Buteo jamaicensis fuertesi

“Fuertes” Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis fuertesi): a taxonomic review with an expanded understanding of phenotype and distribution

Contributed by: Brian L. Sullivan, Bryce W. Robinson, Nicole Richardson, and Lizzy Chouinard

Introduction

As with many described subspecies in the Red-tailed Hawk complex, the “Fuertes” Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis fuertesi) is a taxon in need of further study. Of the 16 recognized subspecies of Red-tailed Hawks, fuertesi is one of only two described subspecies whose known range is bordered on all sides by Red-tailed Hawks of other taxa (the other subspecies being B. j. kriderii) (Preston and Beane 2009, 2020). Birds showing the described characters of this taxon range throughout the southern latitudes of the United States from Arizona east at least through coastal central Texas, with the center of the breeding distribution presumably in west Texas and northern Mexico. But as with many other Red-tailed Hawk taxa, nowhere does it seem that birds fitting the fuertesi type description occur completely in the absence of other taxa (e.g., it breeds with calurus from Brewster County, TX, the purported core of the breeding distribution; see Fig 2). The ongoing confusion around this taxon centers around the difficulty of its identification, both for birders in the field and for researchers in museums. B. j. fuertesi was described from 11 specimens taken from a fairly small geographic region (Brewster County, Texas), and even in this small sample there is variation in ground color and ventral markings (Fig 2). This variation in the type series has led to relatively pale-bodied, dark-backed birds (and some pale-backed birds) being ascribed to this taxon (e.g., Sutton 1967, Lish 2007 etc.; see Appendix 2), when they are likely intergrades or paler extremes of neighboring taxa. In this paper we review the original description and historical literature on B. j. fuertesi, and review its identification criteria, distribution, and movements both in a historical context as well as in the modern context, with new information gained through field study and review of digital specimens housed in the Macaulay Library. 

Taxonomic Background

Buteo jamaicensis fuertesi Sutton and Van Tyne 1935

Type Specimen. Adult female, University of Michigan Museum of Zoology, No. 86400, Calamity Creek Bridge, 22 miles south of Alpine, Brewster County, Texas, 8 March 1935; collected by Josselyn Van Tyne (http://portal.vertnet.org/o/ummz/birds?id=b8d97060-f924-11e2-b158-782bcb84bc75) (Fig 2). Sutton and Van Tyne (1935) described fuertesi from a series of 11 adult specimens, including the type which is the rightmost bird (Fig 3). 

Nomenclatural note: Sutton and Van Tyne (1935) named the bird in honor of the artist Louis Agassiz Fuertes, who was a mentor to Sutton, but failed to provide a common name in the original description, referring to it only as fuertesi in that publication. In their follow-up work on the birds of Brewster County, Texas, however, Van Tyne and Sutton (1937) did use a common name, and referred to the taxon as “Fuertes’ Red-tailed Hawk” in the possessive: as in “Fuertes’s Red-tailed Hawk”. They appear to be the only authors to do so, and since the prevailing subsequent terminology has been simply ‘Fuertes Red-tailed Hawk’ without the possessive, that is the convention we follow here.

Identification

Averages larger and longer-winged than other subspecies, similar to calurus in size (Wheeler 2003, Pyle 2008, Wheeler 2018).  Adult. The classic combination of field marks includes mostly unmarked whitish underparts with contrastingly dark, thick patagials, dark upperparts with completely dark wings and darker scapulars than borealis (but beware of the effects of wear and fading on late spring/summer birds), and usually a plain orange-red tail lacking, or with only a very narrow subterminal band (Sutton and Van Tyne 1935, Wheeler 2003)(Figs 1, 7-9) . Supporting field marks for fuertesi are a dark head usually lacking the pale eyebrow of borealis, and little rufous around the neck sides. Throat pattern is usually pale in the core of the range (streaked or dark as you move westward). Birds showing this classic combination of field marks are not hard to find throughout the depicted range (see Range), but birds with classic characters also occur alongside many individuals that are not so typical, especially as you move further away from the core of the range in southwest Texas. This variation includes underparts that become increasingly washed tawny or rufous as you move westward, with increased belly/flank markings in Arizona. This regional variation likely represents influence from neighboring taxa (in this case calurus). Patagial marks are usually dark and well-defined in the core of the range (Wheeler 2018), but birds in the eastern and northern portions of the range tend toward more rufous patagials. Whether these birds are intergrades with borealis requires further study. Uppertail coverts range from white in the eastern portion of the range, to rufous in the west (Wheeler 2018). In short, the ‘classic’ characters of adult fuertesi bleed out in a gradient from the core of the range in every direction.  Juvenile. Not identifiable with certainty from borealis, but perhaps averages more lightly marked below. Wheeler (2018) noted more V-shaped markings below compared with the streaks of other subspecies, but some individuals don’t seem to show this and more study is needed (Figs 10 and 11).

The main points of confusion are with pale-bellied borealis and calurus, along with intergrades between both of these taxa and fuertesi where their ranges meet. Given that both borealis and calurus can have very faint to nearly absent belly bands, especially in the eastern Lower 48 and in central and southern California respectively, identification as fuertesi must rely on a set of subsequent characters beyond the lack of a belly band. The key difference from pale-bellied borealis is fuertesi’s much darker upperparts on average, including darker wings and scapulars. The key differences from pale-bellied calurus are fuertesi’s white rather than rufous-washed underparts, unmarked legs (usually barred rufous in calurus), and unbanded tail.

Intergrades. As with most other Red-tailed Hawk subspecies, fuertesi intergrades with neighboring taxa, especially on the borders of its range (Wheeler 2003, Wheeler 2018), and determining whether any given individual is a ‘pure’ example of one subspecies or another is problematic. Starting in Brewster County, Texas, the site of the original description–a region widely considered the center of this subspecies’ distribution–westward, fuertesi intergrades with calurus in central NM and eastern AZ (Figure 12, Appendix 1); eastward and northward it intergrades with borealis in central and northern Texas, Oklahoma, and in east Texas (Figure 13, Appendix 1). The paler-bellied phenotype is prevalent throughout the desert southwest of the US, including southern California, where individuals have a decidedly more rufous wash below. Pale-bellied forms are also prevalent into the central Great Plains, with pale-bellied borealis grades into B. j. kriderii in the northern Great Plains. The picture is less clear to the south into Mexico where birds showing the fuertesi phenotype breed at least through Chihuahua, Coahuila, and Nuevo León, and likely grade into B. j. hadropus further south. Exactly where that transition takes place requires further study.

Polymorphism

Apparently monomorphic, occurring only in light morph (Sutton and Van Tyne 1935, Wheeler 2003). Sutton and Van Tyne (1935) stated that “there is in this new subspecies no dark phase such as occurs regularly in the range of calurus (dark phase specimens of calurus examined from southern California, North Dakota, Kansas, and Arkansas).”

Range

Range information presented here is synthesized from a suite of publications (Sutton and Van Tyne 1935, Van Tyne and Sutton 1937, AOU 1957, Sutton 1967, Lish 2007, Wheeler 2018), and checked against our own field observations, as well as a review of the media available in eBird/Macaulay Library (Appendix 1)(eBird 2025). While fuertesi is ostensibly resident, for determining breeding range we limited media review to photos taken during June, when little if any movement is occurring in any Red-tailed Hawk subspecies. Palmer (1988) and Pyle (2008) ascribe much larger ranges to this taxon, but without supporting evidence it’s impossible to verify those claims.

Based on the type description, we consider southwest Texas and northern Chihuahua to be the center of the breeding distribution (Figs 15-17), with birds showing this phenotype breeding west into southern NM and southeastern AZ (Fig 18), north into north TX and central OK, east into Gulf Coastal TX, and south to south-central Nuevo León. The exact boundaries of the breeding distribution are confused by rampant intergradation with other Red-tailed Hawk taxa, and lack of information in northern Mexico.

The northern boundary of the breeding distribution is a matter of debate. Prominent ornithologists Sutton (1967, 1987) and Lish (2007) suggest that all breeding Red-tailed Hawks in Oklahoma are fuertesi, but we find evidence to the contrary, with borealis-like birds occurring in the state during the breeding season (Figs 19a/b, 20-21; see Appendix 1 for Oklahoma photo review). There’s no question that birds with the fuertesi phenotype occur regularly throughout northern TX and OK in the summer, but they appear to be mixed with borealis in this region, and intergrades between the two are common. Part of this continuing confusion stems from the problematic nature of the type description of fuertesi, and just where one draws the line between ‘pure’ fuertesi and its various intergrades. If one takes a more liberal view of where to draw the plumage lines for fuertesi, many birds in this region could be classified that way. Another problem, especially with photo review, is being able to see and assess all the field marks on a given individual. In this case we looked largely at the extent of the ventral markings (belly band) to classify birds to putative fuertesi or borealis. On only a few individuals could we assess the upperparts, which in fuertesi should be darker than borealis. While our June photo review of breeding adults in Oklahoma is just a cursory glance at the phenotypes in the region, it’s clear from these results that not all individuals breeding in Oklahoma show the classic fuertesi phenotype, contra Sutton (1967, 1987) and Lish (2007).

On the Great Plains north of Oklahoma during the breeding season, Red-tailed Hawks with little to no belly band are common in Kansas (e.g., https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/103024531 ) and Nebraska (e.g., https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/620381501; https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/163444501 ). Any putative fuertesi from these regions should be carefully considered, as borealis in this region have much more lightly marked underparts on average. A suite of field marks beyond the belly band must be considered, including head pattern, tail pattern, and upperparts coloration. Past Nebraska and into South Dakota, individuals can have the kriderii influence, with little to no bellyband, as well as a pale head with faint patagials. More study is needed across the transition from fuertesi to borealis and then to kriderii. Intergrade types across this transect are expected, especially at the transition zones between taxa, and it may be inappropriate and/or impossible to classify many individuals to subspecies based on field marks alone.

Movements

Ostensibly resident (Sutton and Van Tyne 1935, Van Tyne and Sutton 1937, Wheeler 2003, Wheeler 2018), with no evidence of significant movement in this taxon, but Lish (2007) reported an influx of fuertesi into Oklahoma in the winter months (see Range above). AOU (1957) lists winter (nonbreeding) records from “central Sonora, sw. Arizona (Chiricahua Mountains [in southeast Arizona!]), NM, and s. Louisiana”. The taxon is likely resident in all of these places, apart from Louisiana, where no further information is provided so evaluating the record isn’t possible. We suspect it to be in error. Brandt (1938) published the first record from California: an adult specimen (A299) Rose Canyon, San Diego, CA, 23 March 1929. The specimen was not examined by us, but its identification was called into question by Grinnell and Miller (1944) as likely being a variant of calurus. Given the prominence of pale-bellied calurus types in this area, we suspect it to be in error. It’s fair to say that its movements, if any, are poorly understood, and more study is needed. 

Status

Reportedly common throughout its range, but breeding season material is generally scarce. 

Discussion

“Fuertes” Red-tailed Hawk is an interesting taxon in that it spans the geographic gradient from B. j. borealis in the East, through to B. j. calurus in the West, with large amounts of intergradation on both sides of its core range in west Texas and northern Mexico. It would be a fascinating study to sample birds across this entire gradient to see where all three subspecies range genetically.

Part of the confusion around this taxon over the years stems from a somewhat imprecise type description with just a single type specimen that describes the features of the taxon in such a way that they could be applied to pale-bellied examples of both B. j. borealis in the East and B. j. calurus in the West. Sutton and Van Tyne (1935) begin by comparing the new taxon against light morph examples of B. j. calurus, and describe fuertesi as similar but with paler underparts, including the underwings, and especially with a much reduced belly band of dark streaks; “the streaks being much attenuated or even reduced to a mere hair line along the shaft of the feather”. They go on to describe pale, plain leggings “thighs” or slightly barred with buff. Confusingly, they describe the “chin and throat usually sharply demarked from the breast”, which we interpret to mean that the chin and throat are contrastingly pale compared with the already very pale breast, based on the photos available of the type series. On the upperparts they describe fuertesi as having much reduced barring on the tail and uppertail coverts, a more uniform crown (presumably uniformly dark) and less rufous on the upper back and nape. The problem with this description is that B. j. calurus can be quite pale bellied below and dark above, especially from the southwestern and southern and central California portions of the range, which leaves essentially no firm distinguishing features between pale calurus and fuertesi.

Sutton and Van Tyne (1935) continue by comparing fuertesi with both Krider’s (B. j. kriderii) and Eastern (B. j. borealis). They quickly dispel potential confusion with the similarly pale B. j. kriderii by describing fuertesi as having darker upperparts, and lacking white in the base of the tail. The comparison with B. j. borealis is a bit more tenuous. They describe fuertesi as differing from borealis in being larger (impossible to judge in the field) with the black markings of the belly band much reduced and more attenuated. They specifically recognize that borealis can have much reduced belly bands, but go on to qualify those differences in this way: “In some specimens of borealis these markings are much reduced, but they are never as attenuate as in fuertesi.” Yet, individuals from the southern Great Plains, and even into Kansas, that are otherwise identical to borealis can have extremely reduced belly bands (Appendix 1). This distinction between ‘much reduced’ markings and their quality being ‘attenuate’ seems to dwell in the realm of minutia, and has led to many otherwise borealis-like birds being potentially misidentified as fuertesi–especially in the southern Great Plains and across the Southeast. Sutton and Van Tyne (1935) wrap up the comparison with borealis by describing fuertesi as having on average a paler tail with a narrower subterminal band, as well as more limited rufous on the neck sides and upper breast.

Importantly, in the discussion of characters of the 11 adult specimens in their series, Sutton and Van Tyne (1935) describe all but one as being ‘very pale or nearly white on the underparts’, with just one bird (Sutton, No 6084) described as “strongly buffy below, much as in the average specimen of calurus, from which it differs in the almost complete lack of the band of black streaks on the lower breast”. 

Conclusion

In the core of the described range, Red-tailed Hawks mostly fit the described characters for B. j. fuertesi, with some individuals intermediate in plumage between fuertesi and neighboring taxa, as well as those that appear to be typical calurus or borealis. This pattern is shared with B. j. kriderii, which intergrades on all sides of its range and seems to occupy no exclusive geography to itself. Whether these taxa are valid subspecies depends on the definition of the term. These forms do occupy a specific geography, just not in complete isolation of the other types. Whether this has always been the case, or this is a result of a historically small and range restricted population meeting the population expansion of neighboring taxa following European colonization (and the subsequent increase in suitable nesting habitat) is a question in need of further study.

References

American Ornithologists’ Union. 1957. Check-list of North American Birds. Fifth Edition. American Ornithologists’ Union.

Brandt, H.W. 1938. Four extra-limital records. Auk 55:287-288.

eBird. 2025. eBird: An online database of bird distribution and abundance [web application]. eBird, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York. Available: http://www.ebird.org. (Accessed: Date [e.g., March 14, 2025]).

Grinnell, J. and A.H. Miller. 1944. The Distribution of the Birds of California. Cooper Ornithological Club.

Lish, J.W. 2007. Comments on the distribution of the Fuertes Red-tailed Hawk on the southern Great Plains. Journal of Raptor Research 41(4):325-327.

Palmer, R.S. 1988. Handbook of North American Birds. Volume 5. Family Accipitridae: Buteos. Yale University Press.

Preston, C.R., and R.D. Beane. 2009. Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), version 2.0. In The Birds of North America (A. F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bna.52

Preston, C.R., and R.D. Beane. 2020. Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), version 1.0. In Birds of the World (A. F. Poole, Editor). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.rethaw.01

Pyle, P. 2008. Identification Guide to North American Birds: Part II. Slate Creek Press, Point Reyes Station, California.

Sutton, G.M. 1967. Oklahoma Birds. Univ. of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK, USA.

Sutton, G.M. 1987. Birds Worth Watching. Univ. of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK, USA.

Sutton, G.M. and J. Van Tyne. 1935. A new Red-tailed Hawk from Texas. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology. University of Michigan. Number 321.

Van Tyne, J. and G.M. Sutton. 1937. The Birds of Brewster County, Texas. Miscellaneous Publications No. 37. Museum of Zoology. University of Michigan. 

Wheeler, B.K. 2003. Raptors of Western North America. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

Wheeler, B.K. 2018. Birds of Prey of the West: A Field Guide. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

Appendix 1. eBird/Macaulay Library Photo Review

Breeding Season Photo Review–Only birds photographed in June

TX (Westward transect to AZ-CA border)

Brewster County and Jeff Davis County, TX

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/223942041

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/622794374

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/346330461

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/622377300

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/620763714

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/72128771 (2nd year)

El Paso, TX

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/582378541

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/162091671

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/246302801 (pair)

NM

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/347779101

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/622049201 (western NM)

AZ (southeast)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/66501011

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/245036391

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/30213241

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/351346871 (Wilcox)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/166738301

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/78490821 (starting to get a little calurusy)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/167414281 (San Rafael grasslands)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/620112092 (Patagonia)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/43266971 (Patagonia)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/580140131 (Green Valley)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/166027941 (Green Valley)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/105869551

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/621539871 (Box Canyon)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/621540082

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/60522561

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/330083751

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/620535620 (Buenos Aires NWR)

By the time you get to the Chiricahuas the birds become pretty washed with rusty-buff below:

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/461881571

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/352198211

Calurus in AZ and NM

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/60551851 (NM)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/66501021 (se. AZ)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/621236590

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/580431501 (Sierra Vista)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/330486871 (Patagonia)

Rufous morph https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/126720751 (Green Valley)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/612103403 (Box Canyon)

TX East of Brewster County

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/223733991 (Austin)

Pale-bellied bird NE Louisiana: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/164074301

Pale-bellied bird MO: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/246260771

Oklahoma (reviewed all June photos of adults from west to east)

borealis: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/586337071

borealis: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/620740853

borealis: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/350247841

fuertesi: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/351312191

borealis: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/587353261

borealis: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/620691967

borealis pair: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/163684961

borealis or intergrade: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/581211391

borealis: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/354870551

likely intergrade: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/619930270

borealis: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/583130831

fuertesi or intergrade: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/348871031

borealis: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/350257231

fuertesi: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/459201961

Kansas

borealis: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/60624511

fuertesi or intergrade: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/580532801

borealis: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/30052021

borealis: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/348346621

borealis: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/588177211

borealis: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/105692561

fuertesi: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/103024531

fuertesi or intergrade: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/584181901

North of TX

Kansas City: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/580532801

Omaha, NB, getting kriderii like: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/620381501

South of TX

Nuevo León: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/246386191

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/61244511

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/586158731

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/60741821

Coahuila: https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/52983841

Variation in presumed fuertesi from Brewster, Jeff Davis, and Presidio Counties, TX

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/614253629

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/204254951

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/570129061

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/222512001

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/91848791

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/545642971

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/625897088

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/615900486

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/567009251

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/218791021

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/60593551

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/530246341

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/426177781

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/285424871

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/144868241

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/144868231

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/50030861

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/219810291

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/625897273

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/626242349

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/328556981

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/88096061

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/554575431

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/145010321

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/569549241

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/144787831

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/140809351

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/627755936

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/627773577

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/612762660

Presumed fuertesi from elsewhere:

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/615233868 (NM)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/629558954 (NM)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/614803800 (West TX)

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/282012261; https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/282012271 (Nuevo León, Mexico)

Appendix 2.

A series of specimens labeled as B. j. fuertesi, courtesy of the University of New Mexico Museum of Southwestern Biology.

a. Adult female from breeding pair, MSB No. 8499, 4 miles northwest of Cedarville, Torrance county, New Mexico, 15 March 1992. https://arctos.database.museum/guid/MSB:Bird:8499

b. Adult male, MSB No. 8212, Phelps Dodge Plant, near Tyrone, Grant County, New Mexico, 26 March 1974. https://arctos.database.museum/guid/MSB:Bird:8212

c. Adult male, MSB No. 18404, Estancia, Torrance county, New Mexico, 3 May 1995. https://arctos.database.museum/guid/MSB:Bird:18404

d. Adult female, MSB No. 28829, Rio Rancho, Sandoval county, New Mexico, 20 April 2007. https://arctos.database.museum/guid/MSB:Bird:28829

e. Adult male, MSB No. 17021, Mescalero Apache Reserve, Otero County, New Mexico, 8 April 1966. https://arctos.database.museum/guid/MSB:Bird:17021

f. Adult male, MSB No. 28857, Alamogordo, Otero County, New Mexico, 7 July 2009. https://arctos.database.museum/guid/MSB:Bird:28857

g. Adult male, MSB No. 14117, Grants, Cibola County, New Mexico, 7 August 1993. https://arctos.database.museum/guid/MSB:Bird:14117

h. Adult male, MSB No. 51951, 174 Rococo Road, Roswell, Chaves County, New Mexico, 8 April 2021. https://arctos.database.museum/guid/MSB:Bird:51951

Appendix 3. Sutton and Van Tyne’s Original Description Text