 |
|
|
|
|
ID-FRONTIERS for June 24-30, 2001
[ Prev Week
| Next Week
| Calendar Month
| ID-FRONTIERS Info
]
|
Messages are displayed in the order they were received.
|
| Subject | From | Date | Time |
| Mystery Martin | Trevor Hardaker | Sun, 24 Jun 2001 | 11:50pm |
| grey gull | Alvaro Jaramillo | Mon, 25 Jun 2001 | 2:06pm |
| Redstart x Yellow Warbler | ian paulsen | Mon, 25 Jun 2001 | 5:11pm |
| Cannon Netting questioned | Night Parrot | Mon, 25 Jun 2001 | 7:14pm |
| Re: Cannon Netting questioned | Mike Patterson | Mon, 25 Jun 2001 | 8:06pm |
| Re: Cannon Netting questioned | Paul J Leader | Mon, 25 Jun 2001 | 8:20pm |
| Re: Redstart x Yellow Warbler | Matt Heindel | Tue, 26 Jun 2001 | 3:58am |
| Re: grey gull | Donna Dittmann | Tue, 26 Jun 2001 | 7:34am |
| Re: grey gull | Shawneen Finnegan | Tue, 26 Jun 2001 | 12:42pm |
| Redstart X Yellow Warbler | Brett Walker | Tue, 26 Jun 2001 | 10:07pm |
| Brown-breasted flycatcher questions | CROOK NIGEL | Wed, 27 Jun 2001 | 5:17am |
| Cannon Netting questioned | Jenny Austin | Wed, 27 Jun 2001 | 5:27am |
| Re: Cannon Netting questioned | Norman D.van Swelm | Wed, 27 Jun 2001 | 4:16pm |
| Re: Cannon Netting questioned | John Ribble | Wed, 27 Jun 2001 | 6:41pm |
| Inappropriate Posts re: Ringing | Chris Sloan | Wed, 27 Jun 2001 | 7:04pm |
| Mystery Update | Trevor Hardaker | Wed, 27 Jun 2001 | 11:41pm |
| Re: grey gull | Alvaro Jaramillo | Thu, 28 Jun 2001 | 11:20am |
| Re: grey gull | Kimball Garrett | Thu, 28 Jun 2001 | 1:19pm |
| Re: Cannon Netting questioned | Anthony G. Futcher | Fri, 29 Jun 2001 | 8:43am |
| Parkes e-mail address | ian paulsen | Fri, 29 Jun 2001 | 9:05pm |
| Re: eyebrowed robin | D. Heindel | Sat, 30 Jun 2001 | 1:22pm |
| Re: Cannon Netting questioned | Norman D.van Swelm | Sat, 30 Jun 2001 | 3:42pm |
| Re: Cannon Netting questioned | Jenny Austin | Sat, 30 Jun 2001 | 8:12pm |
| Re: Cannon Netting questioned | KACastelein and DJLa | Sat, 30 Jun 2001 | 10:20pm |
|
To use email addresses replace '(AT)' with '@'.
This is done to confuse the spam 'bots.
|
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Mystery Martin
From: Trevor Hardaker <trevor(AT)DHK.CO.ZA>
Date: 24 Jun 2001 11:50pm
Greetings from a gloomy Cape Town,
Calling all Hirundine fundis - try your hand at our latest mystery bird on
our website at http://www.zestforbirds.co.za
This mystery martin was photographed in Southern Mozambique. Please let us
know what you think it is and what your reasons are for saying so as well.
Looking forward to hearing from you.
Kind Regards
Trevor and John
---------------------------------------------------------
Trevor Hardaker and John Graham
Cape Town, South Africa
ZEST for BIRDS
Website: http://www.zestforbirds.co.za
---------------------------------------------------------
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: grey gull
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <alvaro(AT)SIRIUS.COM>
Date: 25 Jun 2001 2:06pm
Birders:
Could someone remind me what was the final outcome of the Grey Gull
reported many years ago from the Gulf Coast somewhere. I gather that folks
thought it was ship assisted. Any details welcome.
cheers,
Al
Alvaro Jaramillo
Montara,
California
alvaro(AT)sirius.com
Field Guides Inc.
http://www.fieldguides.com/home.html
Helm guide to the New World Blackbirds, Birding in Chile, at:
http://www.sirius.com/~alvaro
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Redstart x Yellow Warbler
From: ian paulsen <ipaulsen(AT)LINKNET.KITSAP.LIB.WA.US>
Date: 25 Jun 2001 5:11pm
HI ALL:
I just got in a report of an American Redstart paired with a Yellow
warbler. Has anyone heard of this combination before?
sincerely
Ian "Birdbooker" Paulsen
Bainbridge Is., WA, USA
ipaulsen(AT)linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us
"Rallidae all the way"
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Cannon Netting questioned
From: Night Parrot <night_parr0t(AT)HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 25 Jun 2001 7:14pm
Hello everybody
You may have heard about the current debate over the moral ethics of cannon
netting and banding migratory waders.
Universal disgust has been expressed since it was revealed that cannon
netting inflicts an average mortality rate of more than 4% and that the
survival of waders, once banded is very low. But still the die hard banders
refuse to accept that it's time to cease this barbaric practice and modify
their hobby. They believe that cannon netting is an essential tool used for
research and that the end result is justified irrespective of the horrific
mortality and injury rate.
Many observers have pointed out that banding waders has been useful in the
past but its time to stop because most of the interest now is intrinsic and
is no longer necessary or needed for wader conservation or habitat
management.
As a result of this ongoing debate, a poll is being conducted where
observers have been asked to indicate; Are you in favor of cannon netting,
yes or no? We were swamped by replies and some are still trickling in. So
far, its not looking too good for the cannon netters and almost unanimously
this practice is now condemned, particularly catching waders prior to their
migration.
Some of the trends emerging in the discussion are interesting.
Comments such as, "cannon netting participants generally lack competence in
field identification of waders and many can id, only when a bird is held in
the hand" needs further qualification before any results can be concluded.
It would be helpful if we could get a little more information about why so
many observers feel that association with cannon netting taints ones
reputation.
Another interesting observation made by more than one is; "some cannon
netters seem to experience a level of sexual arousal when handling live
birds".
Of course the overwhelming response has been general concern about the
mortality, cruelty and trauma that is inflicted upon the targeted birds and
also the single minded attitude, science at any cost without regard to the
consequences, which seems to prevail among cannon netters.
Results of the Cannon Netting poll will be posted soon. Not wishing to
create controversial discussion on this list, if you wish to comment
further, please feel free to mail your response directly to my address.
Your reply will be treated as confidential and only its content will be
used.
Night Parrot
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cannon Netting questioned
From: Mike Patterson <celata(AT)pacifier.com>
Date: 25 Jun 2001 8:06pm
There's nothing more entertaining then unreferenced data used
to solict unscientific internet poll data by an anonymous
hit and run subscriber with a hotmail account.
His address will be going in my killfile. Others are
encouraged to at the very least seek out referenced source
material and substantiate the claims presented before
responding.
And no, I am not, nor have I ever been a cannon net "hobbiest".
Night Parrot wrote:
>
> Hello everybody
>
--
Mike Patterson Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo,
Astoria, OR it is not enough to be persecuted
celata(AT)pacifier.com by an unkind establishment,
you must also be right.
---Robert Park
http://www.pacifier.com/~mpatters/bird/bird.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cannon Netting questioned
From: Paul J Leader <pjleader(AT)NETVIGATOR.COM>
Date: 25 Jun 2001 8:20pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
May I suggest that all subscribers treat this email with extreme =
caution. While I would be happy to see a debate over the role and =
ethics of cannon netting, I would suggest that this is perhaps not the =
proper place, and more importantly, I suspect that the author of the =
email is using this forum to pursue his/her own personal/political =
interests.
That this is not an attempt to stimulate reasoned debate is indicated by =
the inability of the author to state his/her real name.
Paul Leader,
Hong Kong
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Redstart x Yellow Warbler
From: Matt Heindel <MTHEINDEL(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 26 Jun 2001 3:58am
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
In a message dated 6/25/01 7:12:12 PM Central Daylight Time,
ipaulsen(AT)LINKNET.KITSAP.LIB.WA.US writes:
> I just got in a report of an American Redstart paired with a Yellow
> warbler. Has anyone heard of this combination before?
>
Neither Pyle's tome or Dunn and Garrett's great warbler work referenced this
hybrid combination, so not an encouraging start. Yet, a few years back (off
the top of my head Sep 1995), we had an individual presumed to be this
combination in east Kern (CA) during fall. At the time, I did find some info
suggesting this was known, but do not have this at the time. And since
nothing was cited in these two works, it is likely undocumented.
Our bird was real odd and seemingly showed a blend of characters. I still
recall the strange tail/undertail covert length, intermediate between the two
on a feature that looks very different between the two species. But, it was
not photographed so, while that is my best guess, it should not stand on its
on.
Matt Heindel
mtheindel(AT)aol.com
San Antonio TX
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: grey gull
From: Donna Dittmann <ddittma(AT)UNIX1.SNCC.LSU.EDU>
Date: 26 Jun 2001 7:34am
The Louisiana Bird Records Committee did not accept the Gray Gull (19-20
Dec. 1987, Cameron Par., Cameron; American Birds 42, N. 2:277) on the first
circulation. The seven of seven "non-accept votes" included "Identification
Questionable" and "Origin Questionable." Only one of the two observing
parties submitted details (only a couple photographs of the bird resting on
a piling were received). A larger, better series of photos by the other
observer, including flight shots, was never submitted. Therefore, the LBRC
has not had the opportunity to review all relevant documentation for this
record.
The Gray Gull was caught in a catch-22, because you should not reject a bird
on origin that has not been unanimously identified to species. Since the
LBRC's initial vote, the Committee also changed its Bylaws to re-evaluate
any record that was NOT unanimously accepted or rejected on its first
circulation. But no additional details by the other observer ever surfaced,
most importantly the nice series of photos, so the committee members that
rejected the record on ID were not in a position to reevaluate the record
without these photos. Because of the somewhat nebulous position of the
record, the outcome of the committee's first circulation has never been
published. We remain optimistic that additional photos may someday be
received.
Part of the ID problem is that there is a description of a melanistic
Laughing Gull in the literature. Whether this bird was a Gray Gull can not
be determined at this point. Based on the photos in the LBRC file, (bird
sitting on a piling) the possibility that the Cameron bird is not a
melanistic Laughing Gull could not be ruled out by dissenting members (other
than Gray Gull's darker plumage, the two species are extremely similar in
structure and plumage pattern).
Donna L. Dittmann
LBRC, Secretary
on 6/25/01 2:06 PM, Alvaro Jaramillo at alvaro(AT)SIRIUS.COM wrote:
> Birders:
>
> Could someone remind me what was the final outcome of the Grey Gull
> reported many years ago from the Gulf Coast somewhere. I gather that folks
> thought it was ship assisted. Any details welcome.
>
> cheers,
>
> Al
>
> Alvaro Jaramillo
> Montara,
> California
>
> alvaro(AT)sirius.com
>
> Field Guides Inc.
> http://www.fieldguides.com/home.html
>
> Helm guide to the New World Blackbirds, Birding in Chile, at:
> http://www.sirius.com/~alvaro
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: grey gull
From: Shawneen Finnegan <zoothera.cm(AT)VERIZON.NET>
Date: 26 Jun 2001 12:42pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
As one member of the party that did submit details of the Gray Gull I
would like to add a comment or two. Paul Lehman and I were doing the
Cameron Christmas Count on December 19, 1987. Paul and I both submitted
details that evening and Paul later submitted the photographs he took of
the bird. I don't have a copy of my description in my possession so I
cannot refer back to them for additional details.
But a feature that Paul and I both remember very well was the bill. When
I first saw this gull I hadn't a clue what it was. Neither of us had
ever seen a Gray Gull before. The first reaction was to question whether
it was a melanistic Laughing Gull or not since it was so similar. But
the bill was longer and much slimmer in proportion than any of the
surrounding Laughing Gulls. This feature seems to be consistent with
photos I have since since of Gray Gull. And when we looked at the
literature available to us the evening's compilation and additional
literature later, what we had observed was consistent with Gray Gull.
As I recall the photos Paul took of the bird were overexposed and made
the bird look lighter than it was in actuality. The meter exposed for
the surrounding dark pilings and as a result the gull looks too pale in
the photo. See attached photo. No adjustments were made. If anyone who
is more familiar with Gray Gull would comment on the ID of this bird I
would welcome the feedback.
Shawneen Finnegan
Cape May, New Jersey
zoothera.cm(AT)verizon.net.
----DELETED image/jpeg MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Redstart X Yellow Warbler
From: Brett Walker <pancaminando(AT)HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 26 Jun 2001 10:07pm
Dear Ian and Frontiers,
I've got field notes on a male American Redstart that I observed on two
separate occasions feeding nestlings at the nest and later, fledglings with
a female Yellow Warbler in the Bitterroot Valley of Montana in 1996. I
didn't get a good enough look at the fledglings to figure out whether the
two individuals had hybridized or whether the male Redstart had just
"accidentally" adopted the young.
There is another report of a Redstart x Yellow Warbler pairing from
northeast Oregon in an old North American Bird Bander (NABB), but I don't
have the reference at hand (1985?).
Interestingly, American Redstarts and Yellow Warblers in Montana can have
extremely similar-sounding songs (they were often difficult for our
top-notch point counters to tell apart), they have identical song systems
(repeat mode at high rates before pairing, serial mode at low rates after
pairing, repeat mode at high rates on secondary territories until paired on
those territories), and they respond to each others songs and call notes.
We found that playback of Yellow warbler chip notes was the most effective
way to catch both sexes of both species in mist-nets! Food for thought...
Cheers,
Brett Walker
Wildlife Biology Program
University of Montana
Missoula, Montana 59812
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 16:44:07 -0700
From: ian paulsen <ipaulsen(AT)LINKNET.KITSAP.LIB.WA.US>
Subject: Redstart x Yellow Warbler
HI ALL:
I just got in a report of an American Redstart paired with a Yellow
warbler. Has anyone heard of this combination before?
sincerely
Ian "Birdbooker" Paulsen
Bainbridge Is., WA, USA
ipaulsen(AT)linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us
"Rallidae all the way"
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Brown-breasted flycatcher questions
From: CROOK NIGEL <nigelcrook(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 27 Jun 2001 5:17am
Hi everyone
First I apologize to those subscribed to both
Frontiers and the Oriental Bird Club chat lines for
this cross posting.
I've been in Thailand since January and have seen and
closely looked at 4 species of Muscicapa flycatchers.
I was recently somewhat surprised to find a pair of
Brown-breasted Flycatchers feeding chicks in Doi
Inthanon National Park in the north west region of
Thailand. According to Craig Robson's Birds of
South-east Asia, "status uncertain, probably breeds NW
Thailand". Phil Round's book says a similar thing but
since I've left it in storage in Bangkok (I'm on my
way down to Indonesia) I can't quote exactly what he
writes.
This was my first encounter with this species.
Initially, with the combination of a relatively long
bill, rufescent brown upperparts, a buffish brown
breast band and flanks and pink legs, the adult birds
recalled to mind the Rhinomyias genus - Jungle
Flycatchers. Upon closer inspection the birds differed
in structure, plumage details and voice from any
Jungle Flycatcher I've seen, besides of which, a
breeding pair of Jungle Flycatchers in Northern
Thailand would be quite remarkable. However, my
lasting impression of the birds was of a Muscicapa
flycatcher which looked very much like a Rhinomyias.
Prior to actually seeing this pair of Brown-breasted
flys, I was expecting the species to closely resemble
Thailands resident race of Asian Brown Flycatcher, M.
d. siamensis, and to even perhaps pose an ID
challenge. My preconceptions of this species were
somewhat off the mark.
Question number 1: Do my impressions of these birds
fall into line with other peoples experience of this
species?
My second question concerns the birds leg colour.
Their legs and feet were pink, a distinct pink,
perhaps best described as bubble gum pink. Plate 67
in Craig Robson's field guide to Birds of South-east
Asia shows the bird with pink legs, but no mention is
made of this in either the plate caption or the text.
Is this the normal colour of the legs of this species
and if so, should it not be mentioned by future field
guides? This leg colour differs from that exhibited by
other members of Muscicapa I've seen here in Thailand.
Good Birding
NIGEL CROOK
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Cannon Netting questioned
From: Jenny Austin <jenny0jenny(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 27 Jun 2001 5:27am
Hello all
I wish to comment on the debate about cannon netting and ringing
shorebirds raised by the anonymous "Night Parrot". It is the substance
of what is said that is important, not who says it and if whistle
blowing is the purpose, then perhaps anonymity is justified.
Perhaps it maybe too harsh to suggest that ringing is meaningless for
shorebird conservation. Ringing has provided some useful data that has
been used effectively in the past but my questions are, would effective
shorebird protection strategies have been developed anyway? And in
future, why do we need to know everything about the movement of each
age composition to justify protecting these birds?
Many observers dismiss as insignificant, the mortality caused by
ringing and compare it with the road kill or other more damaging
processes. Others attack anti-ringers by suggesting "they should spend
their time lobbying for habitat protection". They probably do.
It is well known that some ringers go to great effort to hide and cover
up evidence of killed and injured birds. They try to justify their
impact by stating what might have been saved from the results of their
activity rather than focusing on what could have been saved if the
birds had been left alone.
My husband and I assisted with cannon netting waders near Broome,
Western Australia while visiting there recently. I was not told how
many birds were killed and injured during the exercise but I saw
several and 4% would not surprise me. What upset me most though was
that the Ringers were more excited about the numbers of birds they
caught rather than distressed about the birds that were injured.
Several Knots and Godwits died of heat stress while waiting to be
processed. The exercise was an abhorrence.
If it was up to me I would ban ringing shorebirds as it is mostly
meaningless research. Ringing obviously impacts greatly on the birds
affected and no matter how much one "gilds the lilly" about the results
obtained and the number of still alive retraps, the main objective is
to satisfy human curiosity, nothing more.
That's my say on the matter
Thank you
Jenny Austin
Birmingham
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cannon Netting questioned
From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)WXS.NL>
Date: 27 Jun 2001 4:16pm
Jenny wrote:>shorebirds raised by the anonymous "Night Parrot". It is the
substance
>of what is said that is important, not who says it and if whistle
>blowing is the purpose, then perhaps anonymity is justified.
Anonymity is never justified, certainly not in this case anyway where nobody
objects to discuss the substance!
>Perhaps it maybe too harsh to suggest that ringing is meaningless for
>shorebird conservation. Ringing has provided some useful data that has
>been used effectively in the past but my questions are, would effective
>shorebird protection strategies have been developed anyway? And in
>future, why do we need to know everything about the movement of each
>age composition to justify protecting these birds?
>
>Many observers dismiss as insignificant, the mortality caused by
>ringing and compare it with the road kill or other more damaging
>processes. Others attack anti-ringers by suggesting "they should spend
>their time lobbying for habitat protection". They probably do.
>
>It is well known that some ringers go to great effort to hide and cover
>up evidence of killed and injured birds. They try to justify their
>impact by stating what might have been saved from the results of their
>activity rather than focusing on what could have been saved if the
>birds had been left alone.
>
>My husband and I assisted with cannon netting waders near Broome,
>Western Australia while visiting there recently. I was not told how
>many birds were killed and injured during the exercise but I saw
>several and 4% would not surprise me. What upset me most though was
>that the Ringers were more excited about the numbers of birds they
>caught rather than distressed about the birds that were injured.
>Several Knots and Godwits died of heat stress while waiting to be
>processed. The exercise was an abhorrence.
>
>If it was up to me I would ban ringing shorebirds as it is mostly
>meaningless research. Ringing obviously impacts greatly on the birds
>affected and no matter how much one "gilds the lilly" about the results
>obtained and the number of still alive retraps, the main objective is
>to satisfy human curiosity, nothing more.
>
>That's my say on the matter
Birds may and do die during ringing operations, very sad indeed, all ringers
I know, including myself feel very uncomfortable when it happens. I try to
make the most of the victim and collect them for museum collections or other
research purposes. It is however not fair and intelligent to say that
because of this shorebird ringing is mostly meaningless research. A stance
like this may even be contra-productive and therefore not listened to and
thus do no good at all. You had better help to find means to prevent it from
happening. Rest assured though that I do appreciate your care.
Norman
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cannon Netting questioned
From: John Ribble <TUFTEDS(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 27 Jun 2001 6:41pm
Norman,
I am confused. Are you for ringing or not? Are you saying that Jenny's
attitude is counterproductive to the cessation of ringing and are you
suggesting that rather than criticizing ringers, a better way should be
suggested to achieve the purpose of ringers? Is this the message you intended
to relate? Thanks. John Ribble
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Inappropriate Posts re: Ringing
From: Chris Sloan <chris.sloan(AT)home.com>
Date: 27 Jun 2001 7:04pm
I'm not the listowner, so I apologize if I'm usurping his/her
authority, but I think it should be obvious to anyone that this
topic is way way way outside the scope of this forum. I'm sure
that there are a myriad of other forums available to discuss this
topic, but please stop using this one.
Thanks.
Chris Sloan
chris.sloan(AT)home.com
Nashville, TN
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
> [mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]On Behalf Of John Ribble
> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 8:41 PM
> To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Cannon Netting questioned
>
>
> Norman,
> I am confused. Are you for ringing or not? Are you
> saying that Jenny's
> attitude is counterproductive to the cessation of
> ringing and are you
> suggesting that rather than criticizing ringers, a
> better way should be
> suggested to achieve the purpose of ringers? Is this
> the message you intended
> to relate? Thanks. John Ribble
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Mystery Update
From: Trevor Hardaker <trevor(AT)DHK.CO.ZA>
Date: 27 Jun 2001 11:41pm
Hello from Cape Town,
Thank you to all those people that have responded so far. There have been a
number of responses to the latest mystery bird on our website at
http://www.zestforbirds.co.za
So far, there have been three main answers which are:
Brown-throated or Plain Martin - Riparia paludicola
Mascarene Martin - Phedina borbonica
Juvenile Red-rumped Swallow - Hirundo daurica
Go and have a look and let us know what you think it is and why.
Kind Regards
Trevor and John
---------------------------------------------------------
Trevor Hardaker and John Graham
Cape Town, South Africa
ZEST for BIRDS
Website: http://www.zestforbirds.co.za
---------------------------------------------------------
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: grey gull
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <alvaro(AT)SIRIUS.COM>
Date: 28 Jun 2001 11:20am
At 03:42 PM 6/26/2001 -0400, Shawneen Finnegan wrote:
>As I recall the photos Paul took of the bird were overexposed and made
>the bird look lighter than it was in actuality. The meter exposed for
>the surrounding dark pilings and as a result the gull looks too pale in
>the photo. See attached photo. No adjustments were made. If anyone who
>is more familiar with Gray Gull would comment on the ID of this bird I
>would welcome the feedback.
The photo does indeed look like a Grey Gull, based on my experience. The
only two things that look odd, but may be photographic effects are the
reddish tone to the legs and the seemingly darker and contrasting nape.
These two features are not shown by Grey Gull. However, the structure and
plumage pattern looks pretty good for a second year bird. Adults would show
a bold white trailing edge to the secondaries which is visible on the
folded wing. There are some brown tones on the upperparts which also
suggest this is not a full adult. As mentioned, Grey Gull and Laughing Gull
are structurally very similar. They also sound very much alike, and I have
always thought they may be each other's closest relatives as odd as that
may seem.
The idea of a melanistic Laughing Gull is intriguing. The
underparts of this bird are darker than on Laughing Gull of a similar age,
but the upperparts look paler than Laughing Gull to me. Above Grey Gull is
paler than Laughing Gull. Could melanism darken one part of a bird but
lighten up another? Seems unlikely to me. As well a couple of features are
missing which should show (even on a melano?) up if this was a Laughing
Gull. First of all, there is no clearly demarcated tertial crescent, nor a
scapular crescent. Both of these crescents are lacking on Grey Gull. If
this is a second year bird, shouldn't a Laughing Gull show some streaking
on the head. That distinctive "headphone" pattern should show through, even
on a bird with a dark head like this, but it is lacking. Also, and this is
age and season dependent, there are no white tips to the primaries. On
fresh, adult and some second year birds white tips would be visible on a
Laughing Gull but always absent on Grey Gull. The thinner bill of Grey Gull
is a feature I had not thought about, but does match photos I have from
Chile. They do seem to be thinner billed than Laughing Gull, but they still
have a Laughing Gull like long and drooping bill. These points may not
apply depending on how melanism affects a bird such as a Laughing Gull, and
I have no experience to assess this. Finally, are reported melanistic
Laughing Gulls based on field observations or specimens? Was Grey Gull
considered in those cases?
Given the information available to them the LOS committee acted in a
justified manner. I hope that these flight shots do turn up and that this
bird's identity can be evaluated more thoroughly. My guess is that a better
series of photos would allow a definitive ID to be made.
cheers,
Al
Alvaro Jaramillo
Biologist
San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory
P.O. Box 247
Alviso, CA 95002
(408)-946-6548
http://www.sfbbo.org/
Home of the California Fall Challenge!!
alvaro(AT)sirius.com
Birds of Chile and
New World Blackbirds at : http://www.sirius.com/~alvaro
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: grey gull
From: Kimball Garrett <kgarrett(AT)NHM.ORG>
Date: 28 Jun 2001 1:19pm
At 11:20 AM 6/28/01 -0700, Alvaro Jaramillo wrote:
>
>The photo does indeed look like a Grey Gull, based on my experience. The
>only two things that look odd, but may be photographic effects are the
>reddish tone to the legs and the seemingly darker and contrasting nape.
>These two features are not shown by Grey Gull. However, the structure and
>plumage pattern looks pretty good for a second year bird. Adults would show
>a bold white trailing edge to the secondaries which is visible on the
>folded wing. There are some brown tones on the upperparts which also
>suggest this is not a full adult. As mentioned, Grey Gull and Laughing Gull
>are structurally very similar. They also sound very much alike, and I have
>always thought they may be each other's closest relatives as odd as that
>may seem.
I rarely weigh in on gull topics, for which you should all be grateful,
but I would certainly add my support here for the identification of the
Louisiana bird as a Gray Gull. The photo closely matches our specimens
and my own photos from coastal Peru.
I take minor exception with Alvaro's assertion that Laughing and Gray
Gulls "may be each other's closest relatives as odd as that
may seem." There is a living example of what a melanistic Laughing
Gull relative looks like, and that's Larus fuliginosus, the Lava
Gull of the Galapagos Is. Tom Howell et al. pointed out in their
monograph on the Gray Gull (U. Calif. Publ. Zool. No. 104, 1974) how
fuliginosus "resembles a large 'melanistic' counterpart of the atricilla
type.......". Fortunately, recent works place fuliginosus next to
Laughing, unlike many older works (e.g. Peters checklist) that placed
Lava Gull with Heermann's/Gray, well away from the black hooded gulls.
While Lava and Laughing look structually identical to me, I think
Gray Gull is actually quite distinct, most notably because of the
long, slender bill. Howell et al. also note many behavioral
similarities between Heermann's and Gray (though there are important
differences as well), with Lava Gull being quite dissimilar.
I would like to hear from Paul or Shawneen about the leg color, as
Gray Gulls should show black legs; are the slight reddish tones
apparent in the posted photo real?
-- Kimball
*****************************
Kimball L. Garrett
Ornithology Collections Manager
Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County
900 Exposition Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90007 USA
(213) 763-3368
(213) 746-2999 FAX
kgarrett(AT)nhm.org
*****************************
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cannon Netting questioned
From: "Anthony G. Futcher" <tfutcher(AT)CUC.EDU>
Date: 29 Jun 2001 8:43am
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Well folks,
It looks like "Night Parrot" is achieving at least part of his/her intent -
band-width is being taken up by people criticizing one another's
intents/methods/actions. This is just what I was afraid would happen. With an
open medium like this, who knows who reads and responds to our posts.
One should also be aware that citizens in other parts of the world may not have
quite the same values as some of the persons in this country. I could go on
about
that, but I won't!
The important thing is that each of us as banders should make every effort to
be
as caring for the creatures we work with as is possible.
It also bothers me when people criticize others research projects, often with
very little knowledge of the project, and often with very little knowledge
about
research in general.
I'm off of the soap-box now!
Best wishes,
Tony Futcher
Professor of Biology
John Ribble wrote:
> Norman,
> I am confused. Are you for ringing or not? Are you saying that Jenny's
> attitude is counterproductive to the cessation of ringing and are you
> suggesting that rather than criticizing ringers, a better way should be
> suggested to achieve the purpose of ringers? Is this the message you intended
> to relate? Thanks. John Ribble
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony G. (Tony) Futcher, Ph.D. mailto:tfutcher(AT)cuc.edu
Director of Records, Columbia Union College fax : 301-891-4121
Takoma Park, MD 20912 office : 301-891-4119
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
----DELETED text/x-vcard MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Parkes e-mail address
From: ian paulsen <ipaulsen(AT)LINKNET.KITSAP.LIB.WA.US>
Date: 29 Jun 2001 9:05pm
HI ALL:
Does anyone have the CURRENT e-mail address for Ken Parkes? The one in
the 1999 "Flock" is not current!
Ian "Birdbooker" Paulsen
Bainbridge Is., WA, USA
ipaulsen(AT)linknet.kitsap.lib.wa.us
"Rallidae all the way"
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: eyebrowed robin
From: "D. Heindel" <birdfish(AT)earthlink.net>
Date: 30 Jun 2001 1:22pm
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Hi all,
First I'd like to thank everyone for responding
publicly or privately to my "eye-browed robin"
post, and looking at and commenting on the bird.
The resounding overall opinion is that it is
as stated on the webpage, an aberrant Robin. Though
some do argue otherwise. I wish I had more
reference materials, so I could learn more of these
gray capped, dark-billed, eye-lined, wing-barred,
spot below and forward of eye, ROBINS. Where
are they from? How many are there? Are there
specimens like this anywhere? Other photos of
similar birds?
What a great thing, this net, where we can share
our experience and knowledge. The picture
isn't of much value in a box/drawer, with
only a handful having seen it. Now maybe more
of you are as afraid of Robins as I am :):):)
I think in learning identification of birds the most
can be gained from comparing something to the
most similar thing, that it is not.
I would like to further answer the original question
posed: "Didn't you publish this as a record......
and did you publish retraction...? "
I answered the back half of that with a piece of
a paragraph I wrote stating no ID of an EBT had
ever been made (the retraction). I would like to
further state the retraction I put in my column was
THE ONLY mention I EVER made of the bird in
my column. So the answer is NO, I did not publish
this as a record. Someone ELSE wrote a story
about it which inferred and implied such, and my
column's only mention EVER of this birds existence
was the paragraph containing the retraction to
clarify the implications made in their column the
month before, not my column.
Anyway, thanks again to all who shared their wisdom !!
I have put up a species list at my site, so if you choose
to, you can reference species you're looking for, via it.
I will try to keep it current, adding species as I get
more photos up. It's about 150 species so far..... and
with the species list, you can now find one, if you're
looking for something specifically, in less than a week.
I also just added photo quiz 10....if you want some
more bad pictures to look and laugh at....
Now if I could just get a shot of the melanistic
N.Rough-winged Swallow down at my local
park, I know I could get y'all with that one! :):)
best all,
Mitch - beak geek, bird nerd, feather freak
Mitch Heindel
birdfish(AT)earthlink.net
http://www.angelfire.com/ca5/pelagics
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cannon Netting questioned
From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)WXS.NL>
Date: 30 Jun 2001 3:42pm
John Ribble wrote:> I am confused. Are you for ringing or not?
I have been involved in ringing (banding) since 1958 either as trainee,
assistant or on my own. I am for ringing as a tool to collect data that
cannot otherwise obtained.
>Are you saying that Jenny's
>attitude is counterproductive to the cessation of ringing and are you
>suggesting that rather than criticizing ringers, a better way should be
>suggested to achieve the purpose of ringers? Is this the message you
intended
>to relate
Jenny's criticism was based on the bad condition some waders were in during
a trapping session in Australia. Why did she not release them or suggest a
better way to keep them instead of condemning all research.
Norman
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cannon Netting questioned
From: Jenny Austin <jenny0jenny(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 30 Jun 2001 8:12pm
Hello All
Interesting proposition suggested here. Picture this! An
inexperienced holiday maker and her husband visiting from UK, volunteer
to assist with a ringing (banding) project in a foreign country that
prides itself on worlds best practice. That would go down well,
wouldn't it. I wonder if we all did that how the Aussies would vote in
their next independence referendum.
Sorry to the cannon netters but what i saw at Broome seemed reasonably
professional and when I saw birds killed by their activity I realized
that it must happen everywhere else too and probably just covered up.
Regards
Jenny Austin
Birmingham
--- "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)WXS.NL> wrote:
> John Ribble wrote:> I am confused. Are you for ringing or not?
> I have been involved in ringing (banding) since 1958 either as
> trainee,
> assistant or on my own. I am for ringing as a tool to collect data
> that
> cannot otherwise obtained.
>
> >Are you saying that Jenny's
> >attitude is counterproductive to the cessation of ringing and are
> you
> >suggesting that rather than criticizing ringers, a better way should
> be
> >suggested to achieve the purpose of ringers? Is this the message you
> intended
> >to relate
> Jenny's criticism was based on the bad condition some waders were in
> during
> a trapping session in Australia. Why did she not release them or
> suggest a
> better way to keep them instead of condemning all research.
> Norman
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cannon Netting questioned
From: KACastelein and DJLauten <birdsong(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 30 Jun 2001 10:20pm
There are some who have already stated, and lots of us who really wish,
that this conversation be taken SOMEWHERE ELSE AS IT DOES NOT BELONG HERE!
Note this is an ID listserver!!!!!!!!!
Thank you for your cooperation
Dave Lauten
Bandon OR
birdsong(AT)harborside.com
Jenny Austin wrote:
> Hello All
>
> Interesting proposition suggested here. Picture this! An
> inexperienced holiday maker and her husband visiting from UK, volunteer
> to assist with a ringing (banding) project in a foreign country that
> prides itself on worlds best practice. That would go down well,
> wouldn't it. I wonder if we all did that how the Aussies would vote in
> their next independence referendum.
>
> Sorry to the cannon netters but what i saw at Broome seemed reasonably
> professional and when I saw birds killed by their activity I realized
> that it must happen everywhere else too and probably just covered up.
>
> Regards
>
> Jenny Austin
> Birmingham
>
>
> --- "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)WXS.NL> wrote:
>
>> John Ribble wrote:> I am confused. Are you for ringing or not?
>> I have been involved in ringing (banding) since 1958 either as
>> trainee,
>> assistant or on my own. I am for ringing as a tool to collect data
>> that
>> cannot otherwise obtained.
>>
>>
>>> Are you saying that Jenny's
>>> attitude is counterproductive to the cessation of ringing and are
>>
>> you
>>
>>> suggesting that rather than criticizing ringers, a better way should
>>
>> be
>>
>>> suggested to achieve the purpose of ringers? Is this the message you
>>
>> intended
>>
>>> to relate
>>
>> Jenny's criticism was based on the bad condition some waders were in
>> during
>> a trapping session in Australia. Why did she not release them or
>> suggest a
>> better way to keep them instead of condemning all research.
>> Norman
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
> http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
|
|
|
|
BIRDxxxx
BIRDCHAT
ID-FRONTIERS
US:NewEngland
