Golden Eagle

Species information

The following is a report on progress made towards the protection and recovery of Golden Eagle, (Aquila chrysaetos) in Ontario from 2007 to 2020, based on Ontario’s species-specific recovery policy. This report meets the legislative requirement for a review of progress under the Endangered Species Act, 2007 (ESA or “the Act”). Golden Eagle is listed as endangered on the  Species at Risk in Ontario (SARO) List under the ESA.

Golden Eagle has been classified as a species at risk since 2004. It was originally classified as an endangered species and was listed as such under the ESA when it came into force in June 2008.

The species-specific recovery policy for Golden Eagle, known as the Government Response Statement (GRS) was published in 2016 and includes the government’s recovery goal for the species and the actions and priorities it intends to lead or support to help achieve that goal. The GRS considers science advice provided in the recovery strategy, when developing recovery actions for the species. As legislated in the Act, the purpose of this review is to report on progress made towards implementing the protection and recovery actions in the GRS. The review can also help identify opportunities to adjust and adapt the implementation of protection and recovery actions to achieve the recovery goal for the species.

Further information about Golden Eagle, including the threats that it faces, and actions being taken to help protect and recover this species is available on the Government of Ontario webpage for Golden Eagle. A summary on the progress towards the protection and recovery of Golden Eagle and an annual update on the broader species at risk program (i.e. the Introduction to the 2021 Review of Progress report) is available on the Review of Progress towards the Protection and Recovery of Ontario’s Species at Risk webpage.

Snapshot: Progress towards the protection and recovery of Golden Eagle

Progress towards meeting the recovery goal

• The recovery goal in the Government Response Statement (GRS) in Ontario is to maintain existing populations by allowing for the natural increase of successfully breeding Golden Eagles in Ontario.
• Initial progress has been made towards implementing the majority of the government-led actions. Initial progress has been made towards implementing all of the government-supported recovery objectives and several of the associated actions. Examples of progress include:
  • surveys for Golden Eagles and their nests
  • education and outreach programs that raise awareness of Golden Eagle
  • submission of Golden Eagle observations to the Natural Heritage Information Centre
• In alignment with the GRS, further work is needed to develop standardized methodologies to survey and monitor Golden Eagle, determine this species’ sensitivity to threats, and minimize incidental trapping. More education and outreach specific to Golden Eagle is also needed to support the protection and recovery of this species.

Occurrences and distribution

• Eleven populations of Golden Eagle have been documented near Fort Severn and Peawanuck in the Far North of Ontario. Currently, six of these populations are extant, whereas the remaining five are considered historical. One population of Golden Eagle has been newly-identified since 2008.

Government-supported stewardship projects

• Through the Species at Risk Stewardship Program, the Government of Ontario has enabled its stewardship partners to conduct nine projects (by providing $354,981 in funding) that have supported the protection and recovery of multiple species at risk, including Golden Eagle.
• The government’s support helped its stewardship partners to involve 111 individuals who volunteered 495 hours of their time towards protection and recovery activities for species at risk, including Golden Eagle. The estimated value of these voluntary contributions, as well as additional funding and in-kind support, is $59,367.
• Stewardship partners reported providing outreach on multiple species at risk, including Golden Eagle, to 280 individuals.

Supporting human activities while ensuring appropriate support for species recovery

• The Government of Ontario has issued 15 permits for this species, all were ‘protection or recovery’ permits issued under clause 17(2)(b) of the ESA.
• Twenty-four activities have been registered for the species. One activity was registered under ‘Species protection, recovery activities’ (section 23.17), and 23 activities were registered under ‘Threats to health and safety, not imminent’ (section 23.18) under Ontario Regulation 242/08 of the ESA.

Reporting on the progress towards the protection and recovery of Golden Eagle

The implementation of government-led and government-supported actions demonstrates progress towards reaching the desired objectives and the recovery goal set out in the GRS.

Progress towards implementing government-led actions

Progress has been made towards implementing the majority of government-led actions identified in the GRS. Common actions for the government to lead as it works towards achieving a species’ recovery goal include:

• Educate other agencies and authorities involved in planning and environmental assessment processes on the protection requirements under the ESA.
• Encourage the submission of Golden Eagle data to the Government of Ontario’s central repository at the Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC).
• Undertake communications and outreach to increase public awareness of species at risk in Ontario.
• Protect the Golden Eagle and its habitat through the ESA.
• Support conservation, agency, municipal and industry partners, and Indigenous communities and organizations to undertake activities to protect and recover the Golden Eagle. Support will be provided where appropriate through funding, agreements, permits (including conditions) and/or advisory services.
• Encourage collaboration, and establish and communicate annual priority actions for government support in order to reduce duplication of efforts.

Key progress made towards implementing these actions is described in the following sections.

Additionally, the government has directly undertaken the following species-specific actions:

Notice of Activity Form under Ontario Regulation 242/08

One of the key Government-led actions to support the recovery of Golden Eagle in Ontario is to monitor registrations under the Notice of Activity Form and Other Notices under Ontario Regulation 242/08 of the ESA for any incidental trapping related to Golden Eagle. This is intended to create a better understanding of the extent of this threat to the species in Ontario. Regular instances of incidental Golden Eagle trapping have been reported in adjacent jurisdictions, including Quebec, but no registrations of incidental Golden Eagle trapping have been made in Ontario. The Government of Ontario will continue to monitor registrations of incidental Golden Eagle trapping to support the protection and recovery of Golden Eagle.

Community based land use planning

Community based land use planning is a joint process between First Nations and Ontario to make consensus-based decisions on what lands are open to development and what should be protected in the Far North of Ontario. Throughout the planning process, First Nations contribute their traditional knowledge, historical relationship to the land, and community interests to inform decisions around economic development and protection. Ontario contributes provincial interests related to economic development and environmental protection, provides mapping and science information, and ensures opportunities for public and stakeholder input. Each Community Based Land Use Plan (CBLUP) documents the outcomes of the planning process.

Plans define land use areas and assign a designation to each area. Designations are used to set out the broad objectives and priorities for an area, and the land uses that are permitted and not permitted. The three designations that planning teams use in their plans include:

• Dedicated Protected Areas (DPAs)
• Enhanced Management Areas (EMAs)
• General Use Areas (GUAs)

Planning teams apply a DPA designation where there is an interest in keeping areas free from industrial development because they represent sensitive or significant ecological or cultural values. As specified in the Far North Act, 2010, certain developments, land uses and activities may not be carried out in a protected area including: prospecting, mining claim staking or mineral exploration, opening a mine, commercial timber harvest, and oil and gas exploration or production.

Protection is provided for a range of wildlife species and values, including Golden Eagle, by incorporating information and knowledge (including Traditional Ecological Knowledge and scientific data), through DPA designations and through management direction for future activities in EMAs and GUAs. The aim in designing these land use areas is to consider habitat, high-use areas and travel corridors that extend within and beyond a planning area to adjacent protected areas.

Planning teams consider a broad landscape perspective in identifying how to preserve important habitat for a range of species that may include Golden Eagle. Designing larger protected areas that prohibit certain activities ensures maintenance of habitat, helps minimize fragmentation and aids in protecting species at important times during the year. Consideration of connectivity of protected areas within a planning area and between adjacent communities’ planning areas helps to maintain ecological and cultural values.

Once a plan is in place, all activities must be consistent with plan direction (i.e., the land uses that are permitted and not permitted, as set out in the plan). In addition, plans typically include guiding direction for permitted land uses. In order to ensure that all parties are aware of land use direction, approved plans are posted on the Government of Ontario website and added to the online Crown Land Use Policy Atlas.

As of January 2021, five First Nation communities have worked with Ontario and completed CBLUPs (Pikangikum, Cat Lake, Slate Falls, Pauingassi, Little Grand Rapids). These plans were approved by the First Nation and the Minister of Northern Development, Mines, Natural Resources and Forestry under the Far North Act, 2010. The currently approved plans have planning areas ranging in size from approximately 1,400 km² to 14,500 km², and designate from 34% to 100% of their planning areas to DPAs.

Nine other First Nation communities have completed their Terms of Reference including Marten Falls, Eabametoong and Mishkeegogamang, Webequie, Wawakapewin, McDowell Lake, Constance Lake, Kashechewan and Weenusk. A Terms of Reference is an agreement between First Nations and the Government of Ontario which sets the objectives and process for developing a CBLUP.

Ontario remains committed to working with communities through the community based land use planning process to identify and protect areas of cultural and ecological value while maintaining opportunities for sustainable economic development that benefits First Nations.

Guides and resources

The Government of Ontario has developed guidelines for reducing impacts of windpower projects on birds and bird habitat. This document provides guidance on identifying and assessing bird habitat and addressing potential negative effects on birds and bird habitats during the planning construction and operation of onshore wind power projects in Ontario.

In addition, NDMNRF, Bird Studies Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada and the Canadian Wind Energy Association maintain a Wind Energy Bird and Bat Monitoring Database that includes bird and bat monitoring data from operating wind power projects in Ontario and across Canada. The database also contains annual summaries of Ontario’s wind turbine-related bird and bat mortalities. Studying bird and bat mortality patterns associated with wind power projects can help to inform guidelines and policy, support an adaptive management approach and provide public information.

Occurrences and distribution

Eleven populations ^{footnote 1[1]} of Golden Eagle have been documented in Ontario. Six are considered extant (i.e., observed within the past 20 years) and five are considered historical ^{footnote 2[2]} . The extant populations are located in northern Ontario near Fort Severn and Peawanuck, south of Hudson Bay, at Little Shagamu River, Shagmu River, Shamattawa River, Sutton Narrows, Wachi Creek, and Winisk River. Historical locations are more widespread, with records from northern Ontario (Severn River), northwestern Ontario (Thunder Cape and Pipestone Lake), and southeastern Ontario (Round Schooner Lake and Mazinaw Lake).

Since 2008, the government’s central repository at the Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) has received six records of the species from two different sources, including one newly-identified population record from Winisk River (i.e. first identified after 2008). The newly-identified population is likely the result of increased search effort and education about Golden Eagle and may not represent actual population increases, but rather increased knowledge about the distribution of the species.

Two of the extant records at Sutton Narrows and Shamattawa River are nests that have been reused since 2008 and have been assessed as having “possibly excellent” viability. The remaining four extant records have not been assessed for viability.

Searches for Golden Eagle have been conducted at two locations with historic records of this species, including Round Schooner Lake in 2005 and Severn River in 2008. However, there were no Golden Eagle sightings or evidence of Golden Eagle nesting activity in these areas.

It is possible that there are observations of Golden Eagles and nesting sites that have not been submitted to the government. Encouraging the submission of observations of this species is included in the GRS as a government-led action. Everyone is encouraged, or may be required by an authorization or approval to submit observations of Golden Eagle, and any other species at risk observed, to the NHIC for incorporation into the provincial record of observations. Observations may now be submitted to NHIC via the Rare Species of Ontario project in iNaturalist or through eBird.

• 6
  observations of this species were submitted to the NHIC since 2008

Government-supported stewardship projects

An important government-led action in the GRS for Golden Eagle is to support partners to undertake activities to protect and recover the species. Through the Species at Risk Stewardship Program the government has supported nine projects ($354,981) designed to contribute to the protection and recovery of Golden Eagle ^{footnote 3[3]} . All projects focused on multiple species at risk, including Golden Eagle. In addition to the government funding, partners with projects designed to benefit multiple species at risk, including Golden Eagle, were successful in securing additional funding from other sources ($59,367). These amounts include in-kind support in the form of time and expertise provided by volunteers.

Stewardship partners reported that provincial funding helped them to secure in-kind support by involving 111 individuals who volunteered 495 hours of their time towards protection and recovery activities for multiple species at risk, including Golden Eagle, which has an estimated value of $16,185. In addition, stewardship partners reported providing ecosystem-based outreach on multiple species, including Golden Eagle, to 280 individuals.

The remainder of this section highlights one project supported through the Species at Risk Stewardship Program as well as the corresponding government-supported recovery actions for the species.

In 2009, the Municipality of Red Lake collaborated with NDMNRF to conduct habitat surveys for species at risk in the Municipality of Red Lake, located in northwestern Ontario. This included two aerial helicopter surveys for Bald Eagle nests, with a broader focus on documenting and recording any potential species at risk habitat and observations in the area. Although several Bald Eagle nests were located, no evidence of Golden Eagle in the area was found, which supports the Government of Ontario’s current understanding of the Golden Eagle’s Ontario breeding range. However, continued surveying and monitoring in this area and across the province may identify important non-breeding habitat features, such as migratory stopover sites that could be used by breeding Golden Eagles in the future.

In addition to these survey efforts, the Municipality of Red Lake educated the public about this project and species at risk through media releases in a municipality newsletter and a local newspaper.

The outcomes of this project correspond to multiple high-priority actions for this species, including developing and implementing monitoring protocols for the species, and delivering targeted communication products to promote public awareness of the Golden Eagle.

Species at Risk Stewardship Program

• 
  9

  projects included Golden Eagle

• 
  $354,981

  for multi-species projects that included Golden Eagle

• 
  $59,367

  in additional funding and in-kind support

• 
  111

  volunteers

• 
  495

  volunteer hours

• 
  280

  people received outreach

Supporting human activities while ensuring appropriate support for species recovery

Supporting partners through authorizations and their associated conditions is an important government-led action.

Fifteen permits have been issued for Golden Eagle since the species has been protected under the ESA, all of which were ‘protection or recovery’ (17(2)(b)) permits. ‘Protection or recovery’ permits are issued if the purpose of the activity is to assist in the protection or recovery of a species at risk. All of these permits were issued for multiple species, including Golden Eagle. These permits enabled a variety of monitoring projects including banding of captured birds, and assessment of wind project operations. To protect the well-being of the species, all people that would be handling or interacting with individual Golden Eagles were required to be properly qualified and trained in measures to prevent stress or injury. Proponents were also required to submit all observations and monitoring data to be added to the provincial records.

A total of 24 activities that may affect Golden Eagle or its habitat have been registered for the purposes of Ontario Regulation 242/08 under the ESA. One activity was registered under ‘Species protection, recovery activities’ (section 23.17), and 23 activities were registered under ‘Threats to health and safety, not imminent’ (section 23.18). These registrations require the registrant to comply with all conditions of the regulation, such as:

• the requirement to have a mitigation plan be prepared by a person with suitable expertise
• ensuring that the activity is carried out and monitored in accordance with the plan
• taking reasonable steps to minimize the adverse effects of the activity on the species

No registrations have been made under Notice of Incidental trapping for Golden Eagle to date.

• 15
  protection or recovery permits
• 24
  registrations

Progress towards implementing government-supported actions

Government-supported actions are organized under overarching recovery objectives. Initial progress has been made towards achieving all government-supported recovery objectives and implementing three of the associated actions identified in the GRS for Golden Eagle.

Under this objective, initial progress has been made towards implementing Action No. 1 through surveys for the Golden Eagle at identified nesting sites and in areas with potential habitat. This may support the development of surveying and monitoring methodologies specific to Golden Eagle. Initial progress has been made towards Action No. 2 through submissions of Golden Eagle observations to the NHIC, which resulted in one newly-identified population. This data is shared with an assortment of partners as needed to better inform management efforts for this species.

Under this objective, initial progress has been made towards implementing Action No. 5 through conditions of ESA authorizations (see above) and projects supported by the Species at Risk Stewardship Program. These projects provided outreach for several northern Ontario communities and one eastern Ontario community about how to identify and support the recovery of the Golden Eagle, such as by building nesting platforms.

Summary of progress towards meeting the recovery goal

The recovery goal for Golden Eagle is to maintain existing populations by allowing for the natural increase of successfully breeding Golden Eagles in Ontario. Efforts made towards the government-led and government-supported actions has helped to make progress towards this goal. For example, stewardship partners have increased awareness and understanding of the Golden Eagle among communities in northern and eastern Ontario and both stewardship partners and the Government of Ontario have conducted surveys for Golden Eagle nests.

The provincial record of observations suggests that Golden Eagle continues to persist in the province, with six extant populations, including one newly discovered since 2008.

Recommendations

As stated in the GRS, this review of progress can be used to help identify whether adjustments to the implementation of GRS actions are needed, to achieve the protection and recovery of the species. Based on progress to date, the overall direction provided in the GRS for Golden Eagle, particularly the implementation of actions identified as high priority, should continue to guide protection and recovery of the species.

Although initial progress has been made towards the action to survey, monitor and report on Golden eagle nesting sites (Action No. 1 – High Priority), more work is required to develop and implement standardized methodologies for Golden Eagle. In addition, the action to coordinate efforts and share information (Action No. 2), requires further research and information sharing with other jurisdictions to fully implement this action. Finally, the action to develop and deliver targeted communication products (Action No. 5), requires further work to create communications products specific to the Golden Eagle, as well as translate documents into dialects of Cree, Ojibway and Oji-Cree.

Relative to actions that have received a stronger level of support, the following actions have received less attention and are identified for consideration in future work towards the protection and recovery of the species:

• Government-led action – Develop direction to provide greater clarity to proponents and partners on the areas of general habitat protected under the ESA for bird species at risk.
• Action No. 3 – Determine the levels of sensitivity of Golden Eagles to recreational activities, industry initiatives and development projects occurring near nesting sites in Ontario. Determine the distances at which disturbance of Golden Eagle nesting sites will not occur.
• Action No. 4 – Investigate the extent that environmental contaminants (e.g., lead and mercury poisoning) are impacting Golden Eagles in Ontario and the locations and levels at which these contaminants are impacting the species.
• Action No. 6 – Work with fur trapping groups in Ontario to promote and implement trapping methods that reduce incidental catch of Golden Eagles and to report any incidental trapping of the species that occurs.

Protecting and recovering Golden Eagle will continue to be a shared responsibility that will require the involvement of many individuals, organizations and communities. Financial support for the implementation of actions may be available through the Species at Risk Stewardship Program. The government can also advise if any authorizations under the ESA or other legislation may be required to undertake a project. By working together, progress can continue to be made towards protecting and recovering Golden Eagle in Ontario.