CDC Logo

BC Conservation Data Centre: Species Summary


Lanius ludovicianus
Loggerhead Shrike

 
Scientific Name: Lanius ludovicianus Linnaeus, 1766
English Name: Loggerhead Shrike
 
Classification / Taxonomy
Scientific Name - 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/.
Classification Level: Species
Species Group: Vertebrate Animal
Species Code: B-LOSH
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family
Animalia Craniata Aves Passeriformes Laniidae
   
Conservation Status / Legal Designation
Global Status: G4 (Apr 2016)
Provincial Status: SNA (Apr 2024)
BC List: Accidental
Provincial FRPA list:   
Provincial Wildlife Act:
COSEWIC Status:
SARA Schedule:
General Status Canada: 1 - At Risk (2005)
Migratory Bird Convention Act: Y
   
Ecology & Life History
General 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).
Global Reproduction Comments: 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).
Global Ecology Comments: 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).
Migration Characteristics:
(Global / Provincial)		 
    Nonmigrant:
    Local Migrant:
    Distant Migrant:
    Within Borders Migrant: 		Y /
Y /
Y /
na /
Global Migration Comments: Withdraws southward from northern half of breeding range for winter. Banding returns indicate that birds from as far north as Alberta and Quebec winter from southern Kansas, Missouri, and Virginia south to Alabama, Louisiana, and Texas (Fruth 1988). Shrikes in Wisconsin begin moving south in August. In Oklahoma and Missouri, begins to arrive and set up breeding teritories in mid-February (Tyler 1992). Returns to nesting areas in New York in mid- to late April (Novak 1989). Shrikes breeding in the Virginias and Maryland frequently are resident, but there appears to be some southward movement. Shrikes that formerly bred in New England apparently followed a predominantly coastal migration route (Milburn 1981). Nonmigratory in much of California, especially in southern and central coastal regions (Matthews and Moseley 1990).
Habitats:
(Type / Subtype / Dependence)
Global Habitat Comments: 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).
Food Habits: Carnivore: Adult, Immature
Invertivore: Adult, Immature
Global Food Habits Comments: Feeds primarily on large insects (especially beetles and orthopterans), also other invertebrates, small birds, lizards, frogs, and rodents; sometimes scavenges (Fraser and Luukkonen 1986). Diet varies with season and location; in parts of the range, most of the food eaten in winter may be vertebrates, which comprise only a small part of the diet in California. In California, the summer diet comprises mainly insects (Terres 1980). Captures prey usually via a short flight from a perch; sometimes hovers kestrel-like or walks when foraging (Bent 1950, Luukkonen 1987). Sometimes impales food items on a plant thorn or on barbed wire (Fraser and Luukkonen 1986); such items may be eaten later or fed to young (Applegate 1977).
Global Phenology: Diurnal: Adult, Immature
Provincial Phenology:
(1st half of month/
2nd half of month)
Colonial Breeder: N
Length(cm)/width(cm)/Weight(g): 23/ / 47
Elevation (m) (min / max): Global: 
Provincial: 
   
 
Distribution
Endemic: N
Global Range Comment: 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).
 
Authors / Contributors
Global Information Author: SOULE, J., AND G. HAMMERSON
Last Updated: May 03, 1995
Provincial Information Author:
Last Updated:
   
References and Related Literature
American Ornithologists' Union (AOU). 1983. Check-list of North American Birds, 6th edition. Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas. 877 pp.
Applegate, R. D. 1977. Possible ecological role of food caches of loggerhead shrike. Auk 94:391-392.
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.
Bartgis, R. L. 1989. Site surveys for rare plants and animals in eastern West Virginia. Unpubl. report, The Nature Conservancy, Boston, Massachusetts.
Bent, A.C. 1950. Life histories of North American wagtails, shrikes, vireos, and their allies. U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull. 197. Washington, D.C.
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.
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.
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.
Brooks, B. L., and S. A. Temple. 1990b. Dynamics of a loggerhead shrike population in Minnesota. Wilson Bull. 102:441-450.
Bureau of Land Management. Life History Summaries.
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.
Cade, T. J. 1992. Hand-reared loggerhead shrikes breed in captivity. Condor 94:1027-1029.
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.
Campbell, R.W., N.K. Dawe, I. McTaggart-Cowan, J.M. Cooper, G.W. Kaiser, M.C.E. McNall and G.E.J. Smith 1997. The Birds of British Columbia, Vol. 3, Passerines: Flycatchers through Vireos. UBC Press in cooperation with Environ. Can., Can. Wildl. Serv. and B.C. Minist. Environ., Lands and Parks, Wildl. Branch. 700pp.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Harrison, C. 1978. A Field Guide to the Nests, Eggs and Nestlings of North American Birds. Collins, Cleveland, Ohio.
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.
Kridelbaugh, A. L. 1982. An ecological study of loggerhead shrikes in central Missouri. Master's thesis, Univ. Missouri, Columbia.
Luukkonen, D. R. 1987. Loggerhead shrike status and breeding ecology in Virginia. Master's thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and Sate University, Blacksburg.
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.
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.
Miller, A. H. 1931. Systematic revision and natural history of the American shrikes (LANIUS). Univ. California Publ. Zool. 38:11-242.
National Geographic Society (NGS). 1983. Field guide to the birds of North America. National Geographic Society, Washington, DC.
Novak, P. 1989. Breeding ecology and status of loggerhead shrike (LANIUS LUDOVICIANUS) in New York. Master's thesis, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, New York.
Peterson, R. T. 1990b. A field guide to western birds. Third edition. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston. 432 pp.
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.
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.
Telfer, E. S., et al. 1989. Status and distribution of the loggerhead shrike in western Canada. Can. Wildl. Serv. Prog. Notes 184. 4 pp.
Terres, J. K. 1980. The Audubon Society encyclopedia of North American birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
Tyler, J. D. 1992. Nesting ecology of the loggerhead shrike in southwestern Oklahoma. Wilson Bull. 104:95-104.
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.
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.
Yosef, R. 1994. Evaluation of the global decline in the true shrikes (family Laniidae). Auk 111:228-233.
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.
Yosef, R., and T. C. Grubb, Jr. 1994. Resource dependence and territory size in loggerhead shrikes (LANIUS LUDOVICIANUS). Auk 111:465-469.
 

Please visit the website Conservation Status Ranks for definitions of the data fields used in this summary report.

Suggested Citation:

B.C. Conservation Data Centre. 1995. Species Summary: Lanius ludovicianus. B.C. Minist. of Environment. Available: https://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/eswp/ (accessed Jun 10, 2026).