ID-FRONTIERS for October 22-31, 2000

Messages are displayed in the order they were received.  Subject  From  Date   Time   Sibley Guide   Matt Heindel    Sun, 22 Oct 2000   6:09am   Sibley comments   paullarkin    Sun, 22 Oct 2000   8:21am   Re: Sibley Guide Comments   Katrina Knight    Sun, 22 Oct 2000   8:34am   Sibley Guide   Steven Mlodinow    Sun, 22 Oct 2000   12:13pm   Pymy Owl at 3pm at our feeders in Northern Cal.   Bob & Carol Yutzy    Sun, 22 Oct 2000   9:43pm   Re: Sibley Guide and Brant   Bill or Sue Smith    Mon, 23 Oct 2000   11:37am   Re: Sibley Guide and Brant   Noel Wamer    Mon, 23 Oct 2000   12:38pm   Re: Sibley Guide and Brant   Don Richardson    Mon, 23 Oct 2000   12:44pm   Re: Sibley Guide and Brant (#2)   Bill or Sue Smith    Mon, 23 Oct 2000   4:51pm   Re: Sibley Guide   Bob Abrams    Tue, 24 Oct 2000   6:19am   Taxonomy and identification of Brant from Melville Island   Angus Wilson    Tue, 24 Oct 2000   10:12am   Another Brant Source   Steven Mlodinow    Tue, 24 Oct 2000   1:58pm   new Sibley golden plover id ?   Matthew Kenne    Tue, 24 Oct 2000   6:36pm   Sibley Caracara   Jeff N. Davis   Thu, 26 Oct 2000   11:25am   Re: Sibley Caracara   David Sibley    Thu, 26 Oct 2000   11:52am   The Sibley Guide   David Sibley    Thu, 26 Oct 2000   2:49pm   shearwater id   Don Crockett    Sat, 28 Oct 2000   10:42am   Sibley Guide at Sam's Club   Bill Principe    Sat, 28 Oct 2000   4:47pm   Re: Sibley Guide at Sam's Club   Florida Nature Tours   Sat, 28 Oct 2000   9:25pm   Red-eyed Vireo in Spain (online)   Ricard Gutierrez    Mon, 30 Oct 2000   5:35pm

To use email addresses replace '(AT)' with '@'. This is done to confuse the spam 'bots.

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Sibley Guide
From: Matt Heindel <MTHEINDEL(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 22 Oct 2000 6:09am

As with any new arrival, people will often line up and take their shots.
Amazes me anyone would want to put the effort in knowing what is coming.
Although I have long liked Ron Pittaway's work (e.g. Ontario Birds), I
thought his comments were a bit biting, but perhaps that was not intended.
Although he is correct that beginners and intermediates get the most from
this guide, would not we say the same about any guide? I am thoroughly enjoy
going bit by bit and have found a number of things not found in other guides.
I have things I would prefer (like the use of subspecies and inclusion of
birds seen more than 2 or 3 times [vs. 10]), but am so thrilled to see such
an excellent work in our hands that any criticism must be put in perspective.
There are thousands of illustrations and while there might be a small number
that seem ever so slightly off, it seems the more appropriate approach would
be to loudly applaud the 99%. Sibley does more to make birds look real than
almost anyone.
Ron's insight on Bicknell's is helpful and I have found a few map issues
myself. I think the book was done in Sep 99, at which point it was turned
over to the publishers, thus the exclusion of the Heermann's Gull. I am not
sure if Ron's comments on the Red-throated Loon are correct. Some
Red-throated Loons in their first fall have reddish in the throat (a small
patch that generally looks brown). Ron might be right that juveniles "never"
have red, but if this is not a juv, it is important that birders know that
young birds in their first fall can have this. It is illustrated in an old
British Birds piece (back in Jan 1980 or so) and in a coincidence, I know of
a personal account involving Sibley with a bird like this.
I think Ron's list of corrections can be valuable and, as with many works,
perhaps there ought to be a place to archive suggested changes in case there
is ever an update. I am thoroughly thrilled with this work and although
always wanting more, pass along a hearty thanks and congrats to David.

Matt Heindel
mtheindel(AT)aol.com
San Antonio TX


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Sibley comments
From: paullarkin <paullarkin(AT)PGEN.NET>
Date: 22 Oct 2000 8:21am

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----

What Ho!
I am not familiar with "full juvenal plumage" but certainly when RT =
Loons arrive in the south of the UK (around Oct to Nov) the 1st winter =
birds often have a ruddy hue to the throat. It is nowhere near the =
colour of adults in breeding plumage however. I do not know if this is =
present from fledging or develops after, perhaps some of my more =
northern compatriots may be able to advise on this. I assume it may be =
this feature that is illustrated. If this feature is not noted in the =
nearctic forms it may be geographic in variation. It is illustrated in =
the Macmillan Guide to Bird Identification and is mentioned in British =
Birds vol 79 No8 p369 " Upper foreneck often marked with narrow dull =
rust-coloured patch, which along with dusky streaking of head and neck, =
gradually disappears with progress of moult to 1st winter plumage".
cheers
Paul

----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Sibley Guide Comments
From: Katrina Knight <kknight(AT)EPIX.NET>
Date: 22 Oct 2000 8:34am

On 08:48 PM 10/21/00 Jean Iron wrote:
>Subspecies (races): Interest in well marked subspecies is currently
>very
>high among birders. In many cases, such the Short-billed Dowitcher,
>the
>scientific names of the subspecies are well established and should
>have
>been used.

Sibley's website contains a list identifying the subspecies illustrated
in the book for those who are interested.

--
Katrina Knight
kknight(AT)epix.net
Reading, PA


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Sibley Guide
From: Steven Mlodinow <SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 22 Oct 2000 12:13pm

Greetings All

First and foremost let me say that the Sibley Guide is, in my opinion,
magnificent. I have spent many a happy hour looking it over and have learned
quite a bit. It has also given me some more points to consider when looking
at common birds, particularly with regard to race.

Since the Sibley Guide  will be considered the new standard by most of the
birding community, however, corrections of ID errors would be quite valuable
even though these errors are few. The maps, perhaps, could have used more
review, and I will not really comment on them here (but for e.g., Harlequin
Ducks breed in the WA Cascades, Pectoral Sands are fairly common during fall
throughout WA, and others).

Brant: The intermediate form, to my eyes, looks too dark beneath, shows too
little white on the flanks, and has too much white on the neck. Also, this
population (per local biologist studying Brant) is considered part of the
"Pale-bellied" or "Atlantic" Brant group.

Gunnison Grouse: do not have pale tails, but have very heavily barred black
and white tails (See Ken Ables recent article in Birding)

Sharp-tailed Sandpiper: The Handbook of Australian, New Zealand, and
Antarctic Birds describes the basic adult Sharp-tailed Sandpiper as still
having a rufous cap. I have never seen this plumage, but the possible
discrepancy is worth noting.

California Gulls: the non-breeding adult and 3rd winter leg colors look much
to yellow and not nearly gray enough to my eye.

Rhino Auklets: In flight, they keep their heads (usually) tucked in giving a
flying-football type appearance. The stretched out neck and elevated head
looks quite wrong to me.

Long-billed Murrelet: ~ 50% do not have entirely dark napes but instead have
pale ovals on the nape that are unique to this species.

Dusky Flycatcher: In my experience, the bill is usually not mostly dark from
beneath. I think that Kaufman's Advanced Birding and the NGS show the bill
pattern more accurately. Indeed, I find empid bills often difficult to
correctly judge without getting a view from almost directly below and would
have liked to have seen David include this perspective (as the NGS did).

Blue-headed Vireo: should have yellow in vent (see Heindel's excellent
article in Dec 1996 Birding).

Spotted Towhee: female Oregonus rarely show contrast between vent and flank
color, at least in Washington. Males sometimes do. Also, undertail pattern is
quite useful and wish it was shown in this guide (though NGS does a good job).

Brewer's Sparrow: the nominate race should not show heavy streaking on the
side of the nape, at least during winter. Indeed, reviewing video tape of 40
or more birds from SE Arizona, none had significant streaking on the side of
the nape.

Some of these points are more significant than others. And, I have
undoubtedly missed some important issues (David Fix posted an interesting
commentary on juv Marbled Murrelet plumage to OBOL). And I would like to
underline my opening statement. This is an awesome book. In a less
magnificent opus, such detailed review of errors would be far less
interesting.

Cheers
Steven Mlodinow


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Pymy Owl at 3pm at our feeders in Northern Cal.
From: Bob & Carol Yutzy <boby(AT)C-ZONE.NET>
Date: 22 Oct 2000 9:43pm

Apologies if this is not fully fitting to send out to others:

- but today we had a Pygmy Owl in bright sunlight at 3 pm and beyond
hanging around our feeders in Old Shasta in Northern California.  It
grabbed an immature male House Finch and flew nearby and consumed it.
It then continued hanging around our feeders.

We have, of course, had many marauding Sharp-shineds, Cooper's and
Merlins at our feeders but we've never had an owl working the feeder
birds.

We have had visits from calling birds in the early am or late pm of
several species of owls.

Do others have any experience or knowledge of daytime visits from Pygmy
Owls at feeders, especially outside the breeding season?

Thanks to all,

Bob & Carol Yutzy


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Sibley Guide and Brant
From: Bill or Sue Smith <birdsmiths(AT)hotmail.com>
Date: 23 Oct 2000 11:37am

    Methinks that Steve Mlodinow's recent comments on Sibley's Brant
illustrations and text points up one of the quirks of Sibley's book -- that
he fails to use scientific names when referring to subspecies /
populations -- possibly leading in this case to an outright error.

    I _presume_ that on p. 76, Sibley is illustrating, from left to right,
Branta [bernicla?] nigricans (left), the "Black Brant" mainly wintering on
the Pacific coast; B. [b.?] bernicla (center), the w. Siberian population
wintering in most of Europe ("Dark-bellied Brant"); and B. [b.?] hrota
(right), the population wintering mainly on the Atlantic coast of North
America ("Pale-bellied Brant").  These three taxa have been split into
three species by the Dutch check-list committee and possibly others in
Europe.  See Birding World (UK) 10: 11-16, 1997, for example, for a
summary.

    However, Sibley's text says that the center illustrations are of the
fairly small, unnamed population of Brant almost unknown outside of the
Puget Sound, Washington, region, where it winters.  I know of no published
photos or illustrations of this population, although they may exist, and
few vouchered specimens.  It breeds in arctic Canada in the Mellville I.
region between breeding populations of nigricans and hrota.  It looks
somewhat intermediate (i.e., something like bernicla but closer to hrota,
as Mlodinow points out), and thus is conceptually analogous to  bernicla.
It is mentioned in BNA account no. 337 and is actively being studied by a
team of Canadian biologists.  However it should be treated in taxonomic
terms, it is not B. [b.?] bernicla.

    The existence of 'melvillensis' (IMHO) presents the Dutch taxonomy with
a conundrum.  Did it confuse Sibley?  Lacking formal terminology, we can't
tell.

Bill
-----------------
The Smiths
Grays Harbor, Washington USA
birdsmiths(AT)hotmail.com


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Sibley Guide and Brant
From: Noel Wamer <nwamer(AT)FCOL.COM>
Date: 23 Oct 2000 12:38pm

At 11:34 AM 10/23/00 -0700, Bill or Sue Smith wrote:

<snip>

>     The existence of 'melvillensis' (IMHO) presents the Dutch taxonomy with
>a conundrum.  Did it confuse Sibley?  Lacking formal terminology, we can't
>tell.

As previously mentioned by Katrina Knight, there is detailed information
about  subspecific nomenclature and the forms illustrated in The Sibley.

The following is a copy of the Brant account...

Brant     Branta bernicla
  Black  B. b. nigricans
  Intermediate B. b. unnamed?
  Pale-bellied B. b. hrota
  Three subspecies in North America differ subtly in plumage. The status
and identification of the recently diagnosed Intermediate population,
nesting on Melville Island and wintering in Puget Sound, is poorly known.
[Eurasian race B. b. bernicla could occur in North America, but would
probably be indistinguishable from Intermediate birds and from Black X
Pale-bellied intergrades].

For those interested the URL for the site is:
http://www.sibleyart.com/taxa.htm

Later...

Noel Wamer
nwamer(AT)fcol.com http://www.badbirdz.com
Jacksonville, FL, US   30.2820 -81.4972
"A strange bird may cause a slight unrest until it is named..."
                                                        (Walker Percy)


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Sibley Guide and Brant
From: Don Richardson <cdplace(AT)concentric.net>
Date: 23 Oct 2000 12:44pm

At 11:34 AM 10/23/00 -0700, you wrote:
>Methinks that Steve Mlodinow's recent comments on Sibley's Brant
>illustrations and text points up one of the quirks of Sibley's book -- that
>he fails to use scientific names when referring to subspecies /
>populations

My note is not to comment on Sibley's book nor any of the comments made on
this list.  Rather it is to inform you of some additional treatment of
subspecies by Sibley.  It can be found at http://www.sibleyart.com/taxa.htm
.  Sibley begins by explaining why he treated subspecies as he did.  Then,
there are links to bird groups (Loons to Ducks) --- (Hawks to Alcids) ---
(Doves to - - - - - ) and so on.  I think it looks pretty good.  Let me
follow this with the paragraph he uses to lead the material I describe.

          "The following list is presented partly because I have a deep
interest in subspecies, partly because I
            have a lot of information that wouldn't fit in the pages of the
Sibley Guide, and partly because several
            people have asked me why I didn't include scientific names of
subspecies in the guide."

Good Birding

Don Richardson
Pearland, Texas


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Sibley Guide and Brant (#2)
From: Bill or Sue Smith <birdsmiths(AT)hotmail.com>
Date: 23 Oct 2000 4:51pm

    Thanks to the various people who pointed out both publicly and
privately that Sibley's website shows that he was not as confused by Brant
populations as I suggested that he might be.  Whether he accomplished what
he was trying to show, or whether a website serves as an appropriate
adjunct to a field guide, are other matters which I doubt should be drawn
out further here.

    As an aside, Martin Garner contacted me from the UK and mentioned that
he wrote an illustrated article about a possible 'melvillensis' in Ireland,
published (he thought) in 1998 in the British magazine Birdwatch.  He also
indicated that recent editions of Scott's "Key to the Wildfowl of the
World" portray it, although my 1968 edition doesn't.  I can't comment on
these matters other than to pass them along; interested people might wish
to follow up.

    So, I must eat a bit of crow.  Northwestern, of course :-)

Bill
-----------------
The Smiths
Grays Harbor, Washington USA
birdsmiths(AT)hotmail.com


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Sibley Guide
From: Bob Abrams <Icepeep(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 24 Oct 2000 6:19am

While my opinion of this book is a grand one and I would never think of
saying anything bad about it without first saying that I love it to death and
I really think it is a nice thing David has done, I do have a problem with a
few of the illustrations that I will now list and I will try to appear as
authoritative as possible from this point in time to the next point in time,
where ever that point might be.
    First and foremost, the flight shot on page 207 of a first winter Ivory
Gull with left wing raised shows the wing having sixty-two tiny black
speckles on the inner part of the wing. After doing an exhaustive search of
all images of this plumage, in a really big bunch of books, I find this
depiction to be inaccurate. If one would turn to page 271 in Birds of Europe
with North Africa and the Middle East authored by Lars Jonsson, one will find
approximately fifty tiny black speckles on the inner part of the extended
left wing. This is the correct amount. I would further point out that Lars
puts ten tiny black speckles on the upper tail coverts and David has none
there, so Lars wins that one. In the book Ocean Birds by another Swede, there
are no flight shots of first winter Ivory Gulls so we can forget that book
entirely, as it does not pertain to this here discussion. I must emphasize
that I do not have any problem with David or this fantastic guide he has
produced, it is just that this thing with the tiny black speckles is driving
me insane. I continue. In Peter Harrison's A Field Guide to Seabirds of the
World, the one with the photographs, there is a flight shot of first winter
Ivory Gull but it is of the underwing, so, once again, nothing. In Harrison's
other guide, Seabirds An Identification Guide, he shows twenty-two speckles
on the inner, upper left wing, so he is way off. The painting by Keith
Shackleton in Birds of the Atlantic Ocean has approximately thirty-two tiny
black speckles, which is pretty darn good, but, I think Keith spelled his
last name wrong. I think there should be a double L at the occurrence of that
consonant in his last name.
    That really is the only major problem I have with David Sibley's book.
Thank you David for an amazing book that, if I may quote "Bubba" Clinton,
"will build a bridge into the 21st century" for authors of future field
guides to cross.
                                                            Respectfully,
                                                            Bob Abrams


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Taxonomy and identification of Brant from
         Melville Island
From: Angus Wilson <wilsoa02(AT)endeavor.med.nyu.edu>
Date: 24 Oct 2000 10:12am

****Taxonomy and Identification of Brant from Melville Island, Canada
****

The article by Martin Garner that Bill Smith referred to is:

Garner, M. (1998) "Brent Crosses." Birdwatch 78: 29-32. This is a very
accessible, but brief, review of the identification and complicated
taxonomy of Brant (Brent Goose), focusing on exciting possibility that
birds breeding on Melville Island are not hybrids between _nigricans_
and _hrota_ but a distinct subspecies, which Martin terms "Grey-bellied
Brant". There are one or two photos of specimens from the Puget Sound
area showing candidate Grey-bellied Brant along side and Black Brant and
also a candidate photographed in Ireland. [I believe the title "Brent
Crosses" is a play on the name of Britain's first large shopping mall,
Brent Cross, located in Northwest London? Maybe Martin can comment on
this.......]. For information on subscriptions to Birdwatch or to order
back issues visit their web site http://www.birdwatch.co.uk/home.htm

Another important reference is:

Shields, G.F. (1990) "Analysis of mitochondrial DNA of Pacific Black
Brant." Auk 107: 620-623.

The DNA sequence divergence reported in the study provides impetus for
treating the Melville Island birds as a separate taxa rather than hybrid
population.

Lastly, in an article published in The Kingbird, Andy Guthrie and I
review the status of Black Brant on the east coast of North America and
briefly consider the possibility that Grey-bellied Brant might
occasionally occur in east.

Wilson, A. and Guthrie, A. (1999) "Black Brant in New York State."
Kingbird 49(2): 98-106.

With fall already upon us, it seems very appropriate for observers on
the Pacific and Atlantic seaboards as well as western Europe to exchange
photos of the different Brant forms, especially the poorly known
immature plumages. I already have some comparison photos of Black and
Atlantic Brant on my web site and would be very happy to host additional
images from elsewhere, especially of candidate 'Grey-bellied Brant' from
Washington State or British Columbia.

http://www.best.com/~petrel/BBrantNY.html
http://www.best.com/~petrel/GBBRT.html

Hope this helps,

Angus Wilson
New York City
wilsoa02(AT)med.nyu.edu
http://www.best.com/~petrel/index.html
http://www.oceanwanderers.com


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Another Brant Source
From: Steven Mlodinow <SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 24 Oct 2000 1:58pm

Greetings All

A fairly good article on Brant races appeared in Birding World 10:11-15
(1997), entitled Separation of Black Brant, Dark-bellied Brent Goose, and
Pale-bellied Brent Goose. It does not cover the Melville Island birds, but
does cover the other taxa.

Notably, the Dark-bellied Brant usually has much less of a white flank patch
than Black Brant. I suspect that a Pale-bellied X Black Brant hybrid would
show a far brighter flank patch than Dark-bellied Brant. Also, the Melville
Island birds wintering in the Puget Sound tend to show a rather prominent
flank patch, and I suspect this could be used in eliminating Dark-bellied
Brant.

The Melville Island birds also tend to show a necklace resembling
Pale-bellied Brant rather than the more complete necklace of Black Brant.

Cheers
Steve Mlodinow


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: new Sibley golden plover id ?
From: Matthew Kenne <meekeckk(AT)RCONNECT.COM>
Date: 24 Oct 2000 6:36pm

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----

Here's another addition to the ongoing Sibley dissection:=20

There is a pointer to the nape of the juvenile Pacific Golden Plover =
labeled "distinctly spotted nape". I'm not 100% sure that this is meant =
to be taken as an identifying mark when attempting to separate Pacific =
from American Golden Plover, but the flight images of the upper side of =
the adult nonbreeding birds also appear to show this difference. This =
would seem to be a rather solid field mark to use in these difficult =
plumages. I can't recall seeing this field mark published anywhere, can =
anyone clue me in on where this is reported? Maybe someone has discussed =
this while birding with Mr. Sibley?

Thanks,

Matthew Kenne
Algona, Iowa
meekeckk(AT)rconnect.com

----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Sibley Caracara
From: "Jeff N. Davis" <jndavis(AT)CATS.UCSC.EDU>
Date: 26 Oct 2000 11:25am

I noticed that what we used to call Crested Caracara is called Northern
Caracara in the Sibley Guide.  This is the name used by Dove and Banks
(1999) [A taxonomic study of Crested Caracaras (Falconidae). Wilson Bull.
111:330-339.], but there is no mention of the name change in the July 2000
AOU Check-List supplement, where the northern species is still referred to
as Crested.  Does anyone know if the AOU Checklist Committee plans to adopt
this name change?

Jeff Davis
Santa Cruz, California
jndavis(AT)cats.ucsc.edu


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Sibley Caracara
From: David Sibley <dsibley(AT)SHORE.NET>
Date: 26 Oct 2000 11:52am

In the final stages of proofing my book I was given advance notice of
changes the AOU was considering, including the change of English names
to Northern Caracara and American Magpie, highlighting the fact that
both species were split from similar populations outside North America.
Both of these changes were made in my book and then, partly because of
timing and partly because of my distraction on other issues of proofing
the guide, the names were never revised to reflect the fact that those
changes were NOT adopted by the AOU. They will be corrected in the next
printing. Sorry for any confusion.

David Sibley
--
David Sibley
355 Lexington Rd
Concord, MA 01742
dsibley(AT)shore.net
www.sibleyart.com


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: The Sibley Guide
From: David Sibley <dsibley(AT)SHORE.NET>
Date: 26 Oct 2000 2:49pm

Hi All,

First, Thank You! to all who have written to me privately or publicly
with comments or suggestions on how to improve my guide. I kept working
on this project for so many years because I truly enjoyed the process of
learning and organizing all the information. Now that it's published I'm
learning even more.

The completion of every book is the result of many compromises. I knew
my book would never be perfect, but I thought long and hard about every
small and large decision. I'm extremely pleased with the way it turned
out.

I don't really consider the book done. To me it is more of a work in
progress, a collection of my sketches, a summary of all the information
I've gathered in thirty years of birding, and I look forward to adding
to it. I will be working constantly to make corrections in each
printing, and someday there will be a revised edition. To that end I ask
anyone who has a comment or suggestion to please email me:
david(AT)sibleyart.com

In the next printing there will be some corrections to errors in "black
ink", but there will only be a small number of corrections to the color
plates.  I've listed here a few of the more significant corrections that
are being made in the next printing:
* "American" Magpie changed back to Black-billed Magpie
* "Northern" Caracara changed back to Crested Caracara
* There are apparently records of Cory's (dark morph) Least Bittern from
Ontario and New York as recently as 1992, so that caption will be
changed to read simply "very rare". I'm very excited by this news, as I
had all but given up hope of ever seeing this color morph.
* The label for "2nd year" Reddish Egret will be changed to "adult
nonbreeding" and the bright-billed "adult" will be labelled "adult
breeding". The bright colors are worn by an individual bird for a few
months when breeding, which can happen almost year-round, but mainly
about Jan to Jun.
* The images of perched adult male and female Sharp-shinned and Cooper's
Hawks should be different sizes to reflect the sexual size dimorphism in
those species. Scans were inadvertently resized during printing and will
be corrected.
* The adult Clay-colored Sparrow image is too dark (apparently two scans
are superimposed) and will be corrected.
* The too-bright rufous colors will be tweaked on many pages

The following topics seem to have generated a lot of discussion, and
while there is no right or wrong answer to any of these, and I don't
really want to get involved in the debate, I wanted to explain some of
the reasons for doing the guide the way I did.

Maps: There are certainly errors in the maps, and I'm anxious to hear
about them. However, it is my impression that a lot of the criticism of
the maps centers on the placement and the presence or absence of the
green dots. The dots are truly meant to show continental patterns, not
local records (though in some cases they are carefully placed, maybe
that was a bad idea!). In general the idea was to let people know that
if they saw a bluebird, for example, in New York it was overwhelmingly
likely to be an Eastern, but Mountain was at least a remote possibility
and Western was essentially impossible.

For that purpose a random scattering of dots in the eastern US would
suffice, but I tried to get a little more detailed than that. I did not
think it was important to place every dot exactly, or even to confirm
that state records were accepted, as long as the reports fit the general
pattern for each species. Nevertheless I'd like to hear of ANY problems
with the maps.

People know their local region very well, much better than any book
could ever represent. It's only natural for them to look carefully at
their local patch on any map and to be very critical of the details that
are wrong. Just for conversation's sake (or to stoke the entreprenurial
spirit) I'd suggest any group of people with good GIS knowledge and a
set of state breeding bird atlases, a set of christmas counts, and a
stack of state bird books, connections to each rare bird committee, and
a whole lot of time could develop a working data base and set of range
maps for the birds of North America. There would be a pretty good market
for these maps!

Subspecies names: I'll probably continue to take criticism for this, but
I stand by my decision to avoid using Latin subspecies names. The
reasons are spelled out in some detail on my website - www.sibleyart.com
- and I'll reiterate here. While there are a few cases in which
subspecies are well-defined and consistently named (such as Short-billed
Dowitcher and Lesser Black-backed Gull) the vast majority are much less
clear-cut. I spent weeks working solely on this problem, researching
names and groupings of subspecies, and found the results frustratingly
inconsistent and unclear. When I came up with the idea of using the
natural ecological regions to define subspecies groups it made my work
much easier. It also helped me to understand the variation I had been
studying for twenty years! In a sense it was like taking a step back
from the detail of subspecies names and looking at the larger patterns.
I feel that most observers should NOT use Latin subspecies names, as the
names imply a kind of precision that is lacking in field observations.
It is much more realistic to label a bird as typical of a certain region
than it is to try to give it an exact subspecies name. Anyone who wants
to learn the Latin names has many options of other books for that
purpose.

Again, this was not a snap decision - but it was what I felt was best.
It may indicate a general weakness of character, but I can live with
that.

Humphrey-Parkes molt terminology: My reasons for avoiding this
terminology are similar to the subspecies argument. In both cases I
believe that experts should discourage casual use of technical terms. My
experience with birders is that most simply substitute the
Humphrey-Parkes terminology for the more intuitive "life-year" system;
thus breeding equals alternate and nonbreeding equals basic. This is
certainly not the case and using the terms in this way clouds their
meaning. The Humphrey-Parkes terminology is an important tool meant
to aid in the study of molt, and that is how it should be used. I
encourage anyone with an interest in molt to learn it, as understanding
the terminology and learning the correct way to apply it can enhance
one's understanding of molt cycles. Applying it broadly in a field guide
(to many species whose molts have never been studied) would be
pointless. Finally, I suggest that anyone who disagrees should spend a
few days trying to relabel all of the illustrations in the guide with
H-P terms (watch for "worn definitive basic male Snow Bunting" and
"definitive basic/definitive alternate Marsh Wren"). Note also the
recent, and very logical, suggestion by Steve Howell in Western Birds
for a significant revision of the Humphrey-Parkes terminology.

I'm interested in following any discussion about my book. Please feel
free to cross-post this message on other listservs; and again please
forward or send to me any comments, suggestions, or corrections (but
I'll be on the road for most of November, so don't expect a quick
response).

Finally, let me say again that I encourage any comments and discussion
about the book, it can only lead to more knowledge and a better
understanding of the birds. I have lots to learn about bird
identification. If this book sparks us to go out and prove or disprove
anything I've written, GREAT! Better still, I hope it sparks people to
go out and learn lots of new stuff that none of us know now.

Good Birding,
David Sibley

355 Lexington Rd
Concord, MA 01742
dsibley(AT)shore.net
www.sibleyart.com


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: shearwater id
From: Don Crockett <crockett(AT)GREATBLUE.COM>
Date: 28 Oct 2000 10:42am

I'm working on a virtual tour/birding break for
Northern California.  One of the destinations
is Cordell Bank which I visited in late-November
a couple years back.  I have a 35mm slide of
2 side-by-side dark-billed dark shearwaters that I'd
like to use in the tour.  I like the shot because it
doesn't give a great look at either bird's underwing
so you're forced to look at features of head shape,
bill length, overall size and what plumage markings can
be made out.  I'd like to get a sense of how identifiable
the birds are to decide whether I should scrap the shot
for the tour and replace it with something that
is less controversial.  I'd appreciate any feedback
people have on the identity of the shearwaters in the
following images (all from the same slide).   I'll post
a summary back to the list or to a web page.

Both: http://www.virtualbirder.com/ncal/views/BIRD001-3.jpg

Right: http://www.virtualbirder.com/ncal/views/BIRD003-3.jpg

Left: http://www.virtualbirder.com/ncal/views/BIRD002-3.jpg

Thanks,

                Don

Don Crockett
The Virtual Birder(R)
http://www.virtualbirder.com
A 2 Z 4 Birders(sm): The Store
http://store.yahoo.com/a2z4birders
mailto:crockett(AT)greatblue.com
Brookline, Massachusetts


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Sibley Guide at Sam's Club
From: Bill Principe <ThePrincipes(AT)EARTHLINK.NET>
Date: 28 Oct 2000 4:47pm

   The new Sibley guide is apparently available nationwide
at Sam's Club for $22.88 (list $35). Someone on Massbird
found it at Sam's Club in Rhode Island yesterday, and we
bought a copy today at Sam's Club in the San Fernando
Valley of California for $22.88 today. By the way, we do
not belong to Sam's Club, but they gave us a free "one
day pass" when we asked at the membership counter.
   At $22.88, this has to be a world's record birding bargain!

Bill Principe                My heart in hiding
La Canada, California      Stirred for a bird,
Los Angeles County    the achieve of; the mastery of the thing!
34*11'N 118*12'W                        from "The Windhover"
ThePrincipes(AT)earthlink.net          by Gerard Manley Hopkins


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Sibley Guide at Sam's Club
From: Florida Nature Tours <fnt(AT)GDI.NET>
Date: 28 Oct 2000 9:25pm

Bill Principe wrote:
>
>    The new Sibley guide is apparently available nationwide
> at Sam's Club for $22.88 (list $35). Someone on Massbird
> found it at Sam's Club in Rhode Island yesterday, and we
> bought a copy today at Sam's Club in the San Fernando
> Valley of California for $22.88 today. By the way, we do
> not belong to Sam's Club, but they gave us a free "one
> day pass" when we asked at the membership counter.
>    At $22.88, this has to be a world's record birding bargain!
>
> Bill Principe                My heart in hiding
> La Canada, California      Stirred for a bird,
> Los Angeles County    the achieve of; the mastery of the thing!
> 34*11'N 118*12'W                        from "The Windhover"
> ThePrincipes(AT)earthlink.net          by Gerard Manley Hopkins

 All:

 I bought my second one at Sam's today in St. Petersburg Fl. The first
one that I paid
 $35.00 for 3 weeks ago will stay on the shelf with a most gracious note
from David
 safe inside. Book number 2 will hit the field with me.

 Wes Biggs
 Florida Nature Tours, Orlando  407/363-1360  fnt(AT)gdi.net
 http://www.floridanaturetours.com   ABA sponsored


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Red-eyed Vireo in Spain (online)
From: Ricard Gutierrez <GUTARB(AT)TERRA.ES>
Date: 30 Oct 2000 5:35pm

Hello:
On 30.10.2000 a 1st winter Red-eyed Vireo (Vireo olivaceus) has been trapped
and ringed (banded) in NE Spain, near Barcelona. This is the 3rd record for
the country and follows two previous in october 1995. A description with a
sketch drawing of the head can be seen in the Rare Birds in Spain web page
http://www.terra.es/personal3/gutarb .
But two interesting questions arise with this observation: 1st the bird was
in extremely good condition. Indeed it was fat: a 5 score in the Kaiser
scale (Kaiser, A. 1993. A new multi-category classification of subcutaneous
fat deposits of songbirds. J.Field Ornithol. 64: 246-255) is a good
indication of a ready-to-migrate or active-migrating bird. So we feel that
it's unlikely to be the case of a recent trans-atlantic arrived bird but the
case of an earlier arrived bird to say C Europe now joining Palearctic
migrants heading South to Mediterranean coasts or Africa.
The 2nd question (and hence a query to USA colleagues) is state of molt. The
bird has been aged as 1st winter according to BWP vol VIII (1998) which also
quotes Pyle et al "in-hand" guide. By this time of the year, is there still
any "juvenile" plumage visible or (as I expect) all birds do show an already
1st winter plumage with retained primaries -with whitish edges-, secs. and
tertials plus tail feathers such as ours?. Head design was that of an adult
but eye-colour was not deep red but brownish-red. Also supercilium colour
varies in ads and 1st calendar-years?. In the aforementioned web page I've
placed a "rather" complete description of the bird. Unfortunately no digital
pictures as I went to the place in a rush from the city office!.
Thank you

Ricard Gutiérrez
CR/SEO
Rare Birds in Spain web site http://www.terra.es/personal3/gutarb
31.10.2000