Tag Archives: bird

EGGS, NESTLINGS, AND FLEDGLINGS

AT WILD BALD EAGLE NESTS,
2006-2020

© elfruler 2020

The table presented on this page gives numbers of eggs, nestlings, and fledglings observed at wild Bald Eagle nests on streaming video cams or by credible ground observers from 2006-2020. (Click here for a list of nests providing data.)

Table 1 gives precise counts of eggs laid, chicks hatched, and eaglets fledged over the 15 breeding seasons, broken down by year and by clutch size (1-egg, 2-egg, 3-egg, 4-egg, 5-egg), with totals and percentages.

TABLE 1

Click on the Pop-Out button to open in a new tab.

Loader Loading...
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

Here are some highlights:
    • The data incorporate numbers from a total of 388 nesting seasons, resulting in 401 clutches of eggs including 12 second clutches after loss of the first clutch (see Notes at the bottom of the table).
    • Of the total clutches for the 15-year time frame,
      • 1-egg clutches made up 6.7% of total clutches;
      • 2-egg clutches made up 60.8% of total clutches;
      • 3-egg clutches made up 31.4% of total clutches;
      • 4-egg clutches made up 0.7% of total clutches.
    • A total of 910 eggs were laid.
    • The average number of eggs laid per clutch was 2.3.
    • 721 of the eggs hatched, or 79.2% of the eggs laid.
    • Of the clutches in which at least one egg hatched,
      • in 1-egg clutches, 44.4% of the eggs hatched;
      • in 2-egg clutches, 78.9% of the eggs hatched;
      • in 3-egg clutches, 83.3% of the eggs hatched;
      • in 4-egg clutches, 75% of the eggs hatched.
    • A total of 588 eaglets were confirmed to have fledged, either directly from the nest (571), or after rehab and release (17). This is 81.6% of nestlings hatched, or 64.7% of eggs laid.

In a handful of cases it is unknown whether a particular eaglet fledged, sometimes when the cam went down, or the cam angle made it impossible to follow an eaglet’s movements, or an eaglet had a misstep and fledged before it seemed ready and ground searches could not confirm it was safe.

Numbers can fluctuate up and down from one year to the next, and there is no clear trend in either direction.  For example:
    • 14.6% of the clutches in 2018 had 1 egg, none in 2019, and only 7% in 2020. The numbers of 3-egg nests jumped from 28.6% in 2013 to 41.4% in 2014, then dropped to 21.4% in 2015.
    • The total number of eggs hatched ranges from 66.7% in 2006 to 96.3% in 2012.
    • Sheer numbers can be deceptive. In 2020 a whopping 29 eggs were lost, but that is 70.7% of the total number of eggs laid that year, slightly below the average of 79.2% for all eggs hatched.
    • Confirmed fledges (directly from the nest and rescue/rehab) varies between 69.2% in 2012 and 93.5% the year before, 2011.

The fluctuations in the numbers actually reflect what observers have seen happen on the nests. Many factors affect the success of a given nest in a given year. These include weather, change of nest, change of mate, food availability, intruders and predators, and unusual events such poisoning and accidents. The variations also could be reflective of the relatively small sampling of nests.

NUMBERS FROM THE NESTS

WILD BALD EAGLES, 2006-2020

© elfruler 2020

The video cameras that have been trained on Bald Eagles’ nests since 2006 have provided a treasure trove of information about the breeding behavior of these apex raptors. In the universe of the more than 100,000 active Bald Eagle nests in North America, the data that these particular nests yield is minuscule. A few published scholarly reports on Bald Eagle nesting success focus mainly on a circumscribed area (e.g. Florida) for 1 or a few breeding seasons. The data here from the nests on cam span 15 years of breeding from 2006-2020 across a wide geographical expanse throughout the continent, and they represent the full range of climates and habits in which Bald Eagles reproduce. (Nests included in the data are listed here.)

Over the period, adult pairs at these nests made 401 breeding efforts at 85 locations, producing 910 eggs, 721 hatchlings, and at least 588 fledglings. These numbers might be considered a fair sampling of breeding data for the species.

The pages and tables that follow break down the data collected via these cameras on multiple levels. The raw numbers of eggs laid, nestlings hatched, and juveniles fledged, from nest to nest and year to year, yield statistics and percentages that give an overall view of breeding success over the 15 years. Burrowing more deeply into these numbers reveals how many clutches are successful over time, and which clutches of a particular size (1 egg, 2 eggs, etc.) are more successful than others. The numbers open a window into losses of eggs and eaglets, and what we can learn about reasons for those losses. And the numbers help flesh out some perceptions of behaviors of nesting Bald Eagles, such as coping with bad weather, predators, and intraspecific intruders (by other Bald Eagles), and replacing a lost clutch.

The data reinforce some facts that are already known:  Bald Eagles typically lay clutches of 2 eggs, with clutches of 3 eggs less common, clutches of 1 egg unusual, and clutches of 4 eggs quite rare. A fair number of eggs do not hatch, but a healthy majority end in successful fledges.

Other details to emerge from these analyses are perhaps more surprising:  While overall averages seem consistent with what is generally believed, there is often a wide range of values across seasons and from nest to nest.  In some years the number of eggs lost far exceeds the average, while in other years few eggs remain unhatched. Similarly, the number of nestlings that die before fledging covers a wide range among the years. Three-egg nests produce a higher percentage of fledges than either 2-egg nests or 1-egg nests; the latter are least successful in producing fledges.

These pages represent a complete revision of data that I published here in 2018, which consisted of a single page and 1 spreadsheet. For this new report I have pared down the nests to include only those with the most reliable observations, mainly the ones with streaming video cams, plus a small number of nests with reliable ground observers. I have also expanded the detail and breadth of information and analysis, resulting in 8 spreadsheets, and I have provided a narrative discussing each one. I have also compiled a lengthy list of References to literature on breeding, eggs, incubation, and survival.

These tables and narratives are presented in sequence in the pages that follow:
Additional new pages also make use of the nest data:
Full references for citations in the following pages are given here:

I began collecting data when I started watching web cams in 2009. Thanks to the Hancock Wildlife Foundation, the Institute for Wildlife Studies, spreadsheets compiled by Judy Barrows, nest cam websites and Facebook pages, and numerous individuals with whom I have communicated, I have been able to stretch the data back to 2006 when streaming cams first began operating. These sources also have been invaluable in filling in gaps in my own observations. I owe all of them a great debt of thanks.

 

BALD EAGLE NEST CAMERA BREEDING SEASON 2019-2020

I use short codes to refer to each nest. Click here for a key.
Click here for links to the nest cams.
Click here for calendars of egg-laying dates in past years.
A question mark ? indicates an approximate date or best guess.
Strikout indicates unhatched eggs.
Italics indicate nestlings that died before fledge.
< = by this date.

More detailed information can be found in
JudyB’s annual report on the nests.

NESTEGGSHATCHESFLEDGESNOTES
FL swf
clutch 1
11/12/19
11/16/19
12/19/19
unhatched
d. 1/15/20
---
eaglet ingested anticoagulant poison, broken blood feather led to fatal blood loss
TX web
new M?
12/12/19
12/15/19
1/17/20
1/19/20
4/6/20
fell 4/7/20,
rehab,
released 4/23/20
cam not streamed live, videos posted on Facebook
FL ece12/28/19
12/31/19
2/3/20
2/5/20
5/1/20
5/7/20
OK seq
new M?
1/4/20
1/7/20
1 broke 2/8/20
1 abandoned <2/15/20
---
---
intruder adult attacked 2/8/20, Mom possibly injured; unk which egg broke, which abandoned
CA bbl1/8/20
1/11/20
unhatched
unhatched
---
---
ravens ate eggs 3/15/20
GA ber1/11/20
1/14/20
1 broke 2/22/20
1 broke 3/11/20
---
---
unk which egg broke first
FL nef
new F & M
1/13/20
1/16/20
2/19/20
2/21/20
5/7/20
5/17/20
NJ duk
new F
1/20/20
1/24/20
2/26/20
3/1/20
both seen 6/25/20cam down
4/30/20 thru
end of season
TN dal1/22/20
1/25/20
1/28/20
2/29/20
3/2/20
3/4/20
fell 3/4/20
1 seen <6/8/20
1 seen <6/15/20
tree fell 4/29/20, cam down
TN blf1/27/20
1/30/20
2/3/20
3/5/20
3/7/20
3/11/20
5/29/20
5/29/20
6/5/20
MD tob2/3/20
2/6/20

2/9/20
3/14/20
hatch fail, 3/14/20
3/16/20
6/4/20?
---

6/5/20?
TN jns2/4/20
2/7/20
2/10/20
3/15/20
3/17/20
unhatched
6/3/20
6/5/20
---
male (Noshi) disappeared 4/24/20; intruder M appeared on cam 4/26/20
MN dnr
new F & M
2/6/20
2/9/20
2/12/20
3/15/20
3/17/20
3/19/20
6/16/20
6/20/20
d. <4/13/20
E3 failed to thrive, possibly starved
AZ gfd
new nest
new M
clutch 1
2/9/20?------new M didn't incubate; nest
abandoned 2/18/20
MI arb<~2/16/20
?
3/20/20?
?
6/9/20
?
CA red
no cam
2/11/20?
?
3/22/20?
<4/12/20
6/17/20?
?
PA frm
new cam
2/13/20
2/16/20

2/19/20
3/25/20
hatch fail, 3/25/20
3/26/20
6/14/20
---

<6/16/20
PA han2/13/20
2/17/20
broke 3/29/20
broke 2/17/20
---
---
PA pit2/13/20
2/16/20
3/21/20
3/23/20
6/11/20
6/6/20
IL umr2/14/20
2/17/20
3/23/20
3/24/20
6/10/20
6/16/20
tree fell in derecho 8/10/20
CA robat least 2
<2/27/20
2 hatched
<3/25/20
<6/10/20
<6/10/20
CO fsv2/14/20
2/17/20

2/21/20
1 hatch 3/29/20
1 hatch <3/31/20
1 unhatched
1 d. ~4/16/20
<6/12/20
cams off 3/16/20 due to coronavirus; unk which egg unhatched; unk which chick d., probably weather related
WV shp2/17/20
2/20/20
3/25/20
3/27/20
fell 3/27/20
6/13/20
CA cWE
new M
clutch 1
2/20/20
2/23/20
ravens predated
both 2/24/20
---
---
new M didn't incubate consistently
IA dnn2/21/19
2/24/20
3/30/20
3/31/20
d. 4/10/20
6/9/20
DN11's death cause unk
CA zSC
new nest
clutch 1
2/21/20broke at lay---
FL swf
clutch 2
2/22/20
2/25/20
3/31/20
4/2/20
6/15/20 accid
7/1/20
102d after clutch 1 first egg, 38d after clutch 1 eaglet d.
NY ctr2/22/20
?
?
3/31/20
<4/2/20
<4/5/20
6/18/20?
6/20/20?
<6/26/20
IA urb
new nest
2/25/20
2/28/20
3/2/20
4/3/20
4/6/20
4/7/20
6/22/20
6/25/20
6/29/20
IA dec2/26/20
2/29/20
3/4/20
4/5/20
4/5/20
4/8/20
6/18/20
6/21/20 accid
6/21/20
IN ndl2/26/20
2/29/20
3/4/20
4/4/20
4/6/20
4/9/20
6/23/20?
6/26/20
d. 5/14/20
BC sur2/27/20
3/1/20
4/5/20
4/6/20
6/28/20
6/28/20
CA cTH2/27/20
3/1/20
4/5/20
broke 3/20/20,
infertile
6/26/20
---
MT mil3 by 3/6/20<4/5/20
<4/7/20
<4/14/20
<6/18/20?
<6/20/20?
<6/28/20?
CA zSC
clutch 2
2/29/20
3/4/20
3/7/20
broke in 3 hrs
broke <3/5/20
broke <3/11/20
---
---
---
OH avn3/1/20

3/4/20
3/7/20
4/10/20

4/11/20
4/12/20
6/18/20 accid (BDOW)
1 d. 4/26/20
6/29/20
unk which chick d. or cause
CO std3/1/20
3/4/20
3/7/20
unhatched
4/12/20
unhatched
---
d. 4/14/20
---
intruder F attacked 4/6/20; eaglet d. of hypothermia or starved; magpie took eaglet's body 4/15/20; M stopped incubating
BC dl23/1/20
3/4/20
3/7/20
1 unhatched
4/11/20
4/12/20
---
7/1/20 accid
7/4/20 accid
unk which egg unhatched
OH ash
new cam
3/1/20
3/4/20
4/7/20
4/10/20
6/24/20
6/24/20
IA dav3/6/20
3/9/20
3/12/20
unhatched
4/14/20
4/17/20
---
<7/4/20
<7/4/20
egg #1 gone 3/7/20?, unk cause
TN har3/9/20?
3/12/20?
<4/16/20
4/18/20
<7/6/20
<7/6/20
BC wht3/10/20
3/13/20
unhatched
4/18/20
---
7/2/20
AZ gfd
clutch 2
~3/10/20------new M didn't incubate; abandoned
<3/25/20
CA cWE
clutch 2
3/18/20

3/21/20
raven predated,
3/20/20
raven predated, 3/29/20
---

---
BC hrn3/28/20
3/31/20 ?
5/5/20
<5/9/20
7/28/20
8/2/20
AK ken4/22/20
4/25/20
5/31/20
6/2/20
8/19/20
d. from fall, 6/22/20
M (Redoubt) disappeared 6/18/20; possible intruder

EAGLET GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT

It has long been a dream of mine to collect a daily log of screen caps and videos that illustrate the growth and development of one eaglet from hatch through fledge, and which can serve as a framework for discussion of the many milestones in an eagle’s first 3 months of life.  This year, thanks to the superb camera setup at the Bluff City nest in Tennessee, operated by East Tennessee State University (ETSU), I have been able to realize this dream.

I have created a series of pages that includes a general introduction to eaglet growth and development, daily photos of young BC14 from hatch on 3/11/19 to fledge on 5/31/19, and a list of references.  I will be adding more pages to the series, covering specific eaglet features like feathers, feet, and various behaviors as it grows.

These pages would not have been possible without the assistance and support of Michelle France, camera operator and keen observer at the ETSU nests, who not only expertly zoomed, panned, and tilted the sometimes touchy cam, often catering to my requests, but also created a treasure trove of screen caps and videos every day which has been invaluable in my quest for daily shots.

I also must thank my long-time eagle-watching buddy Donna Young, whose careful observations over a decade have greatly enriched my understanding of eagle behavior.  Our countless conversations have helped shape this project and contributed enormously to the information I have gathered and presented.

The series I am launching today is found under the Menu item “Eaglet Growth” and so far includes:

More pages are in the works.

Hatching Eaglet

Here is a rare bird’s-eye (pun intended) view of how an eaglet uncurls itself from inside the egg in the final stage of hatching. This video is of the hatch of BC14 on 3/11/19 at 10:32 at the Tennessee Bluff City cam, operated by East Tennessee State University.  I’ve slowed the stream to 10% of normal speed and added arrows to indicate the back, head, left wing, right wing, beak, tail, legs and feet, egg tooth (yes! the egg tooth!), umbilicus, and receding yolk sac of the new hatchling.  The eaglet has its back to us and its head is down, tail up.

INTRASPECIFIC INTRUSIONS AT BALD EAGLE NESTS

© elfruler 2018

intraspecific adj. : occurring within a species or involving members of one species.” (www.merriam-webster.com)

Bald Eagles choose their breeding territories and nest sites carefully, driven by factors that will lead to success in raising their young.  These factors include adequate food resources, a sturdy nest platform, available shelter from dangerous weather, ease of defense, and tolerable distance from disturbances.  A good location will be attractive to any Bald Eagles that come along, and it is not surprising that a resident Bald Eagle pair will be challenged by other Bald Eagles for the site, leading to competition between members of the species, or intraspecific conflict.

It is not uncommon for one or both members of a pair to be challenged even before the nesting season begins, resulting in displacement, injury, and even death.  Conflicts that occur once a clutch of eggs has been laid or a brood of chicks has hatched can cause loss of eggs and chicks, despite the fierce defense that the parents inevitably mount against intruders.  Often the parents are successful in repelling a challenge and their chicks fledge.  In rare cases an intruder is accepted by the resident pair as a cooperative breeder (Go here for a series of pages about Cooperative Breeding and its occurrence among Bald Eagles).

The Bald Eagle nests that have been viewed on camera or monitored carefully from the ground since 1992 have provided a glimpse of intraspecific intrusions of many types and with a variety of outcomes:

  • Events before, during, and after the season
  • From one to many intruders
  • Intruding males and females, adults, subadults, and juveniles
  • Replacements, disappearances, injuries, and deaths of parents
  • Unhatched or broken eggs and injured or slain nestlings
  • Double clutches
  • Rescued nestlings and rehabbed fledglings
  • Successful fledges
  • Cooperative breeding

Even careful monitoring of cams and nests don’t provide the full picture of events surrounding intrusions, which often take place out of human view.  Even happenings in full view do not always have clear-cut explanations.

  • How many intruders are in the area?
  • When did they first appear?
  • What encounters occur off-nest between intruders and residents?
  • What is the sex or age of an intruder?
  • Does a resident eagle disappear because it has been injured or killed, or because it has decided that it cannot prevail in a battle?
  • Was an egg broken by an intruder or an agitated parent, or because it was unviable or infertile?
  • Did an egg fail to hatch because intruders interrupted the reproductive cycle and prevented fertilization?
  • Why would one intruder destroy eggs or chicks but another intruder leave eggs or chicks undamaged?
  • Does a resident adult respond primarily defensively to an intruder, or might there be a trigger that precipitates an offensive response?
  • Why would an intruder become a helper and cooperative breeder rather than a threat?

Answers to such questions would provide a much better understanding of events we can see, but too often the answers elude us.

The number of Bald Eagle nests for which reliable daily reports have been made more than doubled from 2008 to 2018 – from 24 to 57.  They range from southern California to New England, from south Florida to Alaska, and many points on the continent inbetween.  The nests are found in a variety of habitats, including rural farmland, along rivers and streams, lakes and bays, in woodlands in parks and wildlife refuges, on coastal islands, college campuses, and in city neighborhoods.  Yet it cannot be claimed that these nests are a representative sampling of all of the thousands of Bald Eagle nests in North America.

Nor can we be sure that we have witnessed every conceivable behavior or outcome associated with intraspecific intrusions.  The information that I present here is illustrative of certain types of Bald Eagle behavior, but should not be taken as a statistical report on intraspecific intrusions.

This first chart (at this link) describes the intraspecific intrusions observed at Bald Eagle nests from 1992 through 2018, the nest locations and habitats, what is known about the intruders, the events, and the outcomes.  (Link opens in a new browser tab.)  Losses (of parents, eggs, or chicks) can result directly or indirectly from intrusions, or they may occur for other reasons not related to intraspecific conflict.  Not every intrusion leads to a loss.

This second chart (follow this link) summarizes the details and gives percentages to enable comparison of intrusions, losses, and fledges from one year to the next.  (Link opens in a new browser tab.)  The percentages are number of intrusion events (nest intrusions, clutch intrusions, eggs lost, etc.) compared to the total number observed (nests, clutches, eggs., etc.) in that season.  (The years 1992-2007 at the California West End nest are not included in this summary because of the outsized effect of DDE contamination on egg production there.)  Notably, for these nests there is no clear trend in the percentages over time.

  • While 2018 clearly was a bad year for nest intrusions (including both before and during a clutch), at 24.6% of observed nests, 2008 was almost as bad, at 20.8% of observed nests.
  • On the other hand, 2008 was a worse year for clutch intrusions (after eggs were laid), at 19.2% compared to 17.9% in 2018.
  • And in 2008, 4.5% of chicks were lost, compared to a much smaller 1.3% in 2018.
  • The number of eggs lost was a staggering 11.3% in 2018, but the 8.6% of eggs lost in 2008 is the second highest percentage.
  • The year 2013 was difficult, with 13.6% of clutch intrusions and 6.7% of egg losses.
  • Some years were relatively benign: 2011 saw only one intrusion and 2012 only two.  A dip in losses occurred in 2015 and in intrusions in 2016.
  • From 2013-2017 most percentages were relatively stable – nest intrusions, clutch intrusions, losses – with an overall dip in 2016. Intrusions and losses in 2018 were severe, and it remains to be seen in coming seasons whether that year was an outlier.
BRIEF UPDATE ON THE 2018-2019 SEASON: I have not yet added new information to the charts, but the number of intraspecific intrusions declined significantly from the year before. Only 6 such intrusions occurred, only 2 of which happened after eggs were laid. 2 nests ended up with no eggs laid, and a total of 4 eggs were lost. No eaglets were lost.

There is no question that suitable habitat for nesting Bald Eagles is on the decline across the continent because of human development and encroachment.  But the numbers we have for these particular nests do not necessarily mean that increasing numbers of nest intrusions point to an approaching saturation of carrying capacity for Bald Eagles across the board.  Each territory has its own conditions that may or may not be either conducive or resistant to nest intrusions.  Increasing population density in a particular area may simply drive some Bald Eagles to adapt by seeking out previously unclaimed territories, by gradually shrinking the size of their territories (over time) to allow for more nests (if the food supply allows for it), or by allowing more instances of cooperative breeding.  It remains to be seen whether intraspecific intrusions will have a negative impact on the Bald Eagle population in the long run.  Some have argued that a rise in population density ultimately could result in a state of population equilibrium by slowing the breeding productivity to offset the long period of increase that followed the banning of DDT in 1972.

While the snapshots that these observed nests provide give us some narratives about intraspecific intrusions at Bald Eagle nests and make comparisons possible, a broader understanding of the causes and effects of such intrusions, as well as a glimpse of what they may entail in the future, must await more detailed and systematic studies (such as Mougeot et al. 2013 in Saskatchewan and Turrin and Watts in the Chesapeake Bay, 2014 and 2015).

For perspective on the Bald Eagle population in North America and trends over time, Partners in Flight (PIF) estimates the number of breeding-aged Bald Eagle individuals in 2017 at around 250,000, based on data from the North America Breeding Bird Survey, an approximate 131% increase since 1970.  The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s oft-cited number of about 10,000 breeding pairs (or 20,000 individuals) in the lower 48 United States in 2007 does not include numbers from Canada or Alaska (both of which exceed the number in the lower 48 states), and it represents only eagles in pairs that are actively breeding.  The PIF estimate encompasses all individual Bald Eagles throughout North America of breeding age whether they have formed breeding pairs or not.  None of these numbers include juvenile or subadult Bald Eagles, which could more than double the totals.

 There is as yet no sign that the Bald Eagle population is declining, whether because of habitat changes that lead to overpopulation and intraspecific conflict in a territory, or other causes such as contaminants, trauma, electrocution, disease, poisoning, and poaching.  In 2010, following the removal of the Bald Eagle from the list of threatened and endangered species, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service produced a Post-delisting Monitoring Plan for the Bald Eagle.  The Plan establishes a 20-year monitoring period (roughly four generations of breeding Bald Eagles) in the lower 48 states, with data analyzed and reported to the public every 5 years.  The Plan will yield information on changes in numbers and their causes, and it includes provisions for responding to a 25% or greater decline with corrective action by federal, state, and local agencies, Native American Tribes, and other interested partners.  The Plan specifically references the possibility of re-listing the Bald Eagle as threatened and/or endangered as a remedy to an unacceptable level of decline.

REFERENCES

Dzus, E.H. and J.M. Gerrard 1993.  Factors influencing Bald Eagle densities in northcentral SaskatchewanThe Journal of Wildlife Management 57: 771-778.

Elliott, K.H, J.E. Elliott, L.K. Wilson, I. Jones, and K. Stenerson 2011.  Density-dependence in the survival and reproduction of Bald Eagles: linkages to chum salmonThe Journal of Wildlife Management 75: 1688-1699.

Farmer, C.J., L.J. Goodrich, E. Ruelas I., and J.P. Smith  2008.  Conservation Status of North America’s Birds of Prey.  In K.L. Bildstein, J.P. Smith, E. Ruelas I., and R.R. Veit (eds). State of North America’s Birds of Prey.  Nuttall Ornithological Club and American Ornithologists.  Union Series in Ornithology No. 3. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Washington, D.C., 303-420.

Grubb, T.G., L.A. Forbis, M. McWhorter, and D.R. Sherman 1988.  Adaptive perch selection as a mechanism of adoption by a replacement Bald EagleThe Wilson Bulletin 100: 302-305.

Hancock Wildlife Foundation Forum.

Hornby Eagle Group Projects Society.  Our Nature Zone.

Hunt, W.G. 1998.  Raptor floaters at Moffat’s equilibriumOikos 82: 191-197.

Institute for Wildlife Studies.  Channel Islands EagleCAM Forum.

Jenkins, J.M. and R.E. Jackman 1993.  Mate and nest site fidelity in a resident population of Bald EaglesThe Condor 95: 1053-1056.

JudyB.  Watching Eaglets Grow.

Mahaffy, M.S. and L.D. Frenzel 1987.  Elicited territorial responses of northern Bald Eagles near active nestsThe Journal of Wildlife Management 51:551-554.

Markham, A.C. and B.D. Watts.  Documentation of infanticide and cannibalism in Bald EaglesJournal of Raptor Research 41: 41-44.

Mougeot, F. 2004.  Breeding density, cuckoldry risk and copulation behaviour during the fertile period in raptors: a comparative analysisAnimal Behaviour 76: 1067-1076.

Mougeot, F., J. Gerrard, E. Dzus, B. Arroyo, P.N. Gerrard, C. Dzus, and G. Bortolotti 2013.  Population trends and reproduction of Bald Eagles at Besnard Lake, Saskatchewan, Canada 1968-2012Journal of Raptor Research 47: 96-107.

Partners in Flight.

Turrin, C. and B.D. Watts 2014.  Intraspecific intrusion at Bald Eagle nestsArdea 102: 71-87.

Turrin, C. and B.D. Watts 2015.  Nest guarding in Chesapeake Bay Bald EaglesJournal of Raptor Research 49: 18-28.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Watts, B.D., G.D. Therres, and M.A. Byrd 2007.  Status, distribution, and the future of Bald Eagles in the Chesapeake Bay areaWaterbirds 30: 25-38.

Watts, B.D., G.D. Therres, and M.A. Byrd 2008.  Recovery of the Chesapeake Bay Bald Eagle nesting populationThe Journal of Wildlife Management 72: 152-158.

HALIAEETUS LEUCOCEPHALUS

You know what it means.  (DO you know what it means?  The Latinized-Greekish universal scientific name for “Bald Eagle”?  Literally translated “Sea-Eagle White-Head”?  Term established in the 18th century by Swedish naturalist and taxonomist Carl Linnaeus?  Yes, you knew that.)

But can you say it out loud?  Without sneezing or coughing or mumbling?

I couldn’t either until I utilized the ever-handy Google to find someone to say it for me.

I found lots of someones.  Here’s a site that has Americans, Brits, Welsh, Australians, Canadians, Dutch, Chinese, Germans, Italians, Japanese, Poles, Danes, Russians, Spaniards, Turks, and yes, Swedes, and smart people of other nationalities saying it.

Go ahead.  Impress your friends.

MEASURING ADULT, SUBADULT, AND JUVENILE BALD EAGLES

©elfruler 2018

See MEASURING AN EAGLE for details on procedures and challenges of acquiring measurements and descriptions and figures of the features measured.   General References are given at this link, while References specific to each table below are given at the end of each table.

The charts below give measurements of adult and subadult Bald Eagles as reported in peer-reviewed publications.  I have omitted measurements that are questionable or not standard.  (If a reader knows of reports that I do not include here, please contact me with details.)

These numbers provide some context for consideration of several factors relating to size in Bald Eagles:

Age

The age of a Bald Eagle during its first five years affects several measurements.

  • Beak and talons increase in size.
    • A Bald Eagle’s beak and talons are not fully grown at fledge but increase slowly in size over approximately its first 3 years. This is probably caused by a gradual buildup of the keratin layer over the underlying bones (which do appear to be fully grown at fledge) (Bortolotti 1984d).
  • Feathers decrease in length.
    • A juvenile, a fledgling eagle in its 1st year, has longer flight feathers (wing and tail) than it will ever have again.
    • With each successive molt of a subadult from its 2nd year through its 5th, the new flight feathers are a few millimeters shorter.
    • After reaching maturity, feather lengths of adults remain steady. But feathers wear down over time:  An individual Bald Eagle primary or secondary feather molts only every 3-4 years so it becomes progressively shorter over that period.  Also, a new flight feather can take 40-50 days to grow to its full length, so a measurement before it has finished growing will be misleading.
  • Weight.
    • Primarily because of the decreasing feather lengths, an eagle’s weight decreases slightly over its 1st 5 years.
  • Researchers cannot always be certain of the age of a particular bird, and some offer vague or imprecise descriptions of age, such as “second winter,” “immature,” or “subadult.”
  • Only measurements of the same eagle from one year to the next would yield meaningful comparisons, and this is possible only with a captive bird or with nestlings that are visited more than once before they fledge. Few such measurements exist.

Sexual dimorphism

  • Females are larger than males in general, although exceptions can exist. The numbers tabulated here indicate that the difference can be from 13-23%, although some publications and internet sites claim as much as 25-30%.
  • Adult females are larger than subadult females.
  • Adult males are not significantly larger than younger males. (Bortolotti 1984c)

Geographical location and “Bergmann’s rule”

  • It has been stated often that the size of Bald Eagles increases from south to north, and the so-called “Bergmann’s rule” is cited as an explanation for this phenomenon. The numbers in my tables do not necessarily confirm this “rule” for Bald Eagles, as discussed below.
  • “Bergmann’s rule” has roots in an 1847 article by Carl Bergmann, entitled “On the relationship of the warmth economy of animals to their size” (trans. Salewski and Watt 2016).
    • Bergmann described a “law” pertaining to warm-blooded animals (birds and mammals):
      • Since larger animals have a smaller ratio of body surface area to body volume, they expend less effort than smaller animals to maintain a constant internal body temperature. (The surface area is important for the dissipation of heat from the body to compensate for excessive environmental heat, while the volume is pertinent to heat production to warm the body in excessive cold.)
    • From this “law,” Bergmann hypothesized that larger animals need a cooler climate than smaller animals. Since in general environmental temperature is lower at higher latitudes (further north), it follows that larger animals would favor northern environments and smaller animals would favor southern environments, a concept that biologists refer to as a latitudinal size cline, a gradation of size from larger to smaller, in this case from north to south.
    • Bergmann tested the size cline hypothesis by comparing the relative sizes of species within a genus, only once mentioning the sizes of individuals within a single species (the White-tailed Eagle, see below). Using wingspan (not body volume, or weight) to compare size, he examined 310 species across 86 genera and concluded that the hypothesis of a latitudinal size cline is true in most (but not all) cases.
    • To address the exceptions, Bergmann noted that other factors besides latitude might be in play:
      • Altitude (mountainous habitats generally are cooler than lower elevations).
      • The reliability of wingspan as an indicator of size (e.g. the Merlin has a smaller wingspan than the European Hobby but can be of comparable weight and remains in northern climates through the winter).
      • Migratory habits (which may affect wingspan).
      • Quality of plumage.
    • Bergmann included Bald Eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) in a sea-eagle taxon with White-tailed Eagles (Haliaeetus albicilla), Short-toed Eagles, and Ospreys, although he acknowledged that in his day there was disagreement about whether they all belong in the same genus (taxonomists today agree that they do not).
      • He noted that among White-tailed Eagles, which conform to the hypothesis in general, some smaller individuals may be found in the north and some larger ones in the south.
    • Bergmann himself never articulated a “rule” about a relationship between the size of an animal and its geographical location. Later researchers have formulated the “rule” in different ways, and there remain disagreements about its underlying assumptions, its application, and even its validity.
    • A latitudinal size cline does not apply to all species and genera of birds. Meiri and Dayan 2003 surveyed studies of 94 species of birds that provide reliable data on size and locale and concluded that “over 72% of birds…follow Bergmann’s rule.”
      • Among raptors found in North America, that includes Turkey Vultures, Peregrine Falcons, Sharp-Shinned Hawks, and Ospreys.
      • But several North American raptors do not follow “Bergmann’s rule”: Cooper’s Hawks (Whaley and White 1994) , Northern Goshawks (Whaley and White 1994), Red-tailed Hawks (Fitzpatrick and Dunk 1999), and Merlins (Temple 1972).
      • Meiri and Dayan did not include Bald Eagles in their survey because not enough studies were available that provide “data that were statistically tested for geographic variation.”
    • My tables here do not provide such data for Bald Eagles either. The sampling in the published literature is too small, variable, and arbitrary to either confirm or refute “Bergmann’s rule” in the case of Bald Eagles.
    • In fact, the numbers I have tabulated suggest that, as with White-tailed Eagles, which are close genetic relatives of Bald Eagles, some smaller individual Bald Eagles may be found in the north and some larger ones in the south. The ranges of weight and wingspan measurements in my tables illustrate some exceptions to “Bergmann’s rule” (ranges are given in parentheses and italics below the averages):
      • The highest weight among females was recorded in Illinois (6577g) and the lowest in Saskatechwan (4540g) – higher in the south, lower in the north.
      • The highest weight among males was found in Alaska (5625g) and the lowest also in Alaska (3633g) – both high and low in the north.
      • The longest wingspan among females was recorded in Alaska (2333.5mm) and the shortest in Illinois (2035mm) – longer in the north, shorter in the south.
      • But the longest wingspan among males was found in Alaska (2171.7mm) and the shortest in Saskatchewan (2027mm) – both long and short in the north.
    • In conclusion, until more systematic studies of Bald Eagles are done with large samplings of measurements across a full range of geographic locations, we cannot be certain which of the following is true:
      • Bald Eagles are more similar to Turkey Vultures, Ospreys, Peregrine Falcons, and Sharp-Shinned Hawks in always or almost always conforming to “Bergmann’s rule,” or,
      • Bald Eagles are more similar to their sister White-tailed Eagles in following the “rule” generally, but having many individual exceptions. Our limited data suggests that this is a more accurate statement.

ADULT BALD EAGLE MEASUREMENTS TABLE

SUBADULT AND JUVENILE BALD EAGLE MEASUREMENTS TABLE

REFERENCES