Habitat

Throughout range found in areas with shrubs and/or small trees, including forest edges and interior, shrubby areas in logged and second-growth forests, marsh edges, grasslands with shrubs, successional fields, hedgerows in agricultural fields, plantings around buildings (190 Dow, D. D. (1969). Habitat utilization by Cardinals in central and peripheral breeding populations. Canadian Journal of Zoology 47: 409–417. Close , 191 Dow, D. D. (1969). Home range and habitat of the Cardinal in peripheral and central populations. Canadian Journal of Zoology 47: 103–114. Close , 192 Emlen, J. T. (1972). Size and structure of a wintering avian community in southern Texas. Ecology 53: 317–329. Close ), peatlands (193 Calmé, S., A. Desrochers, and J. L. Savard (2002). Regional significance of peatlands for avifaunal diversity in southern Quebec. Biological Conservation 107:273–281. Close ), riparian forests (194 Powell, B. F., and R. J. Steidl (2002). Habitat selection by riparian songbirds breeding in southern Arizona. Journal of Wildlife Management 66(4): 1096–1103. Close , 195 Davis, C. A. (2005). Breeding bird communities in riparian forests along the central Platte River, Nebraska. Great Plains Research 15(2): 199–211. Close , 154 Corman, T. E., and C. Wise-Gervais (2005). Arizona Breeding Bird Atlas. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, NM, USA. Close , 196 Scharf, W. C. (2007). Woodland bird use of in-channel islands in the central Platte River, Nebraska. Prairie Naturalist 39(1):15–28. Close ), mangrove forests (197 Russell, S. M., and G. Monson (1998). The Birds of Sonora. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona, USA. Close , 198 Lloyd, J. D., and T. Doyle (2011). Abundance and population trends of mangrove landbirds in southwest Florida. Journal of Field Ornithology 82(2): 132–139. Close , 199 Lloyd, J. D., and G. L. Slater (2014). Abundance and distribution of mangrove landbirds in Florida. North American Fauna 80: 1–45. Close ), and desert scrub (197 Russell, S. M., and G. Monson (1998). The Birds of Sonora. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona, USA. Close , 154 Corman, T. E., and C. Wise-Gervais (2005). Arizona Breeding Bird Atlas. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, NM, USA. Close , 200 Rodriguez-Estrella, R. (2007). Land use changes affect distributional patterns of desert birds in the Baja California peninsula, Mexico. Diversity and Distributions 13: 877–889. Close ).

Needs woody plants with dense foliage for nesting, and selects nest sites that are in denser vegetation than random points in the same habitat patch (201 Leston, L. F. V., and A. D. Rodewald (2006). Are urban forests ecological traps for understory birds? An examination using Northern Cardinals. Biological Conservation 131: 566–574. Close ; see Breeding: Nest Site), also needs conspicuous locations for song perches (190 Dow, D. D. (1969). Habitat utilization by Cardinals in central and peripheral breeding populations. Canadian Journal of Zoology 47: 409–417. Close ). In eastern Texas (50 Conner, R. N., M. E. Anderson, and J. F. Dickson (1986). Relationships among territory size, habitat, song and nesting success of Northern Cardinals. Auk 103: 23–31. Close ) for 27 territories: mean foliage density (m²/m³) at ground level, 0.27 ± 0.17 SD; at 1 m, 0.13 ± 0.05 SD; at 2 m, 0.12 ± 0.06 SD; at 3 m, 0.08 ± 0.04 SD; at 7–13 m, 0.04 ± 0.06 SD; at 13–20 m, 0.04 ± 0.06 SD; at > 20 m, 0.20 ± 0.37 SD; percent of territory covered by a closed tree canopy 26.9% ± 25.4 SD; vegetation height 13.4 m ± 6.7 SD; and ground cover 42.9% ± 26.7 SD.

In Sonora, common in floodplain rancheria fencerows containing mesquite (Prosopis) and graythorn (Condalia lycioides) (141 Rea, A. (1983). Once a River: Bird Life and Habitat Changes on the Middle Gila. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ, USA. Close ), and desert scrub containing mesquite, feather tree (Lysiloma watsonii), Pithecellobium spp., acacias, and mimosas (197 Russell, S. M., and G. Monson (1998). The Birds of Sonora. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona, USA. Close ).

Winter habitat use is similar to summer. Summer abundance of adults is higher versus winter abundance in the same forested study plots (central Ohio, 201 Leston, L. F. V., and A. D. Rodewald (2006). Are urban forests ecological traps for understory birds? An examination using Northern Cardinals. Biological Conservation 131: 566–574. Close ); occupancy rates are higher in the same shrubby plots in Alabama in summer versus winter (202 McClure, C. J. W., B. W. Rolek, and G. E. Hill (2013). Seasonal use of habitat by shrub-breeding birds in a southeastern national forest. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 125(4): 731–743. Close ). Lower numbers of adults in winter could be accounted for by cardinals leaving their territories to join foraging flocks (see Behavior: Spacing), or to visit bird feeding stations (see Diet and Foraging: Feeding: Microhabitat for Foraging). In central Ohio, winter abundance is best explained by minimum January temperatures, with higher cardinal densities in warmer urban forests than in colder rural forests (201 Leston, L. F. V., and A. D. Rodewald (2006). Are urban forests ecological traps for understory birds? An examination using Northern Cardinals. Biological Conservation 131: 566–574. Close ). In south Texas (192 Emlen, J. T. (1972). Size and structure of a wintering avian community in southern Texas. Ecology 53: 317–329. Close ), winter population density generally increased with shrub density and soil moisture as follows: grass-forb prairie 47/km² (based on 12 km of transects in 4.1 km² of habitat); scrubby grassland 2/km² (based on 15 km of transects in 6.1 km² of habitat); open brushland 67/km² (based on 14 km of transects in 6.6 km² of habitat); dense brushland 106/km² (based on 11 km of transects in 3.6 km² of habitat); 2–layer brushland 114/km² (based on 12 km of transects in 2.1 km² of habitat); oak woodland 148/km² (based on 14 km of transects in 1.7 km² of habitat); and riverine forest 692/km² (based on 11 km of transects in 1.15 km² of habitat); data from 8.33 hours of walking transects in each habitat type.

Abundant in fragmented landscapes (203 Donovan, T. M., and C. H. Flather (2002). Relationships among North American songbird trends, habitat fragmentation, and landscape occupancy. Ecological Applications 12(2): 364–374. Close ), as long as local habitat characteristics are appropriate (204 Brennan, S. P., and G. D. Schnell (2005). Relationship between bird abundances and landscape characteristics: The influence of scale. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 105(1–3): 209–228. Close , 205 Howell, J. E., J. T. Peterson, and M. J. Conroy (2008). Building hierarchical models of avian distributions for the state of Georgia. Journal of Wildlife Management 72: 168–178. Close ). Higher abundances in narrower than broader strips of riparian forest, likely because of the greater abundance of edge habitat and dense vegetation (206 Peak, R. G., and F. R. Thompson III (2006). Factors affecting avian species richness and density in riparian areas. Journal of Wildlife Management 70(1): 173–179. Close ). Urban woodlands generally support greater abundances and densities, compared to commensurate rural woodlands (51 Rodewald, A. D., and D. P. Shustack (2008). Consumer resource matching in urbanizing landscapes: Are synanthropic species over-matching? Ecology 89: 515–521. Close , 207 McKinney, R. A., and P. W. C. Paton (2009). Breeding birds associated with seasonal pools in the northeastern United States. Journal of Field Ornithology 80: 380–386. Close ).