2023 Population Status

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

American Woodcock
Population Status, 2023

American Woodcock Population Status, 2023

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Division of Migratory Bird Management
Branch of Assessment and Decision Support
11510 American Holly Drive
Laurel, MD 20708-4002
August 2023

Cover photograph: American woodcock chick fitted with a radio transmitter, Rhode Island. Photo by
Colby Slezak.
Suggested citation:
Seamans, M.E., and R.D. Rau. 2023. American woodcock population status, 2023. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Laurel, Maryland.
All American Woodcock status reports are available on our web site at:
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/american-woodcock-population-status-reports

AMERICAN WOODCOCK POPULATION STATUS, 2023
MARK E. SEAMANS, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, 134 Union St.,
Suite 540, Lakewood, CO 80228 (mark_seamans@fws.gov).
REBECCA D. RAU, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Migratory Bird Management, Patuxent
Research Refuge, 11510 American Holly Dr., Laurel, MD 20708-4002 (rebecca_rau@fws.gov).
Abstract: The American Woodcock (Scolopax minor) Singing-ground Survey data for 2023 indicate that the index for
singing males was similar to that of 2022 in the Eastern and Central Management Regions. Both regions had a significant
negative trend over the most recent 10 years (2013–2023): Eastern = -1.18%/year; Central = ˗1.25%/year. Both regions
had a significant, long-term (1968–2023) negative trend: Eastern = ˗0.86%/year; Central -0.53%/year. The 2022
recruitment index in the U.S. portion of the Eastern Region (1.21 immatures per adult female) was 12.3% less than the
2021 index and 24.9% less than the long-term regional average, while the recruitment index in the Central Region (1.23
immatures per adult female) was 18.2% less than the 2021 index, and 17.0% less than the long-term regional average.
Estimates from the Harvest Information Program indicated that U.S. woodcock hunters in the Eastern Region spent 94,000
days afield and harvested 65,400 woodcock during the 2022–23 season, while in the Central Region hunters spent 189,600
days afield and harvested 112,500 woodcock.

INTRODUCTION
The American woodcock is a popular game bird
throughout eastern North America. The management
objective of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) is to stabilize woodcock populations, while
ultimately returning the population to a level that
occurred in the early 1970s (Kelley et al. 2008).
Reliable annual population estimates, harvest
estimates, and information on recruitment and
distribution are essential for comprehensive woodcock
management. This information is difficult and often
impractical to obtain. Woodcock are difficult to find
and count because of their cryptic coloration, small
size, and preference for areas with dense vegetation.
The Singing-ground Survey (SGS) was developed to
provide indices to changes in abundance. The Partscollection Survey (PCS) provides annual indices of
woodcock recruitment. The Harvest Information
Program (HIP) utilizes a sampling frame of woodcock
hunters to estimate annual harvest and hunter days
spent afield.
This report summarizes the results of these
surveys and presents an assessment of the population
status of woodcock as of early June 2023. The report
is intended to assist managers in regulating the sport
harvest of woodcock and to draw attention to areas
where management actions are needed. Historical
woodcock hunting regulations are summarized in
Appendix A.

METHODS
Woodcock Management Regions
Woodcock are managed on the basis of two
regions or populations, Eastern and Central (Fig. 1), as
recommended by Owen et al. (1977). Coon et al.
(1977) reviewed the concept of management regions
for woodcock and recommended the current
configuration over several alternatives.
This
configuration was biologically justified because
analysis of band recovery data indicated that there was
little crossover between the regions (Krohn et al. 1974,
Martin et al. 1969). Furthermore, the boundary
between the two regions conforms to the boundary
between the Atlantic and Mississippi Flyways. The
results of the PCS and SGS, as well from HIP, are
reported by state or province, and management region.
Although state and province level results are included
in this report, analyses are designed to support
management decisions made at the management
region scale.
Singing-ground Survey
The SGS was developed to exploit the
conspicuous courtship display of the male woodcock.
Early studies demonstrated that counts of singing
males provide indices to woodcock population
abundance and could be used to monitor annual
changes (Mendall and Aldous 1943, Goudy 1960,
Duke 1966, Whitcomb 1974). Before 1968, counts
were conducted on nonrandomly located routes.
Beginning in 1968, routes were relocated along lightly
traveled secondary roads in the center of randomly
chosen 10-minute degree blocks within each state

The primary purpose of this report is to facilitate
the prompt distribution of timely information.
Results are preliminary and may change with the
inclusion of additional data.
1

for the years they were surveyed. Sauer and Bortner
(1991) reviewed the implementation and analysis of the
SGS in more detail.
Trends in the number of male woodcock heard were
estimated using a hierarchical model. Sauer et al. (2008)
describe a hierarchical log-linear model for estimation
of population change from SGS data. Sauer et al. (2021)
compared the Sauer et al. (2008) model with a model
with additional forms for year effects and the
distribution of overdispersion effects and concluded that
population change is best modeled as the difference in
expected counts between successive years (their ‘D’
model). We used this new D model for inference in this
report. The 2 model forms are similar except in how year
effects are modeled: the old approach (denoted as the ‘S’
in Sauer et al. 2021) modeled year effects as random
effects in the context of a slope parameter to estimate
population change, whereas the D model describes
population change as the difference in expected counts
between successive years. The D model provides
population trend and annual index values that are
generally comparable to the estimates provided by the
previous model, except that the D model provides
slightly fewer extreme estimates of trend.
For the hierarchical model, the log of the expected
value of the counts was modeled as a linear combination
of strata-specific intercepts and year effects, a random
effect for each unique combination of route and
observer, a start-up effect on the route for first year
counts by new observers, and overdispersion. The
parameters of interest were treated as random and were
assumed to follow distributions that were governed by
additional parameters. The hierarchical model is fit
using Bayesian methods. Markov-chain Monte Carlo
methods were used to iteratively produce sequences of
parameter estimates which were used to describe the
distribution of the parameters of interest. After an initial
“burn-in” period, means, medians, and credible (i.e.,
Bayesian confidence) intervals (CI) for the parameters
were estimated from the replicates. Annual indices for
a stratum (state or province) are a function of year
effects, defined as exponentiated random strata and year
effects. Population trends were defined as ratios of the
indices at the start and end of the interval of interest,
taken to the appropriate power to estimate a yearly
change (Sauer et al. 2021). Trend estimates were
expressed as percent change per year, while indices were
expressed as the number of singing males per route.
Annual indices were calculated for the 2 regions and
each state and province, while short-term (2022–2023),
10-year (2013–2023) and long-term (1968–2023) trends
were evaluated for each region as well as for each state
and province.
Due to SARS-CoV-2 (i.e., coronavirus) related
restrictions in Canada and the U.S., only a portion of the
SGS (n=329 routes) was conducted in 2020. Indices for

Fig. 1. Woodcock management regions, breeding range,
and Singing-ground Survey coverage.

and province in the central and northern portions of the
woodcock’s breeding range (Fig. 1). Data collected
prior to 1968 are not included in this report.
Each route was 3.6 miles (5.4 km) long and
consisted of 10 listening points. The routes were
surveyed shortly after sunset by an observer who drove
to each of the 10 stops and recorded the number of
woodcock heard peenting (the vocalization by
displaying male woodcock on the ground). Acceptable
dates for conducting the survey were assigned by
latitude to coincide with peaks in courtship behavior of
local woodcock. In most states and provinces, the peak
of courtship activity (including local woodcock and
woodcock still migrating) occurred earlier in the spring
and local reproduction may have already been underway
when the survey was conducted. However, it was
necessary to conduct the survey during the designated
survey dates to minimize the counting of migrating
woodcock. Because adverse weather conditions may
affect courtship behavior and/or the ability of observers
to hear woodcock, surveys were only conducted when
wind, precipitation, and temperature conditions were
within prescribed limits.
The survey consists of about 1,500 routes. To avoid
expending unnecessary resources and funds,
approximately two-thirds of these routes were selected
for survey each year. The remaining routes were carried
as “constant zero” routes. Routes for which no
woodcock were heard for 2 consecutive years enter this
constant zero status and were not surveyed for the next
5 years. If woodcock were heard on a constant zero
route during its next survey, the route reverted to normal
status and was surveyed again each year. Data from
constant zero routes were included in the analysis only
2

states and provinces with little or no data for 2020 were
estimated with the hierarchical model using strataspecific intercepts and year effects that were calculated
from the limited 2020 data and the long-term dataset.
Credible intervals were used to describe uncertainty
around the estimates when fitting hierarchical models.
If the CI did not overlap 0 for a trend estimate, the trend
was considered significant. We present the median and
95% CIs of 10,000 samples (i.e., we simulated 20,000
replicates and thinned by 2), which were calculated after
an initial burn-in of 20,000 iterations to allow the series
to converge. Refer to Link and Sauer (2002) and Sauer
et al. (2008, 2021) for a detailed description of the
statistical model and fitting process.
The reported sample sizes are the number of routes
on which trend estimates are based. Each route was to
be surveyed during the peak time of daily singing
activity. For editing purposes, “acceptable” stops were
surveyed between 22 and 58 minutes after sunset (or
between 15 and 51 minutes after sunset on overcast
evenings). Due to observer error or road conditions,
some stops on some routes were surveyed before or after
the peak times of singing activity. Earlier analysis
revealed that routes with 8 or fewer acceptable stops
tended to be biased low. Beginning with data from 1988,
only route observations with at least 9 acceptable stops
were included in the analysis. Route observations prior
to 1988 are used regardless of the number of acceptable
stops. Routes for which data were received after 27 June
2023 were not included in this analysis but will be
included in future trend estimates.

Harvest Information Program
The HIP was cooperatively developed by the
USFWS and state wildlife agencies to provide reliable
annual estimates of hunter activity and harvest for all
migratory game birds (Elden et al. 2002). The HIP
sampling frame consists of all migratory game bird
hunters. Under this program, state wildlife agencies
collect the name, address, and additional information
from each migratory bird hunter in their state and send
that information to the USFWS. The USFWS then
selects stratified random samples of those hunters and
asks them to voluntarily provide detailed information
about their hunting activity. For example, hunters
selected for the woodcock harvest survey are asked to
complete a daily diary about their woodcock hunting
and harvest during the current year’s hunting season.
Their responses are then used to develop nationwide
woodcock harvest estimates. The HIP survey estimates
of woodcock harvest have been available since 1999.
Although estimates from 1999–2002 have been
finalized, the estimates from 2003–2022 should be
considered preliminary as refinements are still being
made in the sampling frame and estimation techniques.
Canadian hunter and harvest estimates, which were
obtained through the Canadian National Harvest Survey
Program, are presented in Appendix B (Gendron and
Smith 2019).

Parts-collection Survey
The primary objective of the PCS is to provide data
on the reproductive success of woodcock. The survey is
administered as a cooperative effort between woodcock
hunters, the USFWS, and state wildlife agencies.
Participants in the 2022 survey included hunters who
either: (1) participated in past surveys; (2) were a subset
of hunters that indicated on the HIP Survey that they
hunted woodcock; or (3) contacted the USFWS to
volunteer for the survey.
Parts-collection Survey participants were provided
with prepaid mailing envelopes and asked to submit 1
wing from each woodcock they harvested. Hunters were
asked to record the date of the hunt as well as the state
and county where the bird was shot. Hunters were not
asked to submit envelopes for unsuccessful hunts. The
age and gender of birds were determined by examining
plumage characteristics (Martin 1964, Sepik 1994).
The ratio of immature birds per adult female in the
harvest provides an index to recruitment of young into
the population. The 2022 recruitment index for each
state with ≥ 125 submitted wings was calculated as the
number of immatures per adult female. The regional

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Singing-ground Survey
Data for 847 routes were submitted by 27 June 2023
(Table 1). There was no significant change in the
number of woodcock heard singing during 2023 from
last year for the Eastern and Central Management
Regions (Table 1). Trends for individual states and
provinces are reported in Table 1. Consistency in route
coverage over time is a critical component of precision
in estimation of population change. Low precision of 2year change estimates reflects the low numbers of routes
surveyed by the same observer in both years. Ensuring
that observers participate for several years on the same
route would greatly enhance the quality of the results.
The 10-year trend (2013–2023) indicated a significant
decline in both the Eastern and Central Management
Regions (Table 1, Fig. 2). Many states and provinces in
both management regions have experienced significant
long-term (1968–2023) declines as measured by the
SGS (Table 1, Fig. 3). The long-term trend estimate was
−0.86%/year in the Eastern Management Region
and -0.71%/year in the Central Management Region
(Table 1).

indices for 2022 were weighted by the relative
contribution of each state to the cumulative number of
adult female and immature wings received during 1963–
2021.

3

Fig. 2. Ten-year trends in the number of American woodcock heard on the Singing-ground Survey, 2013–2023, as determined by
the hierarchical modeling method. A significant trend (S) does not include zero in the 95% credible interval, while a non-significant
(NS) trend does include zero.

Fig. 3. Long-term trends in the number of American woodcock heard on the Singing-ground Survey, 1968–2023, as determined
by the hierarchical modeling method. A significant trend (S) does not include zero in the 95% credible interval, while a nonsignificant (NS) trend does include zero.

4

Fig. 5. Annual indices of recruitment (U.S.), 1963–2022. The
red dashed line is the 1963–2021 average.

Fig. 4. Annual indices of the number of woodcock heard
during the Singing-ground Survey, 1968–2023 as estimated
using hierarchical modeling. The red dashed lines represent
the 95% credible interval for the estimate.

spent an estimated 94,000 days afield (Figure 6) and
harvested 65,400 birds (Figure 7) during the 2022–2023
hunting season. In the Eastern Region, harvest in 2022–
2023 was 12.1% less than the long-term (1999–2021)
average (74,400 birds/year) and 11.0% less than last
year (73,500 birds). Woodcock hunters in the Central
Region spent an estimated 189,600 days afield (Figure
6) and harvested 112,500 birds (Figure 7) during the
2022–23 hunting season. In the Central Region, harvest
in 2022–23 was 42.7% less than the long-term (1999–
2021) average (196,300 birds/year) and 20.4% less than
last year (141,300 birds).
Although HIP provides statewide estimates of
woodcock hunter numbers, it is not possible to develop
regional estimates due to some hunters being registered
for HIP in more than 1 state. Therefore, regional
estimates of seasonal hunting success rates cannot be
determined on a per hunter basis. All estimates have
been rounded to the nearest hundred. Data from Canada
indicate that the annual number of successful hunters
and annual harvest have been similar since 2009
(Appendix B). The most recent data available indicate
that an estimated 3,018 successful hunters harvested
20,855 woodcock during the 2021 season in Canada
(Gendron and Smith 2019; Appendix
B).

In the Eastern Region, the 2023 index was 2.62
singing males per route, while it was 2.61 in the Central
Management Region (Figure 4, Table 2). Annual indices
(1968–2023) by state, province, and region are available
in Table 2.
Parts-collection Survey
A total of 756 woodcock hunters (Table 3) from
states with a woodcock season sent in a total of 7,051
usable woodcock wings for the 2022–2023 PCS (Table
4).
The 2022 recruitment index in the U.S. portion of
the Eastern Region (1.21 immatures per adult female)
was 12.3% less than the 2021 index of 1.38, and 24.9%
less than the long-term (1963–2021) regional average of
1.61 (Table 4, Fig 5). In the Central Region, the 2022
recruitment index (1.23 immatures per adult female)
was 18.2% less than the 2021 index of 1.51 and was
17.0% less than the long-term regional average of 1.49
(Table 4, Fig 5). Percent change for all comparisons was
calculated using unrounded recruitment indices.
Harvest Information Program
Estimates of woodcock harvest, number of active
hunters, days afield, and seasonal hunting success from
the 2022–2023 HIP survey are provided in Table 5. In
the Eastern Management Region, woodcock hunters

5

Fig. 6. Harvest Information Program Survey estimates of days
spent afield by U.S. woodcock hunters, 1999–2022. The
dashed line represents the 1999–2021 average and error bars
represent the 95% confidence interval of the point estimate.

Fig. 7. Harvest Information Program Survey estimates of U.S.
woodcock harvest, 1999–2022. The dashed line represents the
1999–2021 average and the error bars represent the 95%
confidence interval of the point estimate.

Acknowledgements
Personnel from the USFWS, CWS, U.S. Forest
Service (USFS), U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), Birds
Canada, many state and provincial agencies, and other
individuals assisted with collecting SGS data. Special
thanks to M. Huang (CT), B. Williams (IL), A. Phelps
(IN), H. Walbridge (MD), D. Scarpitti (MA), D.
Avers (MI), K. Connor (NB), J. Carloni (NH), J. Sloan
(NJ), A. Butler and J. Stiller (NY), L. Millett (NS), L.
Fendrick (OH), D. Adams and M. Lovallo (PA), M.
Ginn (PEI), L. Bonczek (RI), A. Bouton (VT), D. Garst
(VA), M. Peters (WV), K. Jones (Birds Canada), T.
Barney, A. Hicks, C. Roy, M. Tetreault, and M.
Schuster (CWS), and M. Mills and K. VanBeek
(USFWS) for providing state, province, and regional
SGS coordination this year. We especially thank all
observers who conducted SGS routes.
Special appreciation is extended to P. Denmon and
K. Holcomb (USFWS) for coordinating local logistics
and hosting the 2023 wingbee, which was held in
Chincoteague, Virginia. Other individuals who
participated in the wingbee were: A. Stewart (Hillsdale
College), J. Duguay (LA), J. Plante and B. Veverka
(Mianus River Gorge, Inc.), B. Barlow (MI), L. Shartell
(MN), L. Fendrick and M. Wiley (OH), P. Velez (PCS
Participant), R. Tyl (PA), G. Costanzo (VA), M. Balibit
and Z. Poulton (VA Nature Conservancy), C. Kolbmann
(U. of Oklahoma), and B. Bowser, R. Brown, K. Daly,

T. Edwards (retired), J. Foth, C. Kelly, A. Philson, R.
Rau, K. Walker, K. VanBeek, K. Vartenigian (USFWS).
We especially thank all the woodcock hunters who
sent in wings for the survey.
The Branch of Monitoring and Data Management
within the Division of Migratory Bird Management
(USFWS) mailed PCS materials, organized wing
submissions, assisted with data management and
provided HIP estimates (special thanks to S. Catino, T.
Ceaser II, S. Chandler, S. Finucane, K. Fleming, L.
Heckstall, P. Mathias, and R. Raftovich). IRTM
(USFWS) assisted in general maintenance for the SGS
data entry website. To streamline data processing steps,
N. Zimpfer (USFWS) developed SQL queries in
Program R. J. Sauer (USGS) developed computer
programs for calculating trends and indices from SGS
data and conducted this year’s analyses for the survey
with help from J. Hostetler (USGS). T. Cooper, P.
Devers, P. Garrettson, and D. Scott reviewed earlier
drafts of this report and provided helpful comments.

6

Literature Cited
Coon, R. A., T. J. Dwyer, and J. W. Artmann. 1977.
Identification of harvest units for the American
woodcock.
Proceedings of the American
Woodcock Symposium. 6:147-153.
Duke, G. E. 1966. Reliability of censuses of singing
male woodcock.
Journal of Wildlife
Management 30:697-707.
Elden, R. C., W. V. Bevill, P. I. Padding, J. E. Frampton,
and D. L. Shroufe. 2002. Pages 7-16 in J.M. Ver
Steeg and R.C. Elden, compilers. Harvest
Information
Program:
Evaluation
and
recommendations. International Association of
Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Migratory Shore and
Upland Game Bird Working Group, Ad Hoc
Committee on HIP, Washington, D. C.
Gendron, M. H., and A. C. Smith. 2019. National
Harvest Survey web site. Canadian Wildlife
Service, Environment and Climate Change
Canada, Ottawa, Ontario. https://wildlifespecies.canada.ca/harvest-survey
Goudy, W. H. 1960. Factors affecting woodcock
spring population indexes in southern Michigan.
M. S. Thesis. Michigan State University, E.
Lansing, MI.
Kelley, J. R., S. Williamson and T. R. Cooper. 2008.
American Woodcock conservation plan:
A summary of and recommendations for
woodcock conservation in North America.
Washington: U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Publications.
Krohn, W. B., F. W. Martin and K. P. Burnham. 1974.
Band recovery distribution and survival estimates
of Maine woodcock. 8pp. In Proceedings of the
Fifth American Woodcock Workshop, Athens,
GA.
Link, W. A., and J. R. Sauer. 2002. A hierarchical
model of population change with application to
Cerulean Warblers. Ecology 83:2832-2840.
Martin, F. W. 1964. Woodcock age and sex
determination from wings. Journal of Wildlife
Management 28:287-293.
Martin, F. W., S. O. Williams III, J. D. Newsom, and L.
L. Glasgow. 1969. Analysis of records of
Louisiana-banded woodcock. Proceedings of the
3rd Annual Conference of the Southeastern
Association of Game and Fish Commissioners
23:85-96.
Mendall, H. L., and C. M. Aldous. 1943. The ecology
and management of the American woodcock.
Maine Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit,
University of Maine, Orono, Maine. 201 pp.
Owen, R. B., Jr., J. M. Anderson, J. W. Artmann, E. R.
Clark, T. G. Dilworth, L. E. Gregg, F. W. Martin,
J. D. Newsom, and S. R. Pursglove, Jr. 1977.
American woodcock (Philohela minor =

Scolopax minor of Edwards 1974), Pages 149186 in G. C. Sanderson, editor. Management of
migratory shore and upland game birds in North
America. International Association of Fish and
Wildlife Agencies, Washington, D. C.
Sauer, J. R., and J. B. Bortner. 1991. Population trends
from the American Woodcock Singing-ground
Survey, 1970-88. Journal of Wildlife
Management 55:300-312.
Sauer, J. R., W. A. Link, W. L. Kendall, J.R. Kelley, and
D. K. Niven. 2008. A hierarchical model for
estimating change in American woodcock
populations. Journal of Wildlife Management, 72
(1):204-214.
Sauer, J. R., W. A. Link, M. E. Seamans, and R. D. Rau.
2021. American woodcock singing-ground
survey: comparison of four models for trend in
population size. Journal of Fish and Wildlife
Management 12:83–97.
Sepik, G. F. 1994. A woodcock in the hand. Ruffed
Grouse Society, Coraopolis, PA.
Whitcomb, D. A. 1974. Characteristics of an insular
woodcock population. Michigan Department of
Natural Resources, Wildlife Division Report
2720.

7

Table 1. Short-term (2022–2023), 10-year (2013–2023), and long-term (1968–2023) trends (% change per yeara) in
the number of American woodcock heard during the Singing-ground Survey. Trends and 95% credible intervals (CI)
were estimated using a hierarchical log-linear modeling technique (Sauer et al. 2021).
State,
Province,
or Region

Shortterm
Lower
95% CI

Shortterm
Upper
95% CI

10-year
%
Change

10-year
Lower
95% CI

10-year
Upper
95% CI

Longterm %
Change

LongLongTerm
Term
Lower
Upper
95% CI 95% CI

Routes
2022b

Routes
2023c

nd

ShortTerm %
Change

CT

6

3

11

-3.59

-28.52

26.32

-1.98

-7.43

3.17

-2.32

-3.99

-0.59

DE
ME
MD

0
56
5

0
54
9

3
78
26

0.00
-5.35
-1.66

-27.06
-18.45
-25.25

37.44
8.18
28.91

-0.66
-1.84
-2.69

-10.95
-3.80
-9.49

8.52
0.08
3.72

-1.20
-1.00
-3.43

-5.58
-1.45
-5.08

1.07
-0.53
-2.02

MA
NB
NH

9
54
13

9
53
14

23
76
19

-0.18
1.61
-1.29

-19.41
-12.13
-18.95

23.56
17.51
18.24

-2.23
-1.94
-2.06

-5.97
-3.86
-5.40

1.75
0.00
1.17

-2.42
-1.04
-0.66

-3.38
-1.61
-1.54

-1.45
-0.51
0.19

NJ
NY
NS
PA

3
80
40
33

9
82
41
31

19
119
66
86

0.85
-4.05
0.90
3.94

-29.53
-14.83
-12.06
-11.13

44.70
6.35
14.92
24.22

-2.10
-1.95
-0.11
2.41

-9.16
-3.64
-2.20
-0.60

5.54
-0.35
1.98
6.08

-4.02
-0.80
-0.32
-0.47

-5.43
-1.21
-0.91
-1.09

-2.61
-0.40
0.24
0.18

PEI
QUE
RI

10
36
2

9
36
1

13
155
5

-1.81
-1.08
1.27

-21.85
-12.75
-31.80

21.32
11.30
54.47

1.16
-0.93
2.46

-2.60
-3.41
-7.13

4.92
1.36
17.95

-0.53
-0.28
-2.29

-1.54
-0.99
-5.13

0.52
0.45
0.28

VT
VA
WV

19
20
18

18
18
19

24
75
59

-2.90
-1.24
-4.76

-22.71
-28.17
-22.60

20.61
33.10
14.11

-0.18
-1.85
-3.78

-3.34
-8.44
-7.64

3.04
4.98
-0.22

-0.61
-4.14
-2.39

-1.48
-5.36
-3.31

0.26
-3.01
-1.53

Eastern

404

406

857

-1.20

-6.34

3.84

-1.18

-2.06

-0.33

-0.86

-1.11

-0.62

IL

29

20

51

-34.94

-69.46

8.98

3.15

-5.92

13.63

-1.08

-3.24

0.97

IN
MBe
MI

14
4
113

11
13
113

63
31
161

0.07
-0.04
4.96

-26.86
-17.76
-5.29

36.49
22.28
16.61

-2.73
-0.38
-1.64

-9.86
-3.63
-2.92

3.98
3.01
-0.34

-3.73
-0.46
-0.65

-5.09
-2.63
-0.96

-2.50
1.66
-0.32

MN
OH
ON

76
37
84

78
34
89

127
74
177

6.26
-1.78
5.86

-6.34
-19.38
-6.02

21.21
20.45
19.67

0.71
-6.04
-2.12

-0.94
-9.21
-3.65

2.40
-3.09
-0.52

0.94
-2.24
-1.01

0.44
-2.96
-1.41

1.50
-1.55
-0.60

WI
Central

94
451

83
441

134
787

4.46
4.64

-7.33
-1.12

18.05
10.82

-0.74
-1.25

-2.39
-1.98

0.96
-0.49

-0.01
-0.53

-0.43
-0.73

0.41
-0.33

Continent

855

847

1,644

1.61

-2.27

5.61

-1.22

-1.78

-0.64

-0.71

-0.87

-0.54

a

Median of route trends estimated used hierarchical modeling. To estimate the total percent change over several
years, use: (100((% change/100)+1)y)-100, where y is the number of years. Note: extrapolating the estimated trend
statistic (% change per year) over time (e.g., 30 years) may exaggerate the total change over the period.
b
Total number of routes surveyed in 2022.
c
Total number of routes surveyed in 2023 for which data were received by 27 June 2023.
d
Number of routes with at least one year of non-zero data between 1968 and 2023.
e
Manitoba began participating in the Singing-ground Survey in 1992.

8

Table 2. Breeding population indices (singing-males per route) for American woodcock from the Singing-ground Survey, 1968–2023. These indices are based
on 1968–2023 trends that were estimated using hierarchical modeling techniques. Dashes indicate no data were available for that year.
State, Province, or
Region
Eastern Region
CT
DE
MA
MD
ME
NB
NH
NJ
NS
NY
PA
PEI
QUE
RI
VA
VT
WV
Region

1968

1969

1970

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

---0.77
---1.78
6.64
------4.19
4.74
4.54
2.07
---------------1.59
4.22

3.01
0.76
3.84
1.83
6.73
10.32
3.83
4.39
4.33
4.55
2.05
4.98
---1.43
1.34
3.51
1.57
4.20

3.04
0.77
3.95
1.75
7.11
9.68
3.91
4.93
3.96
4.31
2.15
5.07
---1.49
1.32
3.92
1.48
4.15

2.89
0.76
3.96
1.72
6.83
8.81
3.74
5.87
4.16
4.43
2.13
5.23
4.95
1.66
1.15
4.01
1.44
4.07

2.83
0.76
3.75
1.65
6.77
8.32
3.83
5.40
4.16
4.38
2.06
4.90
5.02
1.56
1.04
4.32
1.48
4.00

2.60
0.77
3.77
1.60
6.99
7.82
3.56
5.85
4.30
4.39
1.96
4.88
4.96
1.41
0.95
4.24
1.42
3.95

2.44
0.77
3.41
1.54
7.28
8.06
3.69
5.40
4.41
4.33
1.78
5.15
5.01
1.22
1.08
4.61
1.34
3.98

2.22
0.76
2.86
1.46
7.36
8.13
3.59
4.35
4.29
4.04
1.72
5.55
5.04
1.04
1.03
5.01
1.29
3.90

1.84
0.68
2.59
1.32
6.81
6.95
3.52
3.19
4.15
3.94
1.69
5.19
5.09
0.90
0.97
5.13
1.18
3.67

1.62
0.65
2.45
1.30
5.92
7.14
3.46
2.78
4.03
3.84
1.64
4.81
5.17
0.78
0.91
4.92
1.08
3.55

1.41
0.62
2.36
1.32
5.59
6.10
3.39
2.44
3.97
3.69
1.58
4.45
5.45
0.69
0.81
4.04
0.98
3.39

1.37
0.62
2.34
1.33
5.67
5.94
3.33
2.47
3.63
3.90
1.54
4.16
5.64
0.63
0.76
3.64
1.04
3.40

1.37
0.63
2.14
1.36
5.27
5.34
3.39
2.11
3.40
4.14
1.43
3.64
5.68
0.59
0.71
3.20
1.07
3.30

1.42
0.64
2.07
1.29
5.40
5.58
3.23
1.96
3.15
4.04
1.36
3.41
5.55
0.56
0.76
2.72
1.14
3.25

1.49
0.64
1.87
1.16
4.73
5.41
2.95
1.82
3.01
3.84
1.33
3.49
5.53
0.55
0.79
2.30
1.11
3.11

1.44
0.65
1.74
1.01
4.88
5.22
2.91
1.87
3.09
3.86
1.33
3.81
5.65
0.52
0.78
2.53
1.05
3.13

Central Region
IL
IN
MB
MI
MN
OH
ON
WI
Region

---1.37
---6.99
------7.35
3.39
3.50

---1.10
---6.95
2.34
---8.04
3.52
3.58

0.24
0.99
---6.94
2.43
1.65
8.56
3.90
3.71

0.29
0.90
---6.68
2.68
1.57
8.45
3.92
3.68

0.29
1.05
---6.82
2.86
1.55
8.97
4.00
3.83

0.27
1.02
---7.24
3.30
1.47
9.03
4.21
3.99

0.29
0.92
---8.09
3.84
1.52
9.13
4.34
4.24

0.27
0.80
---8.28
3.83
1.45
8.97
4.44
4.23

0.23
0.77
---7.96
3.92
1.52
9.14
4.28
4.19

0.28
0.76
---7.57
4.05
1.44
9.47
4.54
4.23

0.33
0.80
---7.93
4.24
1.31
9.82
4.72
4.39

0.31
0.88
---7.89
4.11
1.22
9.89
4.68
4.37

0.32
0.80
---7.38
4.42
1.24
9.17
3.97
4.10

0.41
0.79
---6.64
4.12
1.30
8.20
3.46
3.74

0.44
0.64
---6.59
3.93
1.18
7.10
3.41
3.50

0.78
0.60
---5.92
3.54
1.17
6.87
3.41
3.36

Continent

3.87

3.89

3.94

3.88

3.92

3.97

4.11

4.06

3.93

3.89

3.89

3.88

3.70

3.49

3.31

3.25

9

Table 2. Continued
State, Province, or
Region
Eastern Region
CT
DE
MA
MD
ME
NB
NH
NJ
NS
NY
PA
PEI
QUE
RI
VA
VT
WV
Region

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

1.39
0.64
1.79
0.92
5.06
4.93
2.96
1.93
3.08
3.67
1.35
4.07
5.68
0.49
0.84
2.63
1.00
3.11

1.39
0.63
1.80
0.82
5.33
4.88
3.21
1.90
3.17
3.78
1.34
4.22
5.78
0.46
0.61
2.70
0.95
3.14

1.40
0.64
1.76
0.72
5.71
4.57
3.64
1.82
3.21
3.64
1.35
4.34
5.96
0.44
0.57
3.01
0.93
3.17

1.35
0.64
1.71
0.66
5.98
4.80
3.50
1.85
3.04
3.56
1.34
4.19
6.23
0.43
0.53
3.47
0.90
3.24

1.34
0.64
1.65
0.62
5.75
5.45
3.38
1.60
3.09
3.64
1.34
4.39
6.53
0.42
0.47
3.81
0.87
3.32

1.19
0.64
1.53
0.60
5.55
6.09
3.26
1.46
3.09
3.55
1.38
4.46
6.68
0.42
0.43
3.81
0.86
3.35

1.12
0.64
1.47
0.57
4.83
5.68
3.14
1.34
3.04
3.74
1.49
4.19
6.47
0.43
0.44
3.60
0.86
3.25

1.07
0.63
1.41
0.54
4.84
5.44
3.20
1.21
3.19
3.75
1.57
4.01
6.27
0.43
0.43
3.37
0.82
3.20

1.01
0.63
1.33
0.50
4.47
5.36
3.13
1.05
3.28
3.53
1.48
3.84
6.17
0.44
0.44
2.80
0.81
3.08

0.98
0.64
1.29
0.51
4.45
5.91
3.19
0.94
3.33
3.33
1.45
3.67
6.10
0.45
0.42
2.72
0.80
3.08

1.01
0.64
1.29
0.49
4.23
6.13
3.36
0.87
3.23
3.06
1.36
3.61
5.86
0.44
0.37
2.65
0.81
2.98

1.05
0.65
1.31
0.47
4.09
5.89
3.65
0.90
3.31
3.00
1.40
3.76
5.50
0.42
0.33
2.64
0.83
2.89

1.07
0.65
1.36
0.46
3.75
5.48
3.78
0.89
3.36
2.89
1.42
3.98
5.19
0.41
0.31
2.69
0.80
2.77

1.03
0.65
1.45
0.43
3.84
5.79
3.82
0.85
3.34
2.91
1.43
3.92
5.20
0.40
0.31
2.92
0.78
2.81

1.01
0.64
1.55
0.41
3.95
6.02
3.84
0.89
3.48
2.95
1.47
3.74
5.36
0.39
0.28
3.30
0.74
2.90

0.98
0.61
1.73
0.42
4.22
6.57
3.86
0.92
3.74
2.99
1.40
3.53
5.31
0.38
0.27
3.72
0.73
2.98

Central Region
IL
IN
MB
MI
MN
OH
ON
WI
Region

0.80
0.59
---6.44
3.46
1.15
7.05
3.63
3.50

1.00
0.59
---6.71
3.76
1.07
7.71
3.76
3.72

1.02
0.64
---6.99
4.00
1.02
8.04
4.16
3.92

1.08
0.63
---6.73
4.11
1.04
8.03
4.26
3.92

0.67
0.59
---6.99
4.35
1.08
8.10
4.10
3.91

0.63
0.59
---6.91
3.96
1.05
8.10
4.05
3.82

0.51
0.66
6.05
6.97
4.35
1.19
7.80
3.84
3.81

0.61
0.67
6.05
7.19
4.20
1.16
7.69
3.68
3.80

0.53
0.63
6.07
5.98
3.72
1.13
7.17
3.18
3.36

0.54
0.55
6.11
5.68
3.59
1.05
6.65
3.03
3.17

0.42
0.48
6.04
5.20
3.32
1.00
5.91
2.77
2.87

0.34
0.44
5.74
5.44
3.32
0.95
5.87
2.72
2.87

0.34
0.41
4.99
5.33
3.19
0.90
5.26
2.68
2.74

0.34
0.41
4.14
5.32
3.06
0.84
5.52
2.65
2.74

0.38
0.43
4.16
5.87
3.39
0.85
5.74
2.80
2.95

0.42
0.41
4.19
5.36
3.62
0.79
5.77
3.04
2.93

Continent

3.30

3.43

3.54

3.58

3.61

3.59

3.53

3.50

3.22

3.13

2.92

2.88

2.76

2.78

2.92

2.96

10

Table 2. Continued
State, Province, or
Region
Eastern Region
CT
DE
MA
MD
ME
NB
NH
NJ
NS
NY
PA
PEI
QUE
RI
VA
VT
WV
Region

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

0.90
0.59
1.70
0.45
4.36
6.59
3.62
0.87
3.77
2.92
1.28
3.41
5.13
0.38
0.25
3.74
0.69
2.93

0.83
0.56
1.66
0.47
4.11
6.76
3.60
0.79
3.60
2.87
1.35
3.13
5.05
0.37
0.22
3.29
0.65
2.88

0.78
0.54
1.67
0.45
3.94
6.80
3.64
0.71
3.37
2.90
1.39
2.84
4.98
0.36
0.21
3.02
0.63
2.83

0.77
0.52
1.70
0.45
4.12
7.20
3.80
0.67
3.32
3.05
1.43
2.79
5.01
0.34
0.21
3.06
0.62
2.92

0.75
0.50
1.74
0.44
4.33
7.35
3.81
0.58
3.41
3.21
1.47
2.85
5.06
0.33
0.20
3.14
0.59
2.99

0.75
0.49
1.67
0.44
4.45
7.68
3.66
0.54
3.32
3.16
1.50
2.99
5.09
0.32
0.19
3.25
0.58
3.02

0.76
0.47
1.64
0.45
4.39
7.16
3.33
0.55
3.18
3.18
1.45
3.12
4.88
0.32
0.18
3.17
0.59
2.91

0.79
0.46
1.59
0.44
4.19
6.66
2.98
0.56
3.12
3.09
1.46
3.09
4.75
0.31
0.18
2.85
0.61
2.80

0.85
0.45
1.63
0.43
4.19
6.35
2.98
0.55
3.07
3.08
1.57
2.91
4.67
0.31
0.17
2.66
0.63
2.77

0.89
0.44
1.59
0.41
4.21
6.14
3.23
0.56
3.17
3.30
1.61
2.96
4.69
0.31
0.15
2.68
0.64
2.80

0.95
0.43
1.49
0.39
4.48
7.12
3.30
0.49
3.48
3.50
1.61
3.00
4.66
0.30
0.16
2.74
0.64
2.95

1.04
0.42
1.40
0.36
4.64
7.20
3.20
0.53
3.49
3.46
1.45
3.19
4.63
0.30
0.17
2.69
0.66
2.94

1.08
0.42
1.31
0.35
4.68
7.50
3.31
0.57
3.82
3.53
1.31
3.40
4.61
0.30
0.16
2.71
0.66
2.98

1.05
0.41
1.28
0.34
4.61
7.14
3.30
0.54
4.03
3.56
1.26
3.37
4.69
0.31
0.16
2.58
0.62
2.95

1.04
0.40
1.29
0.34
4.38
6.65
3.21
0.48
3.78
3.51
1.33
3.46
4.58
0.31
0.15
2.41
0.60
2.85

1.00
0.40
1.31
0.34
4.10
6.08
2.94
0.41
3.38
3.64
1.37
3.19
4.53
0.32
0.13
2.42
0.57
2.76

Central Region
IL
IN
MB
MI
MN
OH
ON
WI
Region

0.43
0.39
4.31
5.41
3.95
0.78
6.26
2.98
3.05

0.48
0.37
4.28
5.21
3.67
0.78
6.02
2.86
2.93

0.53
0.33
4.03
5.30
3.21
0.79
5.94
2.63
2.84

0.70
0.31
4.23
5.46
3.19
0.83
5.74
2.72
2.88

0.68
0.32
4.25
5.56
3.33
0.98
5.95
2.85
2.98

0.44
0.32
4.49
5.40
3.61
0.97
6.22
3.12
3.03

0.39
0.29
4.40
5.05
3.56
0.91
6.17
3.13
2.94

0.26
0.27
4.42
4.88
3.56
0.80
6.12
3.36
2.90

0.20
0.27
4.44
4.63
3.39
0.83
5.52
3.16
2.71

0.16
0.27
4.63
4.64
3.67
0.96
5.14
3.17
2.71

0.15
0.27
4.87
4.86
4.23
0.97
4.96
3.28
2.81

0.13
0.25
5.23
5.31
4.24
0.97
5.30
3.55
2.98

0.10
0.24
5.16
5.59
4.05
0.96
5.42
3.70
3.03

0.10
0.23
4.86
5.78
3.63
0.93
5.21
3.64
2.96

0.11
0.22
4.86
5.65
3.34
0.88
5.06
3.17
2.79

0.13
0.21
5.16
5.58
4.07
0.87
4.91
3.32
2.89

Continent

2.99

2.90

2.84

2.90

2.99

3.02

2.93

2.85

2.74

2.76

2.88

2.96

3.01

2.96

2.83

2.82

11

Table 2. Continued
State,
Province, or
Region
2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

Eastern Region

CT
DE
MA
MD
ME
NB
NH
NJ
NS
NY
PA
PEI
QUE
RI
VA
VT
WV
Region

1.00
0.39
1.23
0.34
4.22
6.01
2.78
0.39
3.37
3.61
1.41
2.97
4.51
0.32
0.12
2.60
0.56
2.76

0.98
0.39
1.12
0.34
3.73
5.07
2.53
0.36
3.27
3.55
1.41
3.07
4.42
0.33
0.12
2.47
0.56
2.59

0.96
0.39
1.04
0.32
3.51
4.72
2.40
0.34
3.21
3.21
1.41
3.07
4.25
0.34
0.13
2.42
0.53
2.46

0.92
0.39
0.99
0.30
3.72
5.32
2.38
0.34
3.30
3.13
1.42
3.19
4.11
0.35
0.13
2.16
0.52
2.49

0.91
0.39
0.96
0.29
3.78
5.34
2.51
0.37
3.30
3.10
1.44
3.52
4.18
0.37
0.14
2.12
0.50
2.51

0.90
0.39
0.98
0.28
3.99
5.35
2.65
0.39
3.59
3.07
1.48
3.87
4.24
0.38
0.14
2.32
0.47
2.57

0.89
0.39
1.02
0.27
4.04
5.77
2.71
0.44
3.95
3.04
1.53
3.85
4.31
0.40
0.14
2.60
0.44
2.66

0.86
0.39
1.02
0.26
3.82
5.86
2.67
0.44
3.99
2.92
1.60
3.77
4.25
0.41
0.14
2.53
0.42
2.62

Central Region
IL
IN
MB
MI
MN
OH
ON
WI
Region

0.13
0.21
5.37
5.29
4.72
0.80
4.77
3.36
2.90

0.14
0.20
5.76
5.04
4.84
0.72
4.61
3.49
2.87

0.15
0.20
5.45
4.08
4.30
0.70
4.11
3.06
2.49

0.17
0.19
5.32
4.22
4.02
0.70
3.86
3.13
2.46

0.22
0.18
5.11
4.22
3.93
0.61
3.90
3.19
2.46

0.18
0.17
4.91
4.21
3.67
0.53
3.91
3.15
2.40

0.21
0.17
4.68
4.66
3.66
0.51
3.97
3.23
2.49

0.13
0.17
4.69
4.89
3.89
0.50
4.21
3.37
2.61

Continent

2.83

2.73

2.48

2.48

2.49

2.49

2.58

2.62

12

Table 3. The number of U.S. hunters by state that submitted woodcock wings for the 2021–2022 and 2022–2023
Parts-collection Surveys. This number may include a small number of hunters that were sent envelopes in prior years
and who subsequently submitted wings from birds shot in the current survey year. In addition, some hunters hunted
and submitted wings from more than one state.

State of
residence
Alabama
Arkansas
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Nebraska
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Vermont
Virginia
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Total

2021-2022 Season
3
3
14
6
0
3
0
13
4
0
4
9
104
10
23
171
94
1
10
0
43
13
50
8
0
12
0
41
4
7
1
1
34
24
9
149
868

13

2022-2023 Season
3
1
13
6
0
3
1
14
2
0
3
10
89
8
20
159
85
2
9
0
39
10
33
7
0
9
0
28
2
5
1
2
33
20
5
134
756

Table 4. Number of woodcock wings received from hunters, and indices of recruitment in the U.S. Recruitment
indices for individual states with ≥125 submitted wings were calculated as the ratio of immatures per adult female.
The regional indices for 2022 were weighted by the relative contribution of each state to the cumulative number of
adult female and immature wings received during 1963–2021.
Total
Adult
Adult
State or
Wings
Total
Female
Female Immature Immature Recruitment Recruitment
1963Region of
Wings
Wings
Wings
Wings
Wings
Index
Index
harvest
2021
2022
1963-2021
2022
1963-2021
2022
1963-2021
2022
CT
16,045
60
3,611
19
9,746
32
2.7
---DE
648
20
105
6
437
12
4.2
---FL
678
0
153
0
422
0
2.8
---GA
3,485
15
1,100
4
1,471
2
1.3
---ME
94,267
740
27,921
256
47,029
321
1.7
1.3
MD
5,250
39
1,283
13
2,987
22
2.3
---MA
26,529
155
8,325
53
12,799
74
1.5
1.4
NH
40,047
368
13,020
120
18,545
168
1.4
1.4
NJ
28,312
81
6,539
27
16,756
35
2.6
---NY
67,631
245
23,010
103
30,384
86
1.3
0.8
NC
4,983
111
1,622
42
2,310
38
1.4
---PA
35,185
130
11,194
43
16,206
64
1.4
1.5
RI
2,505
6
487
1
1,657
3
3.4
---SC
4,749
117
1,526
47
2,134
35
1.4
---VT
31,453
310
10,349
111
14,291
117
1.4
1.1
VA
7,525
188
2,002
51
4,046
92
2.0
1.8
WV
6,810
15
2,066
6
3,384
6
1.6
---Eastern
Region
376,102
2,600
114,313
902
184,604
1,107
1.6
1.2
AL
AR
IL
IN
IA
KS
KY
LA
MI
MN
MS
MO
NE
ND
OH
OK
TN
TX
WI
Central
Region

1,088
614
1,519
9,091
1,423
50
1,387
34,677
154,990
50,921
2,028
4,971
13
4
15,854
178
1,402
1,177
105,500

24
4
2
70
2
0
12
109
1,586
955
13
56
0
0
63
0
1
34
1,520

312
201
358
2,325
459
9
355
7,830
51,182
18,289
569
1,354
5
3
4,878
39
378
347
36,228

14
1
1
32
0
0
2
24
544
406
7
21
0
0
19
0
0
16
547

491
249
851
5,014
638
26
697
22,343
75,340
21,632
1,026
2,413
6
1
7,454
94
707
568
49,043

0
3
0
26
2
0
5
72
745
351
3
13
0
0
30
0
1
13
658

1.6
1.2
2.4
2.2
1.4
---2.0
2.9
1.5
1.2
1.8
1.8
------1.5
2.4
1.9
1.6
1.4

------------------------1.4
0.9
------------------------1.2

386,887

4,451

125,121

1,634

185,853

1,922

1.5

1.2

14

Table 5. Preliminary estimates of woodcock harvest, hunter numbers, days afield, and hunter success from the
2022–2023 Harvest Information Program (note: estimates rounded to the nearest 100 for harvest, hunters, and days
afield).
Active
Woodcock
Hunters
200
100
4,800
400
600
300
6,800
6,900
2,100
200
5,700
3,400
100
3,900
500
500
100
36,500

Active
Woodcock
Hunters
SE
<100
<100
3,300
100
100
<100
3,100
3,600
1,000
<100
2,700
1,600
<100
3,700
<100
<100
<100
naa

Days
Afield
SE
200
100
5,200
300
900
200
5,000
6,200
3,100
400
6,700
2,600
100
3,700
500
300
100
13,000

Season
Harvest
Per
Hunter
SE
1.04
2.69
1.83
0.66
1.98
0.9
1.79
0.85
1.26
0.63
0.46
0.28
1.09
1.60
1.06
0.58
0.88
nab

State or Region
CT
DE
FL
GA
MA
MD
ME
NC
NH
NJ
NY
PA
RI
SC
VA
VT
WV
Eastern Region

Harvest
400
300
7,500
1,000
2,800
800
20,400
9,900
5,000
600
4,300
1,900
100
5,500
2,700
1,900
300
65,400

Harvest
SE
200
100
7,000
200
1,300
200
8,000
2,600
800
100
1,700
200
<100
3,700
500
300
100
11,800

AL
AR
IA
IL
IN
KS
KY
LA
MI
MN
MO
MS
NEc
OH
OKc
TN
TX
WI
Central Region

500
2,400
100
100
300
100
400
9,200
32,100
23,300
3,800
1,400

300
1,600
<100
100
100
<100
200
5,300
1,400
3,000
3,200
900

100
1,800
100
1,800
1,100
100
1,500
2,300
23,700
14,100
1,700
200

<100
1,600
<100
1,700
900
<100
1,400
1,800
5,500
4,000
1,600
<100

400
2,200
400
2,300
1,400
100
6,100
8,200
55,800
54,700
2,500
900

200
1,600
200
1,700
1,000
<100
5,500
5,300
8,700
19,200
1,600
300

3.83
1.37
0.65
0.06
0.25
0.75
0.24
3.95
1.36
1.65
2.21
6.50

2.81
1.55
0.28
0.07
0.23
0.63
0.24
3.77
0.32
0.52
2.74
4.28

2,100

1,300

1,700

1,200

3,100

1,300

1.20

1.11

200
3,900
32,600
112,500

100
2,300
2,900
8,300

200
4,800
13,300
68,600

<100
3,200
3,200
naa

700
5,700
45,200
189,600

200
3,200
10,100
25,000

1.12
0.82
2.45
nab

0.51
0.74
0.62
nab

U.S. Total

177,900

14,400

105,100

naa

283,600

28,100

nab

nab

a

Days
Afield
800
200
7,600
1,600
3,700
1,000
17,600
19,100
8,100
1,400
13,500
7,900
200
5,100
3,300
2,300
400
94,000

Season
Harvest
Per
Hunter
2.67
4.71
1.58
2.48
4.41
2.83
3.00
1.43
2.42
2.68
0.75
0.57
2.20
1.39
4.91
3.65
2.55
nab

Hunter number estimates at the regional and national levels may be biased high because the HIP sample frames are state specific; therefore,
hunters were counted more than once if they hunted in >1 state. Variance was inestimable.
b
Regional estimates of hunter success could not be obtained due to the occurrence of individual hunters being registered in the Harvest
Information Program in more than 1 state.
C
No hunters that registered for HIP in Nebraska or Oklahoma said they intended to hunt American woodcock in 2022.

15

Appendix A. History of federal framework dates, season lengths, and daily bag limits for hunting American
woodcock in the U.S. portion of the Eastern and Central Regions, 1918 – 2023.
Eastern
Central
Eastern
Daily
Central
Daily
Eastern
Eastern Outside
Central
Central Outside
Season
Bag
Season
Bag
Years(s)
Dates
Length
Limit
Year(s)
Dates
Length
Limit
1918-26
Oct. 1 - Dec. 31
60
6
1918-26
Oct. 1 - Dec. 31
60
6
1927
Oct. 1 - Dec. 31
60
4
1927
Oct. 1 - Dec. 31
60
4
1928-39
Oct. 1 - Dec. 31
30
4
1928-39
Oct. 1 - Dec. 31
30
4
1940-47
Oct. 1 - Jan. 6
15
4
1940-47
Oct. 1 - Jan. 6
15
4
1948-52
Oct. 1 - Jan. 20
30
4
1948-52
Oct. 1 - Jan. 20
30
4
1953
Oct. 1 - Jan. 20
40
4
1953
Oct. 1 - Jan. 20
40
4
1954
Oct. 1 - Jan. 10
40
4
1954
Oct. 1 - Jan. 10
40
4
1955-57
Oct. 1 - Jan. 20
40
4
1955-57
Oct. 1 - Jan. 20
40
4
1958-60
Oct. 1 - Jan. 15
40
4
1958-60
Oct. 1 - Jan. 15
40
4
1961-62
Sep. 1 - Jan. 15
40
4
1961-62
Sep. 1 - Jan. 15
40
4
1963-64
Sep. 1 - Jan. 15
50
5
1963-64
Sep. 1 - Jan. 15
50
5
1965-66
Sep. 1 - Jan. 30
50
5
1965-66
Sep. 1 - Jan. 30
50
5
1967-69
Sep. 1 - Jan. 31
65
5
1967-69
Sep. 1 - Jan. 31
65
5
1970-71
Sep. 1 - Feb. 15
65
5
1970-71
Sep. 1 - Feb. 15
65
5
1972-81
Sep. 1 - Feb. 28
65
5
1972-90
Sep. 1 - Feb. 28
65
5
1982
Oct. 5 - Feb. 28
65
5
1991-96
Sep. 1 - Jan. 31
65
5
a
1983-84
Oct. 1 - Feb. 28
65
5
1997-20
Sep. 22 - Jan. 31
45
3
1985-96
Oct. 1 - Jan. 31
45
3
2021-23
Sep. 13 - Jan 31
45
3
1997-01
Oct. 6 - Jan. 31
30
3
2002-10
Oct. 1 - Jan. 31
30
3
2011-20
Oct. 1 - Jan. 31
45
3
2021-23
Sep. 13 - Jan 31
45
3
a
Saturday nearest September 22nd.

16

Appendix B. Estimates for the number of successful woodcock hunters and woodcock harvest in Canada (Gendron
and Smith 2019).

Figure B1. Estimated number of successful woodcock hunters in Canada and associated 95% confidence intervals,
1972–2021.

Figure B2. Estimated woodcock harvest in Canada and associated 95% confidence intervals, 1969–2021.

17

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Division of Migratory Bird Management
Branch of Assessment and Decision Support
11510 American Holly Drive
Laurel, Maryland 20708-4002
http://www.fws.gov
August 2023
For State Transfer Relay Service: TTY/Voice:711