA, to Tamaulipas (and patchily Yucatán), Mexico, the Bahamas, Cuba and Turks and Caicos Islands (to UK)⁶, with records from Barbados, Haiti, Dominician Republic, Bermuda (to UK), Jamaica, Puerto Rico (to USA), Virgin Islands (to UK), Virgin Islands (to USA), and St Kitts and Nevis^2,7,10,11. Small numbers in Sonora, north-west Mexico, may represent regular winterers⁸.

Within the U.S the Piping Plover is found along the Atlantic Coast in such states as Florida, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Maine, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New England, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, South Carolina, and North Carolina. Outside of the U.S, the Plover can be mainly found along the Atlantic coast of Canada, and in some of the British Caribbean Islands.

Biogeographic Regions: nearctic (Native ); oceanic islands (Native ); atlantic ocean (Native )

The Atlantic Coast Population of piping plovers nest along beaches in New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, Quebec, southern Maine, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina. These birds winter primarily on the Atlantic Coast from North Carolina to Florida, although some migrate to the Bahamas and West Indies. Surveys completed in 1991 found fewer than 2,500 breeding pairs remained in the United States and Canada. Surveys completed in 1999 estimated the Atlantic population at less than 1400 pairs.

The historic breeding range of the Great Lakes population of piping plover encompasses the Great Lakes' shorelines in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, New York and Ontario. Great Lakes breeding sites are currently restricted to several beaches along Lake Superior and Lake Michigan in northern Michigan. These birds winter primarily on the Gulf Coast, in Texas, Louisiana, Alabama and Florida. Critical habitat for the Great Lakes Piping plover has been designated for breeding habitat along the shorelines of the Great Lakes in New York, Minnesota, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Critical habitat for wintering piping plovers has been designated along the Gulf Coast in Texas, Louisiana, Alabama and Florida. Surveys completed in 2001 reported 32 breeding pairs in the United States.

The current breeding range of the Northern Great Plains population of piping plover extends from alkali wetlands in southeastern Alberta through southern Saskatchewan and Manitoba to Lake of the Woods in southwestern Ontario and northwestern Minnesota, south along major prairie rivers (Yellowstone, Missouri, Niobrara, Platte, and Loup), the Prewitt Reservoir in northeastern Colorado, northwestern Oklahoma, and alkali wetlands in northeastern Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Iowa. These birds winter primarily on the Gulf Coast, in Texas, Louisiana, Alabama and Florida. Critical habitat for the Northern Great Plains piping plover has been designated in areas of Texas, Louisiana, Alabama and Florida for their wintering habitat along the gulf coats; and areas of Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska for breeding habitat. Surveys completed in 2001 estimated 5,938 individuals remained in the United States and Canada.

Canada

Origin: Native

Regularity: Regularly occurring

Currently: Present

Confidence: Confident

Type of Residency: Breeding

United States

Origin: Native

Regularity: Regularly occurring

Currently: Present

Confidence: Confident

Type of Residency: Year-round

Global Range: (200,000 to >2,500,000 square km (about 80,000 to >1,000,000 square miles)) BREEDING: Locally in the northern Great Plains region from southern Alberta, northern Saskatchewan, southern Manitoba, northwestern and (formerly) southwestern Ontario, south to eastern Montana, the Dakotas, southeastern Colorado (Andrews and Righter 1992), Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska; sporadic nesting occurs in Oklahoma; breeding birds are widely distributed in small populations (Haig 1992, Haig and Plissner 1993). Formerly throughout much of the Great Lakes region, now locally only in northern Michigan (Haig 1992, Evers 1992). On the Atlantic coast from Newfoundland, southeastern Quebec, and New Brunswick to North Carolina (Haig 1992); 82 percent of nesting pairs in Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and Virginia (USFWS 1992). See USFWS (1994) for further information on breeding distribution in particular states.

NON-BREEDING: Complete winter distribution is not known. Birds have been reported wintering from North Carolina south to Florida, the Gulf coast states, Mexico, and the Caribbean. About 5 percent of the total North American breeding population and 14 percent of the entire Atlantic coast breeding population winters from North Carolina through Florida. Plovers wintering on the Atlantic coast occurred most frequently in Georgia and least frequently in Florida. Approximately 35 percent of the total breeding population winters along the gulf coast from Florida to Texas and represents 56 percent of the Great Lakes/Great Plains population. Also in small numbers in the Bahamas and Greater Antilles, and probably eastern Mexico. See Nicholls and Baldasarre (1990) and Haig and Plissner (1993) for further information on winter distribution in the southeastern U.S., including listings of important sites.

Historic Range:
U.S.A. (Great Lakes, northern Great Plains, Atlantic and Gulf coasts, PR, VI), Canada, Mexico, Bahamas, West Indies

Very limited distribution. Atlantic and Gulf coasts of United States. Small area of interior United States and Canada.

Breeding occurs in the U.S. and Canada, along the Atlantic coast (Newfoundland to North Carolina) and, inland, from central Canada through the northern Great Plains and the western Great Lakes region (6). During winter, the species is found in the southern U.S. on the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts from North Carolina south to Mexico, and the Bahamas and West Indies (4).

The piping plover is a small Nearctic shorebird approximately 17 centimeters (7 inches) long with a wingspread of about 38 cm (15 in. Wilcox (1959) found that breeding females were slightly heavier than males (55.6 grams vs. 54.9 g), had slightly shorter tail lengths (50.5 millimeters vs. 51.3 mm), but had similar wing lengths. Breeding birds have white underparts, light beige back and crown, white rump, and black upper tail with a white edge. In flight, each wing shows a single, white wing stripe with black highlights at the wrist joints and along the trailing edges. In winter, the birds lose the black bands, the legs fade from orange to pale yellow, and the bill becomes mostly black. Breeding plumage characteristics are a single black breastband, which is often incomplete, and a black bar across the forehead. The black breastband and brow bar are generally more pronounced in breeding males than females. The legs and bill are orange in summer, with a black tip on the bill.

(Stout 1967)

Range mass: 55.6 to 59.4 g.

Average mass: 57 g.

Length: 18 cm

Weight: 55 grams

Length: 17 cm, Wingspan: 38 cm

The piping plover differs from the snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus) in having a thicker bill, generally paler upperparts, and orange rather than dark or grayish feet and legs. It is much paler than other plovers.

Habitat and Ecology

Systems

• Freshwater
• Marine

Charadrius melodus usually nest above the high tide line on coastal beaches, sand flats at the ends of sandpits and barrier islands, gently sloping fore dunes, blowout areas behind primary dunes, sparsely vegetated dunes, and wash over areas cut into or between dunes. Feeding areas include inter-tidal portions of ocean beaches, wash over areas, mudflats, sand flats, wrack lines, and shorelines of coastal ponds, lagoons or salt marshes. Wintering plovers on the Atlantic Coast are generally found at accreting ends of barrier islands, along sandy peninsulas, and near coastal inlets.

Terrestrial Biomes: savanna or grassland

Aquatic Biomes: coastal

Comments: BREEDING: Sandy upper beaches, especially where scattered grass tufts are present, and sparsely vegetated shores and islands of shallow lakes, ponds, rivers, and impoundments. Nests may also be built on sandy open flats among shells or cobble behind foredunes (e.g., in Michigan and New Jersey) (Master, pers. comm.).

ATLANTIC COAST: breeds mainly on gently sloping foredunes and blow-out areas behind primary dunes of sandy coastal beaches, and on suitable dredge oil deposits (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1988). In Maine, piping plovers nest only on sandy beaches notably lacking in small or large stones (Vickery, pers. comm.).

GREAT LAKES: Breeds on sand and gravel shorelines, and behind foredune among cobble and sparse vegetation on islands (Powell and Cuthbert 1992). Lambert and Ratcliff (1979) found that the average beach used for nest habitat in Michigan was 37 meters wide and that the nests were located an average of 13 meters from the water's edge (14 meters from the first dune and 109 meters from the nearest tree line). They also found a preference for nesting near other water bodies (beach pools, lagoons, or cuts) that may provide additional food sources. In Minnesota Point (Duluth, Minnesota), the average ground cover was less than 5 percent, and plants were an average of 13 centimeters tall (Niemi and Davis 1979). Niemi and Davis (1979) found that less than 8 percent of the available beach habitat was suitable for piping plover nesting. At Pine and Curry Islands (Lake of the Woods, Minnesota), nest on a sandy island where vegetation rarely exceeds 1 meter in height (Cuthbert and Wiens 1982). Vegetation included Salix interior, Artemisia campestris, Lathyrus japonicus, Xanthium spp., Populus balsamifera, Polygonum spp., Oenothera spp., grasses, and sedges.

GREAT PLAINS: 60 percent of breeding birds use shorelines around small alkaline lakes, 18 percent use large reservoir beaches, 20 percent use river islands and adjacent sand pits, 2 percent use beaches on large lakes, and 0.4 percent use industrial pond shorelines (Haig and Plissner 1993). Suitable breeding habitats are wide beaches (> 20 meters) with highly clumped vegetation, having less than 5 percent overall vegetation cover and/or with extensive gravel (USFWS 1988).

Vegetation cover on nesting islands is generally less than 25 percent (USFWS 1988). Woody species encroachment is a problem at many alluvial island sites due to reduced flows (Hay and Lingle 1981; Lingle, pers. comm.). This is also a problem on saline wetland shorelines due to drawdown and irrigation pumping (Soine, pers. comm.).

NONBREEDING: Usually on ocean beaches or on sand or algal flats in protected bays (Haig 1992). Most abundant on expansive sandflats, sandy mudflats, and sandy beach in close proximity; usually in areas with high habitat heterogeneity. At Laguna Madre, Texas, Drake et al. (2001) found this species to be most abundant on algal flats in fall and spring, but used exposed sand flats more often in winter. See Nicholls and Baldasarre (1990) for further information on winter habitat associations in the southeastern U.S.

Sandy beaches, tidal flats, other open sandy areas.

Piping plovers nest on exposed sandy or gravely beaches, sandflats, reservoirs or river sandbars, as well as alkali wetlands. Sparsely vegetated areas that are slightly raised in elevation are preferred (4).

Non-Migrant: No. All populations of this species make significant seasonal migrations.

Locally Migrant: No. No populations of this species make local extended movements (generally less than 200 km) at particular times of the year (e.g., to breeding or wintering grounds, to hibernation sites).

Locally Migrant: Yes. At least some populations of this species make annual migrations of over 200 km.

Begins northward migration from southern U.S. wintering areas in March, arrives on nesting grounds March-May; males arrive prior to females. Begins arriving in northern inland breeding areas in mid-April and most have arrived by mid-May (see USFWS 1994). Begin fall migration in mid- to late summer. The juveniles may remain later but are generally gone by mid- to late August (Cuthbert and Wiens 1982). Breeders from Northern Great Plains and Great Lakes migrate mainly to Gulf Coast for winter; Atlantic coast breeders migrate primarily to Atlantic coast sites farther south (Virginia to Florida, Bahamas) (Haig and Oring 1988, Haig and Plissner 1993). In Minnesota, the majority of breeding adults left the nesting grounds by early August; most juveniles were gone by late August (Wiens, 1986, M.S. thesis, Univ. Minnesota, Duluth).

Migrate to southern coastal areas of U.S.

Chicks and adults alike feed on a variety of beach-dwelling invertebrates, including insects, small crustaceans mollusks, , marine worms, fly larvae, and beetles. Because of their relatively short beaks, they rely mainly on surface-dwelling organisms or those which live just below the sand surface, for food.

Comments: Food consists of worms, fly larvae, beetles, crustaceans, mollusks, and other invertebrates (Bent 1928). The chicks learn to feed themselves and eat smaller versions adult food items (Hull 1981). Piping plovers feed more leisurely than other sandpipers, alternately running and pausing to search for prey (Bent 1928). Open shoreline areas are preferred, and vegetated beaches are avoided (Cuthbert and Wiens 1982).

Eats various small invertebrates, though relatively little information is available on breeding and winter diet. In New Jersey, intertidal polychaetes were the main prey of plovers foraging at night (Staine and Burger 1994). In the Magdalen Islands, Quebec, Staphylinidae, Curculionidae, and Diptera were the organisms most commonly found in fecal droppings (Shaffer and Laporte 1994).

Forages along ocean beaches, on intertidal flats, tidal pool edges, etc. Obtains food from surface of substrate, or occasionally probes into sand or mud. In Massachusetts, preferred mudflat, intertidal, and wrack habitats for foraging (Hoopes et al. 1992). On Assateague Island, bay beaches and island interiors were much more favorable as brood-rearing habitats than were ocean beaches (Patterson et al. 1992).

Insects, marine worms, and crustaceans.

Note: For many non-migratory species, occurrences are roughly equivalent to populations.

Estimated Number of Occurrences: 81 to >300

Comments: Number of occurrences difficult to determine from available literature - most reports state number of pairs only.

2500 - 10,000 individuals

Comments: No comprehensive surveys since 1996. The 1996 International Piping Plover Census yielded the following: 5913 plovers on the breeding grounds; Atlantic coast population increased to 2581 individuals, Great Lakes population increased to 48, and Northern Great Plains population decreased to 3284 adults (Plissner and Haig 2000). The 1996 International Winter Census yielded of 2541 individuals; the Gulf Coast counts were hampered by weather and tides (Plissner and Haig 1997). The 1991 international census estimated the number of breeding pairs in the Northern Great Plains at 1486, with 897 pairs in the U.S. and 589 pairs in Canada (USFWS 1994). Estimates for the Atlantic coast were 702 pairs in the U.S. and 236 pairs in Canada. The Great Lakes population included only 17 pairs, all in Michigan. The range-wide population in the early 1990s, based on intensive surveys, was 5482 breeding adults and 3451 wintering birds (Haig 1992, Haig and Plissner 1993). USFWS (1994) reported the range-wide population at 2441 breeding pairs, based on the 1991 census. The Atlantic coast population was 1150 pairs in 1994 (USFWS, Federal Register, 6 February 1995, p. 7067; USFWS 1995). Morrison (1993/1994) estimated the population in Canada at 1950 individuals.

Defends territory during breeding season and at some winter sites. Nesting territory may or may not contain the foraging area. Home range during the breeding season generally is confined to the vicinity of the nest. If nest is destroyed, may change home range before renesting; in Manitoba, shifts of 3-100 kilometers have occurred (Haig and Oring 1988).

In the Great Plains, annual survivorship was 66 percent in adults, 60 percent in immatures; calculated that a 31 percent increase in chicks fledged per pair (to 1.2 chicks fledged per pair annually) was needed to stabilize the population (Root et al. 1992, Ryan et al. 1993). Data from Massachusetts indicate that mean annual productivity of one chick per pair will maintain a stationary population (Melvin et al. 1992).

Longevity records indicate that only 13 percent of females and 28 percent of the males lived to five years. Eleven years of age is probably the maximum age (Wilcox 1959).

In Duluth Harbor, nest within a Common Tern (Sterna hirundo) colony and benefit from the terns' defense against ring-billed (Larus delawarensis) and Herring Gulls (Larus argentatus) (Niemi and Davis 1979). Great Plains populations are sometimes associated with Least Tern (Sterna antillarum) colonies (Faanes 1983, Hay and Lingle 1981; Dinan, pers. comm.). Most eastern sites also have Least Terns (Vickery, pers. comm.; L. Master, pers. comm.). Also have commensal relationship with American Avocets (Recurvirostra americana) (Prindiville and Ryan 1984). Plovers nesting in areas used by avocets had a 62 percent nesting success, compared to a 29 percent success in areas without avocets. Once hatched, chick survival rates were similar, regardless of avocet presence.

NON-BREEDING: In Laguna Madre, Texas, non-breeding home ranges were larger in winter than in fall or spring; overall mean was 12.6 +/- 3.3 square kilometers (n=48, Drake et al. 2001). Mean linear distance moved was 1.9 +/-0.4 km in fall (n=13), 4.2 +/- 0.6 km in winter (n=14), and 3.6 +/- 0.6 km in spring (n=19).

Comments: Forages day and night (Burger 1993, Staine and Burger 1994).

Average lifespan

Status: wild: 168 months.

Maximum longevity: 14 years (wild) Observations: Longevity records in captivity have not been established.

The Piping Plover uses (like most birds) a courtship dance to attract a mate for copulation. Courtship displays are also varied. The most visible display is the courtship flight, in which the male plover loops through the air, constantly peeping, often swooping very close to the ground near the location of the female being courted. Once a male and female are more tightly "pair-bonded," courtship displays may lead to mating. Nest scrapes are dug in the sand within the pair's territory, and these sites are often the focal point of courtship displays. These scrapes are simply shallow depressions in the sand, occasionally lined with bits of seashells. If the female approaches the male while he is digging or sitting in a scrape, he will stand over the scrape and fan out his tail. The female may then squat down under his tail, indicating a possible acceptance of him as a mate. At this point, the male will often initiate a tatoo dance, in which he stands very erect, puffs out his chest, and rapidly and repeatedly beats the ground with his feet. Still dancing, he approaches the female until they are touching, ruffling her feathers with the rythmic pounding of his feet. If the female does not back away, the male will then mount her and copulation occurs.

The eggs are layed within a nest scrape over a period of about a week, approximately one egg every other day, until 4 eggs (occasionally less, rarely more) are produced. Incubation is sporadic until around the time of the third egg, at which point it is more or less constant until hatching occurs. The male and female share the chore of incubation, each remaining on the nest for approximately one-half to one hour while the other is off feeding. Approximately 28 days after incubation commences, the eggs will hatch and the young chicks emerge.

Average time to hatching: 28 days.

Average eggs per season: 4.

The breeding season begins when the adults reach the breeding grounds in mid- to late-April or in mid-May in northern parts of the range. The adult males arrive earliest, select beach habitats, and defend established territories against other males (Hull 1981). When adult females arrive at the breeding grounds several weeks later, the males conduct elaborate courtship rituals including aerial displays of circles and figure eights, whistling song, posturing with spread tail and wings, and rapid drumming of feet (Bent 1929, Hull 1981).

Often returns to the same nesting area in consecutive years (but few return to natal sites). Sometimes shifts breeding location by up to several hundred kilometers between consecutive years. Wilcox (1959) has shown that only 20 percent settle at a nest site farther than 1,000 feet from the previous year's locality. Adult females tend to choose new nest sites within the same geographic area with over 50 percent choosing a new nest site over 1,000 feet from the previous year. Previous reproductive success apparently does not increase the probability of returning to specific breeding sites (see USFWS 1994). In Manitoba, adults that experienced nest failure the previous year usually changed general nesting location (Haig and Oring 1988).

Generally monogamous during a single breeding season. Adults tend to pick new mates each year (Wilcox 1959). In southern Manitoba, most breeders changed mates in subsequent years (but hatching success was lower than for birds that retained mates; some birds changed mates within breeding season after nest destruction [Haig and Oring 1988]).

Nest sites are simple depressions or scrapes in the sand (Bent 1929, Wilcox 1959). The average nest is about 6 to 8 cm in diameter, and is often lined with pebbles, shells, or drift wood to enhance the camouflage effect. Males make the scrapes and may construct additional (unused) nests in their territories, which may be used to deceive predators or may simply reflect over-zealousness (Wilcox 1959, Hull 1981). Occupied nests are generally 50 to 100 meters apart (Wilcox 1959, Cairns 1977, Niemi and Davis 1979, Cuthbert and Wiens 1982).

Egg-laying commences soon after mating (Cuthbert and Wiens 1982, Hull 1981). Eggs are laid every second day. The average clutch size is four eggs (Wilcox 1959) and 3-egg clutches occur most commonly in replacement clutches. The average number of young fledged per nesting pair usually is two or fewer. The young hatch about 27 to 31 days after egg laying, and incubation is shared by both adults (Wilcox 1959, Hull 1981).

Young leave the nest about two hours after hatching and are capable of running and swimming. The young remain within about 200 meters of the nest, although they do not return after hatching (Wilcox 1959, Hull 1981, Johnsgard 1979). When disturbed or threatened, the young either freeze or combine short runs with freezing and blend very effectively into their surroundings (Wilcox 1959, Hull 1981). The adults will feign injury to draw intruders away from the nest or young (Wilcox 1959, Bent 1929). Adults also defend the nest territory against other adult piping plovers, gulls, and song birds (Wilcox 1959, Matteson 1980). First (unsustained) flight has been observed at around 18 days, with chicks molting into first juvenile plumage by day 22 (Zickefoose, pers. comm.).

Nest success depends heavily upon camouflage (Hull 1981). Hatching success ranges widely: 91 percent for undisturbed beaches on Long Island (Wilcox 1959), 76 percent for undisturbed beaches in Nova Scotia (Cairns 1977), 44 percent on relatively undisturbed beaches at Lake of the Woods (Cuthbert and Wiens 1982), and 30 percent maximum at disturbed Michigan beaches (Lambert and Ratcliff 1979). Will renest if first clutch is lost. Never raised more than one brood per season in southern Manitoba.

Nest is built in open on the ground. 4 eggs are incubated by both sexes for 26-28 days. Young can feed themselves, the male watches over them. Capable of flight at 21-35 days old.

The following is a representative barcode sequence, the centroid of all available sequences for this species. 

 
There are 6 barcode sequences available from BOLD and GenBank.  Below is a sequence of the barcode region Cytochrome oxidase subunit 1 (COI or COX1) from a member of the species.  See the BOLD taxonomy browser for more complete information about this specimen and other sequences.
 

Download FASTA File

Barcode of Life Data Systems (BOLDS) Stats
Public Records: 6
Species: 8
Species With Barcodes: 1

Piping plovers are listed as vulnerable by the IUCN, and they are considered endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Michigan DNR. There are numerous groups and coalitions trying to protect the Piping Plover around the United States. For more information, see:   http://endangered.fws.gov/i/B69.html 

US Migratory Bird Act: protected

US Federal List: endangered

CITES: no special status

State of Michigan List: endangered

IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: near threatened

Canada

Rounded National Status Rank: N2B - Imperiled

United States

Rounded National Status Rank: N3B,N3N : N3B: Vulnerable - Breeding, N3N: Vulnerable - Nonbreeding

Rounded Global Status Rank: G3 - Vulnerable

Reasons: Widespread but local breeder in North America; major rangewide declines followed by some recovery; some regional declines still occurring. Strong threats related primarily to human activity; disturbance by humans, predation, and development pressure are pervasive threats along the Atlantic coast; inappropriate water management a threat on the northern Great Plains. Current favorable population trends depend on intensive management.

Other Considerations: Highly variable annual reproductive success. Ephemeral habitats.

Population detail:

Population location: Entire, except those areas where listed as endangered above
Listing status: T

Population location: Great Lakes watershed in States of IL, IN, MI, MN, NY, OH, PA, and WI and Canada (Ont.)
Listing status: E

For most current information and documents related to the conservation status and management of Charadrius melodus , see its USFWS Species Profile

Threatened or endangered species probably due to reduction of breeding areas and human impact.

Classified as Near Threatened (NT) on the IUCN Red List 2006 (1), and listed on Appendix II of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species (CMS) (3).

Population

Population Trend

Global Short Term Trend: Relatively stable (=10% change)

Comments: Generally increasing, but trend varies with region. International censuses in 1991 and 1996 revealed a rangewide increase of 7.7 per cent over that five-year period, from 5488 individuals to 5913 individuals.

ATLANTIC COAST: there has been a 50-80 percent decline over the past 50 years. The Long Island, New York population declined from over 500 pairs (Wilcox 1939) to about 100 pairs in 1988 (Cairns and McLaren 1980, USFWS 1988). In 1980 the Atlantic coast population was estimated at 910 pairs (Cairns and McLaren 1980); this estimate declined to 790 pairs in 1986 (550 pairs in the U.S. and 240 pairs in Canada) (USFWS 1988). However, many populations have increased with management attention since the mid-1980s. Most of the increase since 1989 has been in New England; the Mid-Atlantic and Canadian Atlantic populations have declined somewhat since 1989 (USFWS 1995). The 1991-1996 international census data indicate an overall increase of 30.4 per cent, from about 1979 individuals to 2581 (Plissner and Haig 2000). However, the Canadian Atlantic populations declined 16.6 per cent over the same period, from about 513 individuals to 428 (Plissner and Haig 2000). Subsequently, these numbers began to increase again, reaching 475 in 1999 (Boyne 2000).

GREAT LAKES: Long-term declines followed by recent small increases. Viable populations have disappeared from eight states (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York) during last 50 years. Now extirpated in Minnesota, Wisconsin and southern Ontario (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1988, Boyne 2000). In Michigan, reduced range and essentially eliminated from the southern portion of the state (Cottrille 1957, Lambert and Ratcliff 1979). USFWS (1990) categorized the Great Lakes population as declining, but Powell (1991) found that the population has remained stable since its listing in 1986; reproductive success has been low in recent years (Evers 1992, Powell and Cuthbert 1992). The 1991-1996 international census data indicate an increase of 20 per cent, from 40 to 48 individuals (Flemming 1994, Plissner and Haig 2000). Subsequently, 60-62 individuals were counted on the U.S. Great Lakes in 1998, a further increase of about 27 per cent (J. Hathaway, unpublished data cited in Boyne 2000). At Long Point, Ontario there were over 100 pairs in 1928 (Snyder 1931). Populations in Ontario dropped to an estimated 50 birds in the early 1930s (Sheppard 1935). Seven pairs were reported from Ontario in 1961-1965 (Hussel and Montgomerie 1966), and two pairs in 1976-1977 (Bradstreet et al. 1977). One pair of piping plovers nested along Lake Ontario in 1984 (Zickefoose, pers. comm.). No breeding pairs seen along the Canadian shores of the Great Lakes in the 1991 and 1996 censuses (Boyne 2000).

GREAT PLAINS: As of 1993, declining more than 7 percent annually (Ryan et al. 1993). International censuses in 1991 and 1996 revealed a 17.4 per cent increase in Canadian Great Plains populations and a 21.4 per cent decline in U.S. populations. Overall, there was a small decline over the five year period, from 3469 to 3284 individuals (Flemming 1994, Plissner and Haig 2000).

Major Threats

The piping plover nearly disappeared due to excessive hunting for the millinery trade during the 19th century.

The current population decline of the Atlantic Coast population is attributed to increased development and recreational use of beaches since the end of World War II. Human disturbance often curtails breeding success. Developments near beaches also provide food that attracts increased numbers of predators such as raccoons, skunks, and foxes, and domestic pets. Stormtides may inundate nests.

The Great Lakes population decline is attributed to losses of lakeshore habitat due to huge fluctuations in lake levels caused by intensive water management throughout the watershed and in the St. Lawrence River, as well as increased development and recreational use of beaches. Human disturbance often curtails breeding success. Developments near beaches also provide food that attracts increased numbers of predators such as raccoons, skunks, and foxes, and domestic pets. Stormtides may inundate nests.

The Northern Great Plains piping plover population decline is attributed to destruction of vegetated sandbars and river islands for flood control and navigation, and water level regulation policies that endanger nesting habitat. Rapidly raising water levels during nesting or brood rearing causes low reproductive success. Sand pit operations on some rivers draw breeders onto sterile beach environments where chicks find little food.

Degree of Threat: A : Very threatened throughout its range communities directly exploited or their composition and structure irreversibly threatened by man-made forces, including exotic species

Comments: Primary threats are destruction and degradation of summer and winter habitat, shoreline erosion, human disturbance of nesting and foraging birds, and predation (Burger 1993).

HUMAN DISTURBANCE: Disturbance during nesting is the major factor in many areas, and is the most serious threat in Canada (Flemming et al. 1988). Human presence may inhibit courtship, incubation, and brooding (Haig 1983). Nests may also be trampled and destroyed (Lambert and Ratcliff 1979, Haig 1983, Cuthbert and Wiens 1982). Cairns (1977) found that reproductive success was lower on beaches used for recreation in Nova Scotia. Lambert and Ratcliff (1979) found very low reproductive success (30 percent hatching rate, 0.6 young fledged per pair) at a Michigan state park with heavily used beaches. Compression of beaches by vehicular traffic may also reduce invertebrate prey populations (Ryan 1996).

HABITAT ALTERATION: Habitat alteration and destruction is an additional concern. Rising lake levels in the Great Lakes narrowed beaches and may have caused habitat loss (Bradstreet et al. 1977). Hay and Lingle (1981) discuss destruction of nests due to flooding. In the Great Plains, lowering of the water table due to irrigation projects and strip mines is a growing concern (Kantrud 1979, Dinsmore 1981, USFWS 1988). On the Canadian Prairies, reservoir water management is a major concern; water is impounded in the spring, causing levels to rise throughout the breeding season, flooding nests and reducing brood rearing habitat (Boyne 2000). Woody species encroachment of lake shorelines and riverbanks may be responsible for habitat loss (Dinsmore 1981, Haig 1983, Hay and Lingle 1981, USFWS 1988; Lingle, pers. comm.). Invasion of sites by Marram Grass (Ammophila breviligulata), Bayberry (Myrica pensylvanica), and even spruces (Picea sp.) is a problem on the east coast; areas may need to be weeded (Haig 1992, Master, pers. comm.). Plans for dredging and recreational developmen along the Gulf of Mexico coast, particularly on Laguna Madre in Texas, pose a serious threat (USFWS 1994).

PREDATION AND DISTURBANCE: Greatest threat to nest success in South Dakota (Gaines and Ryan 1988) is nest predation. In Massachusetts, predators, primarily Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes), destroyed 52-81 percent of nests in one study area (MacIvor et al. 1990). On Assateague Island, Maryland and Virginia, predators, mainly red fox and raccoon (Procyon lotor), accounted for about 90 percent of the known causes of nest loss (Patterson et al. 1992). Gulls potentially disastrous to plovers. Cartar (1976) reported that nest sites at Long Point, Ontario were invaded by large flocks of Herring Gulls (Larus argentatus) that destroyed nests. Nol (1980) documented adverse effects of non-breeding gull flocks on Piping Plover and Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus). Other important predators include Virginia Opossums (Didelphis virginiana), Striped Skunks (Mephitis mephitis), grackles (Quiscalus spp.), Fish Crows (Corvus ossifragus), and domestic cats and dogs (Patterson et al. 1990). Free-running dogs may be a major concern (Cairns and McLaren 1980, Quinn and Walden 1966, Lambert and Ratcliff 1979, USFWS 1988; Master, pers. comm.). Halbeisen (1977) found that dogs frighten snowy plovers from nests an average of twice as long (5.8 versus 2.8 minutes) compared to people. This increases the chance of egg failure and chick mortality from overexposure, starvation, and predation. Cattle trampling along alkali lakes may also be a problem.

POLLUTION: Wilcox (1959) observed adult mortality following oiling from highway tars. Dinsmore (1981) speculates that pesticides may be a major concern. Wintering populations along the Gulf Coast are potentially threatened by major oil spills (USFWS 1994).

HUNTING: In the mid-1800's piping plovers were harvested for food and brought to the verge of extinction (Bent 1929, Hull 1981). Piping plovers were protected from hunting by legislation in 1913, but populations have not increased to former levels (Hull 1981).

Uncontrolled hunting brought the plovers close to extinction in the early 1900s, but the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in 1918 prohibited hunting and helped the population recover by the 1930s. However, by 1945, Atlantic coast beaches became very popular for recreation, which has been the main cause of the plover population decline since. The building of homes and resorts along shorelines, the dumping of sand on beaches, and the polluting of inlets has altered and destroyed plover breeding and feeding ground (5). Human presence disrupts territorial establishment, courtship, egg-laying, and incubation activities (4). Many nests, eggs and chicks are destroyed by foot traffic and vehicles driving along the coastal beaches, and the raking of beaches for rubbish (7). Ruts left by off-road vehicles can also trap flightless chicks (4). Additionally, potential predators of plover eggs and chicks, such as non-native dogs and cats and native crows, foxes, and raccoons, are often attracted to beaches by human garbage (5). In the Great Plains region, damming of rivers has also eliminated sandbar nesting habitat (4).

Conservation Actions

Restoration Potential: Rapid recovery is possible with intensive protection. Full recovery of the Atlantic coast population is anticipated by the year 2010 (USFWS 1995). To acquire essential habitat, a coordinated effort between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Canadian Wildlife Service is needed. Coordinated efforts between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, state wildlife agencies, Army Corps of Engineers, National Park Service, and state conservation groups are needed to acquire and manage essential habitat. The Great Lakes and Northern Great Plains Piping Plover Recovery Plan (USFWS 1988) and the Atlantic Coast Piping Plover Recovery Plan (USFWS 1988) should be consulted. Future research will determine the recovery potential.

Preserve Selection and Design Considerations: Access to beaches should be restricted for nesting during late May to late July. Dogs should be leashed, and people requested to avoid the upper beach area. In the Great Plains, preserve design considerations should include control or restrictions overwater flow, as reduced flows permit woody species invasion of nest habitat (Lingle, pers. comm.). Untimely flooding also can eliminate potential feeding or nesting habitat (Howe, pers. comm.). The shorelines of alkali lakes should be fenced to restrict cattle use.

Management Requirements: Increasingly dependent on local conservation efforts and management (Collar et al. 1992). See draft revised recovery plan (USFWS 1994, 1995). Protection and management strategies employed to date (fencing, predator exclosures, etc.) generally are very labor-intensive and most require annual implementation (Hecht 1992), but they are effective in increasing productivity and breeding population size (Melvin et al. 1992). May benefit from erection of plover-permeable fencing to restrict human and carnivore access to nesting areas or specific nests. See Mayer and Ryan (1991) for information on the use of electric fences to reduce mammalian predation on nests and chicks. The use of predator exclosures increases hatching success compared to unprotected nests (Rimmer and Deblinger 1990). Cross (1992) recommended that managers should consider also lethal removal of predators if egg loss exceeds 25 percent.

Reducing human disturbance and eliminating off-road vehicles in nesting areas has increased reproductive success (Flemming et al. 1988). Cartar (1976) found that reproductive success at Long Point, Ontario nearly doubled following attempts to restrict access to the nesting areas. Nightime recreational use of beaches should be considered in management plans because plovers forage at night or during the day (Staine and Burger 1994).

Management actions intended to create or maintain habitat, such as breaching and drawdown of coastal ponds, should be considered with caution; periodic high water levels in ponds may be important in providing suitable habitat over the long term. In South Dakota, increases in amount of available beach habitat resulted in larger numbers of nesters (Gaines and Ryan 1988).

Management Programs: The Great Lakes and Northern Great Plains Piping Plover Recovery Plan (USFWS 1988) and the Atlantic Coast Piping Plover Recovery Plan (USFWS 1988) contain detailed, state by state, descriptions of current research and management activities.

Management efforts include creating habitat with harbor dredge in Duluth Harbor. Invading plant communities, however, reduced their desirability after some time (Lakela 1940, Niemi and Davis 1979). New nesting islands have been created also in the Platte River in Nebraska. See also Ziewitz et al. (1992) for information on creating sandbars as nesting habitat in the Platte River. The Connecticut Field Office of The Nature Conservancy and the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection have had success in improving hatching success through the use of predator exclosures made of wire mesh with openings of two by four inches. In Massachusetts, close monitoring of nests did not result in increased predation by red fox (Vulpes vulpes) (MacIvor et al. 1990). Quinn and Walden (1966) have studied captive raising for potential release programs.

Monitoring Programs: See the Great Lakes and Northern Great Plains Piping Plover Recovery Plan (USFWS 1988) and the Atlantic Coast Piping Plover Recovery Plan (USFWS 1988) for details.

Management Research Needs: 1) Continue to monitor populations. 2) Research diet and feeding habits, and the effects of pesticides and pollutants. 3) Monitor responses to habitat management. Habitat restoration should be attempted (Haig 1983; Lingle, pers. comm.). 4) Locate reliable wintering sites and migration routes. Investigate wintering ground ecology.

Biological Research Needs: Develop site evaluation procedure; determine spatial and temporal wintering and migration patterns; investigate ecology, behavior, and population dynamics of predators.

Global Protection: Many to very many (13 to >40) occurrences appropriately protected and managed

Comments: Many occurrences protected. All populations benefit from U.S. Federal listing; additionally, some states list plover as state endangered. Level of protection of sites varies greatly; few areas enjoy total protection, even if land is in conservation ownership. On 10 July 2001, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service designated 137 areas as Critical Habitat under the US Endangered Species Act for the wintering population (approximately 2,892 kilometers of mapped shoreline, 66,881 hectares) along the coasts of Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas (USFWS 2001). On September 11, 2002, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service designated 19 areas (totalling about 74,228 hectares) and portions of four rivers (1943 stream kilometers) in the northern Great Plains region as Critical Habitat under the US Endangered Species Act (USFWS 2002).

Needs: 1) It is critically important to eliminate or reduce human disturbance. 2) Prohibit free-running dogs. 3) Restrict vehicles during late-May to late-July. 4) Post signs and mount public relations campaign to reduce impact on nesting areas. 5) Use fences and other barriers to reduce predation. 6) Protect breeding sites from habitat alteration and recreational overuse. 7) Protect wintering grounds.

Censuses conducted in 1991, 1996 and 2001 have helped strictly monitor piper plover populations, and a further survey is scheduled for 2006 (3). The US Fish and Wildlife Service developed a recovery plan for the species after it was listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Residential and industrial development has since been restricted at plover breeding sites, as has vehicle and pedestrian access. Garbage disposal has been made illegal and free-roaming dogs and cats have been restricted from beaches during the nesting season. Wire fencing has also been erected around plover nests in some areas to protect them from predators and limit disturbance (5). However, measures to protect breeding and wintering beaches are costly and have had mixed success, with $3 million a year being spent in Atlantic USA alone, which will need to be maintained indefinitely (3). In order to help save this bird we must first learn how to effectively protect the threatened ecosystem upon which it depends (5), and public information campaigns over the plight of the piping plover and its beach habitat will undoubtedly need to play a vital part in this recovery process (8).

The Piping Plover has no negative effects on humans.

The Piping Plover is an indicator species that allows scientists to get a glimpse of the condition of an ecosystem. The Piping Plover also controls the insect and small crustacean populations on beaches. The major economic benefits stem from this beach cleaning the Piping Plover provides. This in turn allows for humans to frequent coastal areas more frequently with less incident for contact with pests (tourism).

Stewardship Overview: In many areas, population maintenance depends on intensive management. Nesting and foraging areas need to be protected from human disturbances. Habitat can be created with dredge material. Predator exclosures have been used to improve nest success. Continued population monitoring, and research on diet and feeding habits and on the effects of pesticides and pollutants, is advisable.

Comments: Electrophoretic analyses (Haig and Oring 1988) did not support current subspecific designations (2 subspecies, C. m. circumcinctus in the northern Great Plains, C. m melodus on the Atlantic coast, with intermediates in the Great Lakes region). However, a more recent study of the species' genetics suggests that the Atlantic population is in fact reproductively isolated from the interior population, and Great Lakes individuals do not differ genetically from those on the Great Plains and Canadian Prairies (S. Haig, personal communication, cited in Boyne 2000).