Lanius ludovicianus

Linnaeus, 1766

Loggerhead Shrike

G4Apparently Secure Found in 115 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G4Apparently SecureGlobal Rank
Near threatenedIUCN
PSESA Status
HighThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.104527
Element CodeABPBR01030
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNNear threatened
Endemicoccurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassAves
OrderPasseriformes
FamilyLaniidae
GenusLanius
USESAPS
COSEWICE,T
Other Common Names
Alcaudón Verdugo (ES) loggerhead shrike (EN) Pie-grièche migratrice (FR)
Concept Reference
American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American birds. Seventh edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. [as modified by subsequent supplements and corrections published in The Auk]. Also available online: http://www.aou.org/.
Taxonomic Comments
Constitutes a superspecies with L. excubitor and L. sphenocercus (AOU 1998).
Conservation Status
Rank MethodExpertise without calculation
Review Date2016-04-09
Change Date2001-02-07
Edition Date2014-03-06
Edition AuthorsJudith Soule. Partially revised by G. Hammerson. Partially revised 2014-03-06 by Jue, Sally S.
Threat ImpactHigh
Range Extent>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences81 to >300
Rank Reasons
Still widespread and common in some areas but has been declining throughout North America since the 1960s, and perhaps earlier. The decline is particularly severe in the northeastern and north-central regions. The species is now extirpated from most of the Northeast, and is nearly extirpated from Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan. Part of the decline can be attributed to reforestation and loss of open habitat and thus represents a return to pre-settlement conditions when shrikes were probably absent from much of the heavily forested northern states. However, the decline has proceeded beyond what can be explained by habitat loss, as much suitable habitat remains unoccupied in most northern states. Further, decline has been recorded in all regions of the country, even those with much open habitat. Thus, the decline remains unexplained. Pesticides, loss of wintering habitat quality, and/or dependency on roadside habitat with high predation pressure have been suggested as possible causes. Of most urgent importance is research to unravel the cause of decline, and to identify critical habitat features.
Range Extent Comments
BREEDING: California, eastern Oregon, eastern Washington, and central Alberta eastward across southern Canada to southwestern New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, and south to southern Baja California, throughout Mexico to Oaxaca and Veracruz,the Gulf Coast, and southern Florida (AOU 1983). Recently has been disappearing from the northeastern portion of the breeding range. In the northeastern U.S., breeds in in western Maryland, extreme eastern West Virginia, and Virginia (perhaps several dozen pairs); extirpated elsewhere (Bartgis 1992, R. W. MacDonald pers. comm.). NON-BREEDING: central Washington, eastern Oregon, California, southern Nevada, northern Arizona, northern New Mexico, and (east of the Rockies) the southern half of breeding range south to the Gulf Coast, southern Florida, and Mexico (AOU 1983).
Occurrences Comments
This species is represented by a large number of occurrences (subpopulations). It has an extremely large range and population size (Birdlife International, 2014) and Partners in Flight (2013) estimates a global population of almost six million individuals.
Threat Impact Comments
PESTICIDES: Since shrikes are high on the food chain, pesticides have been implicated as a potential cause of the decline (Fraser and Luukkonen 1986). DDE, a metabolite of DDT, has been detected in eggs from Illinois and Virginia (Anderson and Duzan 1978), but crushed eggs associated with eggshell thinning have not been reported. While there is evidence of some eggshell thinning in Illinois, there is no apparent eggshell thinning in California and Florida (Hands et al. 1989). The relatively high nesting and fledging success rate in the areas of marked decline indicate that pesticides have not reduced reproduction (Brooks 1988, Gawlik and Bildstein 1990, Kridelbaugh 1982, Luukkonen 1987, Novak 1989). Young exposed to dieldrin have been shown to attack and kill prey more slowly than unexposed birds (Busbee 1977). Wide-scale use of organochlorides was curtailed in the U.S. in the 1970s, yet the population decline continues. Blumton et al. (1989) reported that necropsies on six Virginia shrikes showed traces of pesticide contamination, but drew no conclusions on the relationship between contamination and mortality. Pesticides may pose a greater threat in reducing food availability; clutch and brood sizes declined after the introduction of organochlorines; and significant declines on the Canadian prairies corresponded with dieldrin treatment of grasshoppers, which make up 30-75% of the diet (Yosef 1996, Yosef 1994, C. Campbell in Cadman 1985).

FOOD AVAILABILITY: Pesticides may affect populations through reducing food availability (see comments under PESTICIDES above). In Virginia, Luukkonen (1987) reported several nests with malnourished nestlings and developmental variability within a brood, both evidence of limited food availability at some sites. However, on a broader scale, early breeding, brood reduction, and multiple broods should off-set any local problems from food shortages, at least for the nesting season (Luukkonen 1987). In the Midwest, excessive winter mortality may be an important cause of the decline; reduced food supplies may weaken shrikes and cause them to move into woodlots occupied by raptors (Byrd and Johnston 1991).

PREDATION: Predation is the leading cause of nest failure, but nest predation does not appear to constitute an important limiting factor (Bartgis 1992).

BREEDING HABITAT LOSS/DEGRADATION: Limited evidence from most of the Northeast suggests that lack of suitable breeding habitat limits abundance in this region. Habitat loss has been caused by farmland abandonment, development, and widespread changes in farming practices (Novak 1989). Although acreage in pasture has decreased dramatically since World War II in New York and Virginia, there apparently is a substantial amount of unoccupied habitat remaining in both states (Luukkonen 1987, Novak 1989). There also seems to be considerable unoccupied breeding habitat in Maryland and West Virginia (Bartgis, pers. comm.). At least on a local level in Virginia, habitat loss may be the primary problem (Ridd, pers. comm.). Luukkonen (1987) expressed concerns about the fragmenting of potential habitat into islands in the Ridge and Valley of Virginia. Occasional use of marginal habitat may be partially to blame for the decline in Virginia. In southern Idaho, nearly 70% of original sagebrush steppe has been destroyed by agriculture and other development (Woods 1994). In the north-central states, however, habitat loss may explain some of the decline, but not all of it. In Missouri, declining populations coincided with regions with the highest proportion of lands being converted from pasture to row crops (Kridelbaugh 1982). Several reports have concluded that much suitable habitat remains unoccupied in Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, although shrikes now are nearly absent from these states (Brooks and Temple 1990, Robbins 1991). However, Luukkonen (pers. comm.) questioned the availability of adequately sized pastures for habitat in Michigan. Threats in western Canada (Telfer et al. 1989) include habitat loss such as the conversion of unimproved pasture to cropland (Telfer 1992). In eastern Canada, declines probably have been due to loss of breeding habitat to changing agricultural practices, industrial development, residential development, and vegetation succession (Cadman 1986, 1991). Yosef and Grubb (1992) suggested that a human-caused reduction in the number of hunting perches is at least partially responsible for the decline.

WINTER HABITAT LOSS: Populations that winter along the Gulf Coast have lost much habitat, and remaining habitats are often impoverished by red fire-ants and associated pesticide-control procedures (Lymn and Temple 1991). Because of relatively high reproductive success in southern Minnesota, Brooks (1988) concluded that the 20% mean annual rate of decline in the population in the region was "probably due to factors on their nonbreeding range" to the south. Brooks (1988) further summarized concerns that the decline in Minnesota is possibly caused by decreases in winter habitat in the breeding birds' wintering range. She stated that "if resident (southern) shrike populations are being limited by habitat availability, migrant shrikes wintering in the same area are almost certainly being forced to occupy marginal habitats that are not being held by territorial residents." However, a banding study in Missouri indicated that the winter and summer populations in that state are completely separate (Kridelbaugh 1982). Conclusive evidence that factors during the nonbreeding season are limiting is not available (Yosef 1994).

COWBIRD PARASITISM/NEST PREDATION: A study documented cowbird nest parasitism in shrikes in Iowa, but the frequency was very low, only 3 out of 261 nests (DeGeus 1991). The same study found a high incidence of nest predation among shrikes nesting along roadsides (86% of all losses), and only 35% nesting success overall. Predation is apparently more intense in roadside and other linear habitats (DeGeus 1990). If shrikes are utilizing roadside habitat extensively throughout their range, high nest predation may be one explanation for their decline.

OTHER MORTALITY: Locally, mortality from vehicle collisions may be significant. A high incidence of automobile-caused mortality was noted by Miller (1931). Shrikes typically fly low to the ground, sometimes across roadways, and often feed on roads. Inexperienced juveniles have been observed following adults across highways and learning from adults to feed on highways (Hershberger 1989, Novak 1989). In many areas, hedgerows, barbed-wire fences, and other habitat features utilized by shrikes are concentrated along roadways. Fledglings and other juveniles are frequently killed by automobiles. Automobile collisions killed all three fledglings produced at an Ontario nest and four of seven young fledged over three years at a New York site (Novak 1989). Juveniles killed by vehicle collisions in the summer have also been observed in both Virginias (Bartgis 1989, Luukkonen 1987) and Maryland (Hershberger 1990). Blumton et al. (1989) reported that automobiles accounted for 29% of the observed fall and winter mortality among Virginia shrikes.

FIRE ANTS: In Florida, Yosef and Lohrer (1995) found no evidence of an effect of imported red fire-ants on territory size and prey capture rate, but cautioned that insecticides used to control red fire-ants are likely to be detrimental (see PESTICIDES and WINTER HABITAT LOSS).

DISTURBANCE: Shrikes are not particularly alarmed by proximity to human activity. Brooks (1988) noted that nests near buildings had a success rate similar to those farther away from buildings. In Virginia, a shrike continued to incubate a nest in a tree after the top was trimmed off (Luukkonen 1987), although a Maryland nest in a tree was abandoned after a multiflora rose concealing it was killed with herbicide (Dean, pers. comm.). Some shrikes have nested less than 3 m from a road, but were not flushed by passing vehicles (Bartgis 1989, Luukkonen 1987). Food shortages may occasionally limit nesting success.
Ecology & Habitat

Description

Slightly smaller than American robin (TURDUS MIGRATORIUS); total length averages 23 cm; stout, hooked, all-dark bill; bluish-gray head and back; white or grayish-white underparts, very faintly barred in adults; broad black mask extending above eye and thinly across top of bill; gray to whitish rump; black tail with white tip; large white patches in the black wings; juveniles are paler and barred overall, with brownish-gray upperparts and buffy wing patches; males and females are similar in appearance (Miller 1931, NGS 1983, Fraser and Luukkonen 1986). Most nests are made of coarse twigs with a lining of plant material and animal hair (Fraser and Luukkonen 1986).

Diagnostic Characteristics

Differs from northern shrike (LANIUS EXCUBITOR) in having the base of the lower mandible black instead of pale, unbarred or barely barred underparts (adults), a shorter and less hooked bill, a darker head and back, and a more extensive black mask. Differs from the northern mockingbird (MIMUS POLYGLOTTOS) in having a black mask and a shorter, less curved bill.

Habitat

BREEDING: Open country with scattered trees and shrubs, savanna, desert scrub (southwestern U.S.), and, occasionally, open woodland; often perches on poles, wires or fenceposts (Tropical to Temperate zones) (AOU 1983). Suitable hunting perches are an important part of the habitat (Yosef and Grubb 1994).

For nesting, prefers shortgrass pastures in western Canada, Texas (Telfer 1992), and many other areas (Luukkonen 1987, Novak 1989, Gawlik and Bildstein 1990, Bartgis 1992). In Missouri, pasture land surrounded 67% of 60 nests (Kridelbaugh 1982). In New York, occupied nest sites were in pasture areas with less than 20% woody cover (Novak 1989). However, others have found no preference for short-grass areas (e.g., see Chavez-Ramirez et al. 1994). Historically, orchards seemingly were used with some frequency (see Novak 1989). In the upper Midwest, Brooks (1988) found that nestling growth rate, nesting success, and fledgling success were positively correlated with percentage of home range coverage in grassland. In Virginia, pairs nesting in active pastures produced twice as many young as did those in other habitats (Luukkonen 1987).

Nests in shrubs or small trees (deciduous or coniferous, e.g., in eastern North America, JUNIPERUS VIRGINIANA, CRATAEGUS sp., MACLURA POMIFERA, ROSA MULTIFLORA). In northern latitudes, nest sites include spruce and fir trees (Bent 1950, Brooks 1988). In some areas, vine-covered plants are preferred (Luukkonen 1987, Novak 1989). In Missouri, nests in multiflora rose were less successful than were those in trees, perhaps because the nests in roses were lower and poorly supported (Kridelbaugh 1982). In South Carolina, nests in JUNIPERUS fledged a larger number of young than did nests in other sites (5.0 young per successful nest vs. 4.0) (Gawlik and Bildstein 1990). Nests generally are 1.5-3 m above ground, in a crotch or on top of an old nest. In New York, nests were typically 1.5-2.5 m high in trees 4-5 m tall, and usually they were more than a meter back from the outside of the tree (Novak 1989). In Virginia, average nest height was 2.6 m in trees averaging 6.8 m tall; nest height was higher (mean 5.5 m) in second and third nesting attempts (Luukkonen 1987). Nests often in isolated woody plants but also commonly along fencelines or hedgerows (Brooks 1988, Luukkonen 1987), in an open area in a wooded area or in open country. Tends to nest in areas with several potential suitable nesting trees/shrubs (Brooks 1988).

Sometimes nests in the same site in successive years, but return rates generally are low; males are most likely to reoccupy previous breeding territories (Kridelbaugh 1982, Luukkonen 1987, Brooks 1988, Bartgis 1989, Haas and Sloane 1989). In Minnesota and Virginia, respectively, 50% and 30% of breeding territories were not occupied the following year; in Virginia, reoccupation was more frequent in active pasture than in pastures allowed to grow tall (Brooks 1988, Luukonen 1987). Causes of variation in rates of territory reoccupancy have been discussed but available evidence is inconclusive and may differ in different areas (cf. Brooks 1988, Luukkonen 1987, Novak 1989, Haas and Sloane 1989). For a particular pair during a single season, nesting attempts after the first one generally are close to the first site (mean 90 m in Virginia) (Luukkonen 1987). Both sexes are involved in nest site selection and nest construction (Kridelbaugh 1982).

NON-BREEDING: During periods of cold with snow cover, sometimes moves into woodlots (Byrd and Johnston 1991). In winter in Virginia, many move from pastures to shrub and open forest habitats during periods of cold, wet weather (Blumton et al. 1989).

Ecology

Territorial throughout the year. Size of territory may be about 10-16 ha in semidesert. In Florida, territory size varied from about 0.7 ha to 18 ha (Yosef and Grubb 1994). In New York, successful nesting pairs foraged over an area of 5.7-9.3 ha; the smallest area of active pasture in the nesting territory was about 5.5 ha (Novak 1989). Miller (1931) reported nesting territories of 4.4 to 16 ha. Kridelbaugh (1982) reported an average territory size of 4.6 ha in Missouri, with territory size increasing significantly after fledging. In Minnesota during the nesting season, shrikes foraged up to a quarter mile away from the nest (Brooks 1988). In general, nesting territories are smaller in areas with a greater amount of good quality habitat (Kridelbaugh 1982). In Virginia, juveniles established 2 ha to 36 ha (mean 19 ha) fall and winter territories, although use of woody habitats in inclement weather significantly enlarged the home range (Blumton et al. 1989). In Virginia, winter home ranges averaged 52 ha (Blumton et al. 1989).

Breeding and winter territories may or may not be separate. Males and females defend separate territories during the nonbreeding season.

In Virginia, juveniles 10-13 weeks old moved an average of 5.5 km from parents' territory to fall territory; predation by hawks and owls accounted for most fall and winter mortality, with the heaviest mortality in January when temperatures were coldest (Blumton et al. 1989). Suspected nest and fledgling predators in the northeastern North America include black rat snake (ELAPHE OBSOLETA), blue jay (CYANOCITTA CRISTATA), sharp-shinned hawk (ACCIPITER STRIATUS), domestic cat, and house wren (TROGLODYTES AEDON) (Luukkonen 1987, Novak 1989).

Reproduction

Male courtship behavior involves singing, flashing of white wing and tail markings, zigzagging flights and occasional chases of the female, and feeding of the female (Miller 1931, Bent 1950, Kridelbaugh 1982). Primarily monogamous, but polygny known (Yosef 1992, 1996). In Oklahoma, completed nests were found from mid-March through late June; nesting peaked in mid-April, with second nestings from late May to late June (Tyler 1992). In Missouri and Illinois, nesting peaked in late April, with a second peak in late May in Missouri (Tyler 1992). In Maryland, second nesting attempts occurred in June and July (Bartgis 1992). In Virginia, egg-laying extended from early April to mid-June (Byrd and Johnston 1991). Egg laying began in Colorado in early May. Egg dates for California and Florida are mainly February-July, March-June in Arizona and Texas. Single eggs are laid at intervals of one day. Clutch size usually averages 4-6. Incubation usually lasts 16-18 days (Lukkonen 1987, Tyler 1992), probably begins with the laying of the penultimate egg. Male feeds female during incubation. Young tended by both adults, fledge in about 17-20 days, independent in 36 days. Young generally stay concealed in foliage during the first few days out of the nest. About two weeks after leaving the nest, fledglings begins to capture food for themselves; they contunue to be fed by adults for about two more weeks (Luukkonen 1987, Novak 1989). By this time, adults and young begin foraging in areas away from the nesting territory (Novak 1989). In New York, family groups began to break up and disperse in August (Novak 1989). Renesting after nest failure is frequent in the Virginias and Maryland (Luukkonen 1987, Davidson 1988; Bartgis, pers. comm.), but second nesting attempts may be less common in the northern part of the range (Brooks and Temple 1986, Fruth 1988, Novak 1989). A third nesting attempt, usually unsuccessful, may follow an unsuccessful second nesting. Sometimes female leaves fledglings in care of male (Kridelbaugh 1982, Novak 1989); female may renest elsewhere with another male (Novak 1989, Haas and Sloane 1989).

Probability of survival from start of incubation to fledging ranged from 43% to 72% in several studies in different areas (see Tyler 1992). Nesting success tends to be fairly high (range was 50-74% in several studies in the eastern U.S.); generally at least 60% of nesting attempts fledge at least one young (Luukkonen 1987, Brooks 1988, Blumton et al. 1989, Novak 1989, Gawlik and Bildstein 1990, Bartgis 1992). Average number of young fledged per successful nest was 2.6, 3.5, 4.0, and 4.7 in Virginia, New York, Virginia, and South Carolina, respectively (Blumton et al. 1989, Novak 1989, Luukkonen 1987, and Gawlik and Bildstein 1990, respectively). Nest failure was attributed to cold wet weather and predation in New York (Novak 1989) and to predation, abandonment, and inadequate support of nests in Virginia (Luukkonen 1987). Nesting success tends to be better with dry, warm conditions than during cool, wet periods (Kridelbaugh 1982).
Terrestrial Habitats
Shrubland/chaparralSavannaGrassland/herbaceousOld fieldDesertCropland/hedgerow
Other Nations (2)
CanadaN3B
ProvinceRankNative
Nova ScotiaSXBYes
New BrunswickSXBYes
OntarioS1BYes
SaskatchewanS3BYes
ManitobaS1BYes
AlbertaS3BYes
QuebecSNAYes
United StatesN4
ProvinceRankNative
OregonS3B,S2NYes
ArkansasS3Yes
ArizonaS3Yes
North CarolinaS2B,S3NYes
North DakotaSUYes
MarylandS1BYes
LouisianaS3Yes
ConnecticutSXNYes
New YorkS1BYes
TennesseeS1B,S2NYes
New HampshireSHBYes
NevadaS3Yes
New JerseyS1NYes
South CarolinaS3Yes
MissouriS2Yes
MississippiS4B,S4NYes
PennsylvaniaSNRBYes
MaineSHB,S1NYes
NebraskaS3Yes
VermontSHBYes
KentuckyS3B,S4NYes
KansasS4B,S2NYes
OklahomaSNRYes
WisconsinS1BYes
VirginiaS1B,S2NYes
MinnesotaS1BYes
IllinoisS2Yes
CaliforniaS4Yes
District of ColumbiaSHN,SXBYes
OhioS1Yes
South DakotaS3BYes
MontanaS3BYes
New MexicoS3Yes
FloridaS4Yes
West VirginiaS1B,S1NYes
UtahS3Yes
WashingtonS3BYes
GeorgiaS3Yes
ColoradoS3BYes
MichiganSNRYes
TexasS4BYes
AlabamaS3Yes
IdahoS3Yes
DelawareSHBYes
IndianaS2BYes
IowaS3B,S3NYes
MassachusettsSXB,S1NYes
WyomingS4BYes
Navajo NationS4Yes
Roadless Areas (115)
Arizona (15)
AreaForestAcres
BoulderTonto National Forest40,359
Burro CanyonKaibab National Forest19,928
Catalina St. Pk. Roadless AreaCoronado National Forest951
ChiricahuaCoronado National Forest76,876
GaliuroCoronado National Forest28,333
GoldfieldTonto National Forest15,257
Lime CreekTonto National Forest42,568
Middle Romero WSRCoronado National Forest60
PinalenoCoronado National Forest130,920
Red PointKaibab National Forest7,139
SalomeTonto National Forest2,932
Santa TeresaCoronado National Forest8,929
TumacacoriCoronado National Forest44,594
Upper Romero WsrCoronado National Forest150
WhetstoneCoronado National Forest20,728
California (42)
AreaForestAcres
AntimonyLos Padres National Forest40,911
Birch CreekInyo National Forest28,816
Black CanyonInyo National Forest32,421
Black MountainLos Padres National Forest16,818
Boundary Peak (CA)Inyo National Forest210,884
Cactus Springs BSan Bernardino National Forest3,106
ChannellSequoia National Forest45,429
Cucamonga BSan Bernardino National Forest11,933
Cucamonga CSan Bernardino National Forest4,106
CuyamaLos Padres National Forest19,631
Dexter CanyonInyo National Forest17,053
Eagle PeakCleveland National Forest6,481
Excelsior (CA)Inyo National Forest45,607
Fish CanyonAngeles National Forest29,886
Fox MountainLos Padres National Forest52,072
Glass MountainInyo National Forest52,867
Horse Creek RidgeSan Bernardino National Forest8,969
Horse Mdw.Inyo National Forest5,687
HortonInyo National Forest5,717
JuncalLos Padres National Forest12,289
LaddCleveland National Forest5,300
Lpoor CanyonLos Padres National Forest13,762
Magic MountainAngeles National Forest15,542
Mill CreekSequoia National Forest27,643
Mt. HoffmanModoc National Forest9,780
NordhoffLos Padres National Forest12,031
PaiuteInyo National Forest58,712
Pleasant ViewAngeles National Forest26,395
Pyramid Peak BSan Bernardino National Forest7,194
Rouse HillSan Bernardino National Forest13,745
Salt CreekAngeles National Forest11,022
San SevaineSan Bernardino National Forest6,866
Santa CruzLos Padres National Forest21,182
Sawmill - BadlandsLos Padres National Forest51,362
ScodiesSequoia National Forest725
Soldier CanyonInyo National Forest40,589
South SierraInyo National Forest41,853
TequepisLos Padres National Forest9,080
TinemahaInyo National Forest27,060
WildhorseCleveland National Forest1,483
Wonoga Pk.Inyo National Forest11,272
WoolstaffSequoia National Forest41,445
Idaho (2)
AreaForestAcres
Bear CreekCaribou-Targhee National Forest118,582
Italian PeakCaribou-Targhee National Forest141,158
Montana (5)
AreaForestAcres
Italian PeakBeaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest90,401
Lost Water CanyonCuster National Forest9,251
Mt. Gmt Area HCuster National Forest1,335
North AbsarokaCuster National Forest21,063
North AbsarokaGallatin National Forest159,075
Nevada (19)
AreaForestAcres
Bald Mtn.Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest41,598
Chineese Camp (NV)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest15,207
Fourmile HillHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest15,718
Lobdell SummitHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest7,791
North SchellHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest30,773
Pearl PeakHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest71,405
Pine Grove NorthHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest8,749
Pine Grove SouthHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest88,945
Rock CanyonHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest31,552
Snake - MurphyHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest27,064
South SchellHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest125,614
Sweetwater (NV)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,946
Table Mtn. - Barley Ck.Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,424
Table Mtn. - Barley RanchHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest138
Table Mtn. - EastHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest87,789
Toiyabe RangeHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest99,225
Toquima CaveHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest43,147
West SchellHumboldt-Toiyabe National Forest21,656
West Walker (NV)Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest5,683
New Mexico (9)
AreaForestAcres
Capitan MountainsLincoln National Forest14,069
Chama WS RiverSanta Fe National Forest4,168
Devils CreekGila National Forest89,916
Last Chance CanyonLincoln National Forest8,934
LemitasSanta Fe National Forest8,129
Ortega PeakLincoln National Forest11,545
Peloncillo (NM)Coronado National Forest43,339
Ryan HillCibola National Forest34,201
West Face Sacramento MountainsLincoln National Forest41,176
North Dakota (3)
AreaForestAcres
Easy HillDakota Prairie Grasslands7,344
Kinley PlateauDakota Prairie Grasslands16,900
Ponderosa PineDakota Prairie Grasslands7,471
South Dakota (1)
AreaForestAcres
Indian CreekBuffalo Gap National Grassland24,666
Texas (1)
AreaForestAcres
Big CreekNational Forests in Texas1,447
Utah (7)
AreaForestAcres
Capital ReefDixie National Forest763
City CreekFishlake National Forest13,939
CottonwoodDixie National Forest6,754
Joe LottFishlake National Forest19,826
Muddy Creek - Nelson Mt.Manti-Lasal National Forest59,034
Pine Valley MountainsDixie National Forest57,673
Signal PeakFishlake National Forest30,889
Virginia (3)
AreaForestAcres
Bear CreekJefferson National Forest18,274
Garden MountainJefferson National Forest3,960
Hunting Camp Little Wolf CreekJefferson National Forest8,953
Wyoming (8)
AreaForestAcres
0401019Ashley National Forest6,202
Cloud Peak ContiguousBighorn National Forest113,757
Horse Creek MesaBighorn National Forest77,808
Pacific Creek - Blackrock CreekBridger-Teton National Forest24,658
South Beartooth HighwayShoshone National Forest105,570
Spread Creek - Gros Ventre RiverBridger-Teton National Forest166,097
Teton Corridor TrailheadsBridger-Teton National Forest286
West Slope WindsBridger-Teton National Forest143,252
References (94)
  1. American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1983. Check-list of North American Birds, 6th edition. Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas. 877 pp.
  2. American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1998. Check-list of North American birds. Seventh edition. American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D.C. [as modified by subsequent supplements and corrections published in <i>The Auk</i>]. Also available online: http://www.aou.org/.
  3. Anderson, W. C., and R. E. Duzan. 1978. DDE residues and eggshell thinning in loggerhead shrikes. Wilson Bull. 90:215-220.
  4. Applegate, R. D. 1977. Possible ecological role of food caches of loggerhead shrike. Auk 94:391-392.
  5. Balda, R. P., and G. C. Bateman. 1971. Flocking and annual cycle of the piñon jay, <i>Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus</i>. Condor 73:287-302.
  6. Bartgis, R. 1992. Loggerhead shrike, LANIUS LUDOVICIANUS. Pages 281-297 in K. J. Schneider and D. M. Pence, editors. Migratory nongame birds of management concern in the Northeast. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton Corner, Massachusetts. 400 pp.
  7. Bartgis, R. L. 1989. Site surveys for rare plants and animals in eastern West Virginia. Unpubl. report, The Nature Conservancy, Boston, Massachusetts.
  8. Bartgis, R. Maryland Natural Heritage Program, Dept. of Natural Resources, Annapolis, MD.
  9. Bent, A.C. 1950. Life histories of North American wagtails, shrikes, vireos, and their allies. U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull. 197. Washington, D.C.
  10. BirdLife International. 2004b. Threatened birds of the world 2004. CD ROM. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK.
  11. BirdLife International. (2013-2014). IUCN Red List for birds. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on various dates in 2013 and 2014. http://www.birdlife.org/
  12. Blumton, A. K., J. D. Fraser, and K. Terwilliger. 1989. Loggerhead shrike survey and census. Pages 116-118 in Virginia nongame and endangered wildlife investigative annual report, July 1, 1988 through June 30, 1989. Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Richmond, Virginia.
  13. Brooks, B. L. 1988. The breeding distribution, population dynamics, and habitat availability of an upper Midwest loggerhead shrike population. Master's thesis, Univ. Wisconsin, Madison.
  14. Brooks, B. L., and S. A. Temple. 1986. Progress Report on a study of the breeding habitat, distribution, and reproductive success of the Loggerhead Shrike in Minnesota. Unpublished report submitted to the Minnesota chapter of the Nature Conservancy and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. September 19, 1986.
  15. Brooks, B. L. and S. A. Temple. 1990a. Habitat availability and suitability for loggerhead shrikes in the Upper Midwest. Am. Midl. Nat. 123: 75-83.
  16. Brooks, B. L., and S. A. Temple. 1990b. Dynamics of a loggerhead shrike population in Minnesota. Wilson Bull. 102:441-450.
  17. Bureau of Land Management. Life History Summaries.
  18. Busbee, E. L. 1977. The effects of dieldrin on the behavior of young loggerhead shrikes. Auk 94:28-35.
  19. Byrd, M. A., and D. W. Johnston. 1991. Birds. Pages 477-537 in K. Terwilliger, coordinator. Virginia's endangered species: proceedings of a symposium. McDonald and Woodward Publ. Co., Blacksburg, Virginia.
  20. Cade, T. J. 1992. Hand-reared loggerhead shrikes breed in captivity. Condor 94:1027-1029.
  21. Cadman, M.D. 1986. Status report on the loggerhead shrike LANIUS LUDOVICIANUS. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 95 pp.
  22. Cadman, M. D. 1991. Updated status report on the Loggerhead Shrike (eastern population) LANIUS LUDOVICIANUS MIGRANS, in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 26 pp.
  23. Carter, M., G. Fenwick, C. Hunter, D. Pashley, D. Petit, J. Price, and J. Trapp. 1996. Watchlist 1996: For the future. Field Notes 50(3):238-240.
  24. Chavez-Ramirez, F., et al. 1994. Effects of habitat structure on patch use by loggerhead shrikes wintering in a natural grassland. Condor 96:228-231.
  25. Davidson, L. M. 1988. Loggerhead shrike nest in Washington County, MD. Maryland Birdlife 44:3-5.
  26. Dean, R. S., Martinsburg, WV.
  27. DeGeus, D. W. 1990. Productivity and habitat preferences of loggerhead shrikes inhabiting roadsides in a midwestern agroenvironment. Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa. MS thesis.
  28. DeGeus, D. W. 1991. Brown-headed cowbirds parasitize loggerhead shrikes: first records for family Laniidae. Wilson Bulletin 101(3):504-6.
  29. Droege, S., and J.R. Sauer. 1990. North American Breeding Bird Survey, annual summary, 1989. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 90(8). 22 pp.
  30. Ehrlich, P. R., D. S. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1988. The birder's handbook: a field guide to the natural history of North American birds. Simon and Shuster, Inc., New York. xxx + 785 pp.
  31. Ehrlich, P. R., D. S. Dobkin, and D. Wheye. 1992. Birds in Jeopardy: the Imperiled and Extinct Birds of the United States and Canada, Including Hawaii and Puerto Rico. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 259 pp.
  32. Fitchel, C. 1988. 1988 status survey of the loggerhead shrike in Vermont. Unpubl. report, Agency of Natural Resources, Waterbury, Vermont.
  33. Fraser, J. D., and D. R. Luukkonen. 1986. The loggerhead shrike. Pages 933-941 in R. L. DiSilvestro, editor. Audubon Wildlife Report 1986. Academic Press, New York.
  34. Fruth, K. J. 1988. The Wisconsin Loggerhead Shrike Recovery Plan. Wisconsin Endangered Resources Report 38. Bureau of Endangered Resources, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, Wisconsin.
  35. Gawlik, D. E., and K. L. Bildstein. 1990. Reproductive success and nesting habitat of loggerhead shrikes in north-central South Carolina. Wilson Bull. 102:37-48.
  36. Haas, C. A., and S. A. Sloane. 1989. Low return rates of migratory Loggerhead Shrikes: winter mortality or low site fidelity? Wilson Bulletin 101(3):458-60.
  37. Hands, H. M., R. D. Drobney, and M. R. Ryan. 1989. Status of the loggerhead shrike in the northcentral United States. Missouri Coop. Fish Wildl. Res. Unit Rep. 15 pp.
  38. Harrison, C. 1978. A Field Guide to the Nests, Eggs and Nestlings of North American Birds. Collins, Cleveland, Ohio.
  39. Hentcy, E. Department of Resources &amp; Economic Development, Concord, NH.
  40. Herkert, J. R., editor. 1992. Endangered and threatened species of Illinois: status and distribution. Vol. 2: Animals. Illinois Endangered Species Protection Board. iv + 142 pp.
  41. Hershberger, W. 1989. Loggerhead shrike (LANIUS LUDOVICIANUS) survey: spring 1989 for the Washington and Frederick counties of Maryland. Unpubl. report, Maryland Natural Heritage Program, Annapolis, Maryland.
  42. Hershberger, W. 1989. Loggerhead shrike survey 1990 (LANIUS LUDOVICIANUS), Frederick and Washington counties of Maryland. Unpubl. report, Maryland Natural Heritage Program, Annapolis, Maryland.
  43. Horn, H. S. 1968. The adaptive significance of colonial nesting in the Brewer's Blackbird. Ecology 49:682-694.
  44. Howard, David Bagget ('Dave') Tampa, FL
  45. Howell, S. N. G., and S. Webb. 1995. A guide to the birds of Mexico and northern Central America. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
  46. Kibbe, D. P. 1985. Loggerhead shrike. Pages 260-261 in S. B. Laughlin and D. P. Kibbe, editors. The atlas of breeding birds of Vermont. Univ. Press of New England, Hanover, New Hampshire.
  47. Kridelbaugh, A. L. 1982. An ecological study of loggerhead shrikes in central Missouri. Master's thesis, Univ. Missouri, Columbia.
  48. Ligon, J. D. 1971. Late summer-autumnal breeding of the piñon jay in New Mexico. Condor 73:147-153.
  49. Lohrer, F. E. 1974. Some techniques used in a field study of loggerhead shrikes. Bird Banding 45:361-362.
  50. Luukkonen, D. R. 1987. Loggerhead shrike status and breeding ecology in Virginia. Master's thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and Sate University, Blacksburg.
  51. Matthews, J.R. and C.J. Moseley (eds.). 1990. The Official World Wildlife Fund Guide to Endangered Species of North America. Volume 1. Plants, Mammals. xxiii + pp 1-560 + 33 pp. appendix + 6 pp. glossary + 16 pp. index. Volume 2. Birds, Reptiles, Amphibians, Fishes, Mussels, Crustaceans, Snails, Insects, and Arachnids. xiii + pp. 561-1180. Beacham Publications, Inc., Washington, D.C.
  52. Milburn, T. 1981. STATUS & DISTRIBUTION OF THE LOGGERHEAD SHRIKE, LANIUS LUDOVICIANUS IN THE NORTHEASTERN U.S. UNPUB- LISHED REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE USDI/FWS OFFICE OF ENDANGERED SPECIES. 77 PP.
  53. Miller, A. H. 1931. Systematic revision and natural history of the American shrikes (LANIUS). Univ. California Publ. Zool. 38:11-242.
  54. Moore, W. S., and R. A. Dolbeer. 1989. The use of banding recovery data to estimate dispersal rates and gene flow in avian species: case studies in the Red-winged Blackbird and Common Grackle. Condor 91:242-253.
  55. Morrison, M. L. 1981a. Population trends of the Loggerhead Shrike in the United States. Am. Birds 35(4): 754-757.
  56. Morrison, M. L. 1981a. Population trends of the Loggerhead Shrike in the United States. American Birds 35(4):754-7.
  57. National Geographic Society (NGS). 1983. Field guide to the birds of North America. National Geographic Society, Washington, DC.
  58. Novak, P. 1989. Breeding ecology and status of loggerhead shrike (LANIUS LUDOVICIANUS) in New York. Master's thesis, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, New York.
  59. Palmer, W. 1989. Our small eastern shrikes. Auk 15:244-258.
  60. Parker III, T. A., D. F. Stotz, and J. W. Fitzpatrick. 1996. Ecological and distributional databases for neotropical birds. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
  61. Partners in Flight Science Committee. 2013. Population Estimates Database, version 2013. Available at http://rmbo.org/pifpopestimates. Accessed in 2014 and 2018.
  62. Peterjohn, B.G., and D.L. Rice. 1991. Ohio breeding bird atlas. Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Division of Natural Areas and Preserves, Columbus, Ohio. 416 pp.
  63. Peterjohn, B. G. and W. Zimmerman. 1989. The Birds of Ohio. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN.
  64. Peterson, R.T. 1980b. A field guide to the birds of eastern and central North America. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.
  65. Peterson, R.T. 1990b. A field guide to western birds. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.
  66. Peterson, R. T. 1990b. A field guide to western birds. Third edition. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. 432 pp.
  67. Ridd, S., Richmond, VA.
  68. Robbins, C. S., D. Bystrack, and P. H. Geissler. 1986. The breeding bird survey: its first fifteen years, 1965-1979. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Resource Publ. 157. Washington, D.C.
  69. Robbins, C. S., D. Bystrak, and P. H. Geissler. 1986. The Breeding Bird Survey: its first fifteen years. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv. Resource Publ. 157. iii + 196 pp.
  70. Robbins, S. D., Jr. 1991. Wisconsin birdlife: population and distribution past and present. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.
  71. Robbins, S. D., Jr. 1991. Wisconsin Birdlife: Population and Distribution Past and Present. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin.
  72. Sauer, J. R., J. E. Hines, and J. Fallon. 2001. The North American Breeding Bird Survey, Results and Analysis 1966 - 2000. Version 2001.2, USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD.
  73. Schneider, K.J., and D.M. Pence, editors. 1992. Migratory nongame birds of management concern in the Northeast. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Newton Corner, MA. 400 pp.
  74. Scott, T. A., and M. L. Morrison. 1990. Natural history and management of the San Clemente loggerhead shrike. Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology, Proceedings 4:23-57.
  75. Sibley, C.G., and B.L. Monroe, Jr. 1990. Distribution and Taxonomy of Birds of the World. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. xxiv + 1111 pp.
  76. Sibley, D. A. 2000a. The Sibley guide to birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
  77. Stewart, R. E., and C. S. Robbins. 1958. Birds of Maryland and the District of Columbia. North American Fauna No. 62. U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
  78. Tarvin, K. A., and G. E. Woolfenden. 1999. Blue Jay (<i>Cyanocitta cristata</i>). No. 469 IN A. Poole and F. Gill, editors. The birds of North America. The Birds of North America, Inc., Philadelphia, PA. 32pp.
  79. Telfer, E. S. 1992. Habitat change as a factor in the decline of the western Canadian loggerhead shrike, LANIUS LUDOVICIANUS, population. Can. Field-Nat. 106:321-326.
  80. Telfer, E. S., et al. 1989. Status and distribution of the loggerhead shrike in western Canada. Can. Wildl. Serv. Prog. Notes 184. 4 pp.
  81. Terres, J. K. 1980. The Audubon Society encyclopedia of North American birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
  82. Thompson, F. R., III. 1994. Temporal and spatial patterns of breeding brown-headed cowbirds in the midwestern United States. Auk 111:979-990.
  83. Tyler, J. D. 1992. Nesting ecology of the loggerhead shrike in southwestern Oklahoma. Wilson Bull. 104:95-104.
  84. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1980. Selected vertebrate endangered species of the seacoast of the U.S. - Moro Bay Kangaroo rat. FWS/OBS-80/01.19.
  85. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1987. Migratory nongame birds of management concern in the United States: the 1987 list. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Migratory Bird Management, Washington, D.C. 63 pp.
  86. Virginia Society of Ornithology. 1989. Virginia's breeding birds: an atlas workbook. William Byrd Press, Richmond, Virginia.
  87. Williams, L. 1952b. Breeding behavior of the Brewer blackbird. Condor 54:3-47.
  88. Willson, M. F. 1966. Breeding ecology of the Yellow-headed Blackbird. Ecological Monographs 36:51-77.
  89. Yosef, R. 1992. Behavior of polygynous and monogamous Loggerhead Shrikes and a comparison with Northern Shrikes. Wilson Bulletin 104:747-749.
  90. Yosef, R. 1994. Evaluation of the global decline in the true shrikes (family Laniidae). Auk 111:228-233.
  91. Yosef, R. 1996. Loggerhead Shrike (<i>Lanius ludovicianus</i>). In A. Poole and F. Gill, editors, The Birds of North America, No. 231. Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, and American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, DC. 28 pp.
  92. Yosef, R., and F. E. Lohrer. 1995. Loggerhead shrikes, red fire ants, and red herrings. Condor 97:1053-1056.
  93. Yosef, R., and T. C. Grubb, Jr. 1992. Territory size influences nutritional condition in nonbreeding loggerhead shrikes (LANIUS LUDOVICIANUS): a ptilochronology approach. Conservation Biology 6:447-449.
  94. Yosef, R., and T. C. Grubb, Jr. 1994. Resource dependence and territory size in loggerhead shrikes (LANIUS LUDOVICIANUS). Auk 111:465-469.