ShareThis Page

Red-tailed hawk first suspected to be bald eagle

| Tuesday, Jan. 21, 2014, 1:41 p.m.
Courtesy West Homestead Police
Pennsylvania Game Commission removed an injured red hawk that was discovered by a pedestrian along Route 837 in West Homestead on Friday.

The discovery of an injured red-tailed hawk in West Homestead on Friday caused a brief scare among bird lovers, who initially feared the creature might have been one of several bald eagles that have been nesting in the area.

Local authorities contacted the state Game Commission, who sent an officer to the area of Route 837 near the ramp to E. Carson Street where the bird was discovered and identified as a hawk.

The Game Commission removed the animal.

West Homestead police Officer in Charge Jim Ferson said the bird, though injured, was intimidating, rolling over and showing its talons when approached.

“It didn't want us anywhere near it,” he said.

It was reported in the media this week that a young bald eagle born in April on a hillside in nearby Hays had not been seen recently by birdwatchers. There has been speculation the young bird may have flown south though its parents reportedly are still in the area.

Police said several news outlets called them after the injured bird was reported by emergency dispatchers.

Ferson said a pedestrian discovered the hawk at about 12:18 p.m. and thought it might be the eagle.

Local police did not know what brought the hawk down but said it appeared to have an injured wing.

Eric Slagle is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-664-9161, ext. 1966, or eslagle@tribweb.com.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.