FAQs

Southern Wings FAQs

What is the Southern Wings program?

It is a mechanism to facilitate state agency’s voluntary participation in conservation actions and projects in Mexico, Central and South America, and the Caribbean that helps conserve shared priority species.

Watch the Southern Wings 101 webinar.

When did the Southern Wings program start?

Program was endorsed both by the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies’ (the Association) Bird Conservation Committee and the governing body of the Association in 2009. That was also the year the Program started accepting funds.

Why was Southern Wings established?

The science also tells us that conservation of migratory species must occur throughout the annual cycle of a migratory birds. State wildlife agencies invest a significant amount of resources in the conservation of migratory birds within their states and saw a need to complement that investment with investments on stop-over and nonbreeding areas. States also recognize that the factors limiting a population may not be on the breeding grounds or within their state borders.

Why Should a State Agency consider participating in conservation projects in Mexico, Central and South America and Caribbean for shared priority species?

The science also tells us that conservation of migratory species must occur throughout the annual cycle of a species. State wildlife agencies invest a significant amount of resources in the conservation of migratory birds within their states and recognize the need to support annual life cycle conservation. Southern Wings helps states successfully implement their State Wildlife Action Plan objectives.

What role does the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies ("Association") play?

The Association facilitates and coordinates the Program on behalf of the state wildlife agencies. The Coordinator(s) is an Association staff member. The Coordinator(s) supports the Technical Committees, works with the domestic and in-country partners, administers the Program, and promotes the Program.

How does the Program assure state agencies their money is being used wisely and effectively?

The Program only recommends high quality projects, in critical locations, that are implemented by successful NGOs with the capacity to deliver conservation outcomes. The Program requires a project proposal that outlines the actions to be taken to address the largest threats to the species and habitat. We also require reporting and hold our domestic partners accountable for ensuring the actions are implemented on the ground. The Programs domestic partners and when possible the state agencies and Program coordinator(s) meet with the in-country partners and visit the sites.

How many states are participating in the program?

As of October 2024, 41 states participate in the Program.

What types of projects are funded?

The Southern Wings Programs focuses on working with high quality partners that have a proven track record of success. The projects are typically ongoing projects that state agencies join as one of many partners. We also strive to support on-the-ground conservation actions such as restoration, management, monitoring, and acquisition. However any conservation action that is needed can be supported as long as the state agency approves it.

Are there species or areas of focus?

Are state agencies funds leveraged?

State agency contributions to a project are matched at least 1:1. This is either cash or in-kind contributions from domestic partners, foundations, or in-country partners.

How are state contributions moved to projects?

-States voluntarily enter into agreements with and contribute funds through a Regional Association, Flyway Council, a third party NGO, or directly with a project partner in Mexico, Central America, South America or the Caribbean. Those entities collect, hold and disseminate funds for approved projects. The Regional Association, state agency, or a U.S.-based NGO can transfer funds to the in-country partner, usually an NGO, for on-the-ground project implementation. The U.S.-based NGO and/or in-country partner is responsible for providing technical support and contributing to or managing project design and implementation. The Program remains flexible in this regard to accommodate the challenges unique to each state.

What funding mechanisms are available?

Contributions can be from any funding source that the agency has at its disposal. Examples of potential funding sources include State Wildlife Grant monies, PR funds, tax check offs, general funds, non-consumptive User Fees, etc. Monies designated as non-federal in origin can be used to match Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act projects.

How can other U.S. partners participate in the Program?

Partners can participate in the Program by being an in-country or domestic partner of the state fish and wildlife agencies. State level partners (e.g, Wildlife Society Chapter, local birding clubs, state Audubon Chapters, etc.) can work with their state agency partners to match state funds and participate in the conservation projects.

Why should I partner with State Fish and Wildlife Agencies in the Southern Wings Program?

Why should I partner with State Wildlife agencies in the Southern Wings Program? Many state level partners such as Audubon Chapters, TNC Chapters, Ornithological Societies, Birding Clubs, Wildlife Society chapters, zoos, etc. often have a shared interest in the conservation of priority species or locations. The Program is one way to partner and have a Hemispheric impact on conservation.

What can I do to learn more about the Program?

To find out more, contact Deb Hahn at 202-838-3458 or Bradley Wilkinson at 202-838-3475 .

Online Guide FAQs

How to use the Online Guide?

The following products are provided in each State’s page to assist with the inclusion of full annual cycle conservation strategies in State Wildlife Action Plans (SWAPs):

Shared Stewardship Connection Maps to provide a state-level overview of where the migratory birds that breed in each state are found during the non-breeding season.
An overview of focal migratory species breeding in each state including:

- Conservation statistics

- Multi-species Connection Map to provide an overview of connections across the annual cycle for focal species of concern breeding in each state
Focal Species Accounts that provide detailed information on each priority species including:

- Conservation statistics and information about relevant Southern Wings projects

- Species Connection Maps to show species-specific connections across the annual cycle

- Conservation challenges

- Links to additional resources
A list of partner organizations working in countries connected to each state.
Additional resources useful for full-annual cycle conservation

An introductory video is forthcoming and will be available here at a later date.

How were the Tracking and Species Connections maps in the Southern Wings Guide generated?

Multi-species and Species-specific Connections Maps

As migratory birds travel between summer and winter ranges, they connect places across the globe. Researchers map these connections by recording when a bird originally seen or captured in one location is subsequently re-encountered in another location or when a bird is connected to another location based on intrinsic markers. While banding is the oldest form of documenting direct connections among locations, newer tracking techniques such as automated radio telemetry, archival geolocators, satellite telemetry and genetic markers are additional ways that scientists study the movements of individual birds.

Multi-species connections maps allow you to see where else a state’s migratory birds travel throughout their annual journeys. The maps display the number of species that are connected to a state based on data collected with one of these tagging techniques. Species connections maps show where individual birds of a single migratory species of concern for a state have been tracked to other locations across the hemisphere.

The multi-species and species-specific connections maps are based on millions of observations generously shared by hundreds of data holders and partner organizations. Key sources of data for tracking birds include: band encounter records from the USGS Bird Banding Lab, automated radio telemetry from the Motus global wildlife tracking network developed and managed by Birds Canada, location data from hundreds of tracked birds shared by our partners and the research community on Movebank, and genetic connectivity studies shared by the Bird Genoscape Project. The original data are archived by each of these partners. The tracking data are summarized across the entire timespan inclusive of these datasets (1914-2023).

To represent connections, bird movements were aggregated and summarized into 150-km hexagons covering the Americas. Before summarizing the tracking data, we developed an extensive process to flag and remove points with high locational error (i.e., outliers), such as points collected during the spring or fall equinox period for light-level geolocator data and incomplete or questionable banding and Motus records.

For each species, the remaining points were overlaid with the 150-km hexagon grid. For each individual bird that had points spanning more than one hexagon, we generated the unique set of hexagon pairs that were linked together through its movement, disregarding whether points originated in or ended at any given hexagon. We considered the state connected to a location so long as the same individual occurred in both of them, whether those occurrences were within the same year or across multiple years. We filtered the linked hexagon pairs to just those with hexagons intersecting the state.

Species connection maps show locations (i.e., hexagons) that are connected to the state by individuals of a single focal species of concern. Darker shaded locations are connected to the state, and lighter shaded ones indicate that data are available for the species but there are no direct connections to the state. The multi-species connections maps include the linked hexagon pairs available for all the state’s species of concern. The multi-species connection maps display the number of species that connect each location to the state; the darkest shading represents connections made by birds of more than 10 migratory species, whereas the lightest shading denotes connections made by a single species.

For additional information on the methods behind tracking connection maps more generally and tracking techniques more specifically, please see the following:

Smith, M. A., J. Mahoney, E. J. Knight, L. Taylor, N. E. Seavy, C. H. Bailey, M. Carbone, W. DeLuca, N. S. Gonzalez, M. F. Jimenez, G. M. W. O’Bryan, N. Rao, C. J. Witko, C. Wilsey, and J. L. Deppe. 2022 Bird Migration Explorer. National Audubon Society, New York, NY. birdmigrationexplorer.org|exploraves.org

Shared Stewardship Connections Maps

Shared stewardship maps show where the migratory species that breed in each U.S. state are concentrated during the nonbreeding season. The maps are based on spatially-explicit estimates of year-round bird distributions generated by the eBird Status and Trends program, and the value of each pixel represents a quantitative index of connection strength. The maps are generated using a 3-step analysis.

First, we need to quantitatively select the migratory species to include for each state. Starting with the nonresident species which have high quality eBird relative abundance estimates for both breeding and nonbreeding seasons, we include species when at least 1% of their global breeding population breeds within a given state and at least 85% of their breeding population migrates out during the nonbreeding season. You can download a complete list of the species used in the maps for your state by visiting the eBird state-level summary portal, navigating to the state-level downloads, and clicking the link for shared stewardship maps.
Using the list of species identified in Step 1, we calculate the weighted sum of these species’ nonbreeding percent of population estimates in each 3x3 km pixel. The nonbreeding estimates for each species are weighted by the percent of that species’ global population which breeds in the focal state. If a species has a higher percent breeding population in a state, its nonbreeding map will contribute more to that state’s shared stewardship.
Last, we generate shared stewardship uniqueness maps by dividing each state-level map by the sum total across all 50 U.S. states. The resulting values represent the proportion of total connection strength in each pixel attributed to the focal state.

For an explanatory video describing these maps, please visit the eBird state-level summary portal. Shared stewardship maps are produced using freely-available information from eBird Status and Trends. Note that the nonbreeding connections shown in these maps are at the species level, not at the level of individual birds or distinct populations. In other words, the shared stewardship map for, e.g., Maine tells us where the nonbreeding distributions of Maine’s migratory species are most concentrated, weighted by their percent breeding population in the state. The methods behind shared stewardship maps were developed in partnership with Partners in Flight: Making Connections for Bird Conservation.

For additional information on the methods behind eBird Status and Trends more generally, please see the following resources:

eBird Status and Trends FAQ. Data citation: Fink, D., T. Auer, A. Johnston, M. Strimas-Mackey, S. Ligocki, O. Robinson, W. Hochachka, L. Jaromczyk, C. Crowley, K. Dunham, A. Stillman, I. Davies, A. Rodewald, V. Ruiz-Gutierrez, C. Wood. 2023. eBird Status and Trends, Data Version: 2022; Released: 2023. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. https://doi.org/10.2173/ebirdst.2022

Fink, D., Auer, T., Johnston, A., Ruiz‐Gutierrez, V., Hochachka, W. M., & Kelling, S. (2020). Modeling avian full annual cycle distribution and population trends with citizen science data. Ecological Applications, 30(3), e02056. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2056.

Fink, D., et al. (2023). A double machine learning trend model for citizen science data. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 14(9), 2435-2448. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.14186.

How to use the Online Guide?

How were conservation challenges identified for each species?

We used the list of 19 conservation challenges that were included in the Bird Migration Explorer. The “About the Bird Migration Explorer Conservation Challenges” provides a detailed description of how the 19 challenges were selected for inclusion in the Explorer.

The Bird Migration Explorer used the conservation lexicon developed by Salafsky et al. (2008) and subsequently used in multiple conservation planning frameworks to identify the conservation challenges relevant for each migratory species. In this framework, threats are defined as human activities that negatively impact bird species (Salafsky et al. 2008). Sensitivity is the extent to which stresses linked to threat exposure negatively impact a species. Based on a combination of literature review and expert knowledge within this framework, 88 threats relevant to migratory birds were developed. Stresses are the attributes of a species’ ecology that are impaired by threats (Salafsky et al. 2008). The Explorer used a list of seven stresses adapted from the list used by IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature 2012). Next, to identify a subset of threats that each species was sensitive to, a literature review was conducted to determine which threats have a negative impact on a species and the stresses that the threat causes to it. In cases where there was no information on a species sensitivity to a threat, but sensitivity to the threat was documented for a similar related species (e.g., same genus, or similar life history characteristics), both species were considered to be sensitive to it.

Next, threats were pooled into conservation challenges (e.g., agricultural pesticide/herbicide application and agricultural development threats were merged into the conservation challenge of agriculture). The list of conservation challenges was narrowed to those that could be accurately and consistently mapped across the Western Hemisphere, which resulted in 19 conservation challenges that were included in the Bird Migration Explorer. Because some conservation challenges, like invasive and problematic species (e.g., outdoor cats) do not have available hemispheric maps, the list of conservation challenges is not comprehensive. The list of conservation challenges on the Bird Migration Explorer and included in this online guide include:

Urban Areas
Surburban Areas
Coastal Modification
Agriculture
Livestock Management
Oil and Gas Production
Wind Turbines
Roads
Power Lines
Communication Towers
Forest Management
Coastal Disturbance
Groundwater Depletion
Surface Water Management
Light Pollution
Water Quality
Sea Level Rise
Increasingly Severe Flooding
Drought

Literature cited:

Salafsky N et al. 2008. A standard lexicon for biodiversity conservation: Unified classifications of threats and actions. Conservation Biology 22:897–911.

Image sources for the Southern Wings Guide.

American Bittern by Hal Trachtenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

American Oystercatcher by Grigory Heaton via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

American White Pelican by TexasEagle via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Baird's Sparrow by Aaron Maizlish via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Bank Swallow by Charles Gates via Flickr, CC BY 2.0

Barn Swallow by MTSOFan via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Bay-breasted Warbler by Aaron Maizlish via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Bendire's Thrasher by Nick Athanas via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Bicknell's Thrush by Aaron Maizlish via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Black Skimmer by Mick Thompson via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Black Swift by Spring Fed Images via Unsplash, Unsplash License

Black Tern by Hal Trachtenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Black-billed Cuckoo by Tom Murray via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Black-capped Vireo by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service via Flickr, PDM 1.0

Black-throated Blue Warbler by Doug Greenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Black-throated Gray Warbler by Nick Athanas via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Blue-winged Warbler by Doug Greenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Bobolink by Scott Heron via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0

Botteri's Sparrow by Nick Athanas via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Brewer's Sparrow by Mick Thompson via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Broad-billed Hummingbird by Mick Thompson via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Broad-tailed Hummingbird by Robin Gwen Agarwal via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Broad-winged Hawk by Jeff Bryant via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Burrowing Owl by James Marvin Phelps via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Canada Warbler by Tom Murray via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Caspian Tern by Mick Thompson via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Cassin's Sparrow by Nick Athanas via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Cerulean Warbler by Nick Athanas via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Chestnut-collared Longspur by Daniel Arndt via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Chimney Swift by Adam Jackson via Wikimedia Commons, CC0 1.0

Chuck-will's-Widow by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service via Flickr, PDM 1.0

Clark's Grebe by James Marvin Phelps via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Cliff Swallow by loren chipman via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Common Black Hawk by Nick Athanas via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Common Grackle by Tom Murray via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Common Loon by Sunny via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Common Nighthawk by Michael Klotz via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Common Tern by Corine Bliek via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Connecticut Warbler by Tom Murray via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Eastern Meadowlark by Susan Young via Flickr, PDM 1.0

Eastern Whip-poor-will by Tom Murray via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Elegant Tern by Andrej Chudý via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Ferruginous Hawk by Jamie Chavez via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Flammulated Owl by sugarbear96 via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Forster's Tern by Doug Greenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Franklin's Gull by Nick Athanas via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Golden-cheeked Warbler by Aaron Maizlish via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Golden-winged Warbler by Andy Reago & Chrissy McClarren via Flickr, CC BY 2.0

Grace's Warbler by Nick Athanas via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Gray Flycatcher by Aaron Maizlish via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Gray Vireo by Nick Athanas via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Green Heron by Brent Eades via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Henslow's Sparrow by USFWS Midwest Region via Flickr, PDM 1.0

Hooded Warbler by Doug Greenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Hudsonian Godwit by Mark Peck via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Kentucky Warbler by Doug Greenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Lark Bunting by Daniel Arndt via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Least Bittern by Hal Trachtenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Least Tern by Sandy/Chuck Harris via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Lesser Yellowlegs by Mick Thompson via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Long-billed Curlew by Doug Greenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Louisiana Waterthrush by Nick Athanas via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Lucy's Warbler by Mick Thompson via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Marbled Godwit by Doug Greenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Mountain Plover by Aaron Maizlish via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Northern Pintail by Sunny via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Olive-sided Flycatcher by Andy Reago & Chrissy McClarren via Flickr, CC BY 2.0

Piping Plover by Andy Witchger via Flickr, CC BY 2.0

Prairie Warbler by Doug Greenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Prothonotary Warbler by Doug Greenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Purple Martin by Howard Patterson via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Red Knot by JJ Harrison via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 2.0

Red-faced Warbler by Nick Athanas via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Roseate Tern by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service via Flickr, PDM 1.0

Ruddy Turnstone by Andrej Chudý via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Sage Thrasher by Mick Thompson via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Sagebrush Sparrow by Mick Thompson via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Sanderling by Florian Dehn via Flickr, CC0 1.0

Sandhill Crane by Susan Young via Flickr, PDM 1.0

Savannah Sparrow by Dave Wendelken via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Scarlet Tanager by Doug Greenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Semipalmated Sandpiper by Mick Thompson via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Short-billed Dowitcher by Andrew Morffew via Flickr, CC BY 2.0

Snowy Plover by Grigory Heaton via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Sprague's Pipit by Daniel Arndt via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Stilt Sandpiper by Mark Peck via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Surf Scoter by Doug Greenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Swainson's Hawk by Robin Gwen Agarwal via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Swainson's Thrush by Doug Greenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Swainson's Warbler by Andy Reago & Chrissy McClarren via Flickr, CC BY 2.0

Swallow-tailed Kite by Andey Morffew via Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 2.0

Thick-billed Longspur by Daniel Arndt via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Upland Sandpiper by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service via Flickr, PDM 1.0

Veery by Howard Patterson via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Vesper Sparrow by Aaron Maizlish via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Virginia's Warbler by Nick Athanas via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Western Grebe by Mick Thompson via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Western Wood-Pewee by Sunny via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Whimbrel by John.Purvis via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

White-faced Ibis by Sunny via Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Willow Flycatcher by Mick Thompson via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Wilson's Phalarope by Mick Thompson via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0

Wood Thrush by Andy Reago & Chrissy McClarren via Flickr, CC BY 2.0

Worm-eating Warbler by Andrew Weitzel via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0

Yellow-billed Cuckoo by Doug Greenberg via Flickr, CC BY-NC 2.0