Search Field Guide
Advanced Search
MT Gov Logo
Montana Field Guide

Montana Field Guides

Western Flycatcher - Empidonax difficilis
Other Names:  Empidonax occidentalis

Native Species

Global Rank: G5
State Rank: S4B
(see State Rank Reason below)


Agency Status
USFWS: MBTA
USFS:
BLM:
PIF: 2


 

External Links






Listen to an Audio Sample
Copyright by: The Macaulay Library at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, 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
    Western Flycatcher (Empidonax difficilis) Conservation Status Review
    Review Date = 01/15/2009
    Population Size

    ScoreU - Unknown

    CommentUnknown.

    Range Extent

    ScoreG - 200,000-2,500,000 km squared (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)

    Comment287464 square kilometers based on Natural Heritage Program range maps

    Area of Occupancy

    ScoreH - >20,000 km squared (greater than 5,000,000 acres)

    Comment27,602 square kilometers based on GAP predicted model.

    Long-term Trend

    ScoreE - Relatively Stable (±25% change)

    CommentRiparian and Douglas Fir forests relatively stable since European arrival.

    Short-term Trend

    ScoreU - Unknown. Short-term trend in population, range, area occupied, and number and condition of occurrences unknown.

    CommentBreeding Bird Survey (BBS) has low credibility in Montana, but shows a decrease since 1980 of 7.5% per year which is a 54 percent decline over a 10 year time period. Surrounding states have both increasing and decreasing trends. Short term trend may best be regarded as unknown right now.

    Threats

    ScoreF - Widespread, low-severity threat. Threat is of low severity but affects (or would affect) most or a significant portion of the population or area.

    CommentLoss of mature forests with cavities and root wads due to fire and beetle kill

    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.

    CommentNot as restricted to mature forest

    ScopeModerate - 20-60% of total population or area affected

    CommentFire and beetle kill are drastically changing a large portion of the landscape

    ImmediacyModerate - Threat is likely to be operational within 2-5 years.

    CommentOngoing but could accelerate

    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.

    CommentRely on mature forests and riparian areas, but not exclusively

 
General Description
One of the 2 species of Western Flycatchers. A small flycatcher, with length 14 to 17 cm and mass 9 to 12 g. The Cordilleran Flycatcher is slightly larger and heavier than its counterpart, the Pacific-slope Flycatcher. Western Flycatchers are pale, dull yellowish with teardrop- or almond-shaped eye-ring, olive-green upperparts, dull-brownish flight feathers and wing-coverts with dingy yellowish wing-bars, dull-yellowish underparts, relatively long tail and short wing, gray leg color, and broad bill with yellow-orange to pinkish lower mandible. Tend to appear relatively large-headed, with rather prominent short peak to rear crown. The Cordilleran Flycatcher is distinguished by its 2-part call (Lowther 2000).

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.

Species Range
Montana Range Range Descriptions

All Ranges
Summer
Migratory
(Click legend blocks to view individual ranges)
 


Observations in Montana Natural Heritage Program Database
Number of Observations: 3213

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

Recency

SUMMER (Feb 16 - Dec 14)
Direct Evidence of Breeding

Indirect Evidence of Breeding

No Evidence of Breeding

WINTER (Dec 15 - Feb 15)
Regularly Observed

Not Regularly Observed


 

(Observations spanning multiple months or years are excluded from time charts)



Habitat
"Coolness, shade, and nest sites" are requisites, and this species, from Alberta to northern Mexico, "invariably associated with water courses, and thus openings, in the timber" (Johnson 1980, Lowther 2000).

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: mtnhp.org/requests) or systematic surveys for species and evaluations of habitat at a local site level by trained biologists.  Users of this information should be aware that the land cover data used to generate species associations is based on imagery from the late 1990s and early 2000s and was only intended to be used at broader landscape scales.  Land cover mapping accuracy is particularly problematic when the systems occur as small patches or where the land cover types have been altered over the past decade.  Thus, particular caution should be used when using the associations in assessments of smaller areas (e.g., evaluations of public land survey sections).  Finally, although a species may be associated with a particular ecological system within its known geographic range, portions of that ecological system may occur outside of the species' known geographic range.

    Literature Cited
    • Adams, R.A.  2003.  Bats of the Rocky Mountain West; natural history, ecology, and conservation.  Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado.  289 p.
    • Dobkin, D. S.  1992.  Neotropical migrant land birds in the Northern Rockies and Great Plains. USDA Forest Service, Northern Region. Publication No. R1-93-34.  Missoula, MT.
    • Foresman, K.R.  2012.  Mammals of Montana.  Second edition.  Mountain Press Publishing, Missoula, Montana.  429 pp.
    • Hart, M.M., W.A. Williams, P.C. Thornton, K.P. McLaughlin, C.M. Tobalske, B.A. Maxell, D.P. Hendricks, C.R. Peterson, and R.L. Redmond. 1998.  Montana atlas of terrestrial vertebrates.  Montana Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, University of Montana, Missoula, MT.  1302 p.
    • Hutto, R.L. and J.S. Young.  1999.  Habitat relationships of landbirds in the Northern Region, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station RMRS-GTR-32.  72 p.
    • Maxell, B.A.  2000.  Management of Montana's amphibians: a review of factors that may present a risk to population viability and accounts on the identification, distribution, taxonomy, habitat use, natural history, and the status and conservation of individual species.  Report to U.S. Forest Service Region 1.  Missoula, MT: Wildlife Biology Program, University of Montana.  161 p.
    • Werner, J.K., B.A. Maxell, P. Hendricks, and D. Flath.  2004.  Amphibians and reptiles of Montana.  Missoula, MT: Mountain Press Publishing Company. 262 p.

Food Habits
Feeds almost exclusively on insects caught in the air or gleaned from foliage of trees and shrubs (Lowther 2000).

Reproductive Characteristics
Has been know to nest in rocky outcroppings near water, in natural nest cavities in live trees (quaking aspen, Douglas fir), tree stumps, and about mountain cabins. Eggs are subelliptical to elliptical in shape. Dull white or creamy white and marked. Clutch size usually four. Eggs have been reported in July (Davis 1961), but the dates are probably similar to those reported for Colorado: June 3 to July 23 (Johnsgard 1986).


References
Login Logout
Citation for data on this website:
Western Flycatcher — Empidonax difficilis.  Montana Field Guide.  .  Retrieved on , from