ID-FRONTIERS for November 18-24, 2001

Messages are displayed in the order they were received.  Subject  From  Date   Time   Re: Black-crowned Night-heron sightings   andrew bernick    Mon, 19 Nov 2001   9:27am   more on BC's Whip-poor-will   Don Cecile    Mon, 19 Nov 2001   9:09pm   Italy. Mystery shrike   =?iso-8859-1?q?Menot   Tue, 20 Nov 2001   3:03pm   Italy. Mystery jaeger   =?iso-8859-1?q?Menot   Tue, 20 Nov 2001   2:59pm   [megabirds] Bristle-thighed Curlew (fwd)   ian paulsen    Tue, 20 Nov 2001   4:58pm   Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos   Peter Wilkinson    Tue, 20 Nov 2001   5:04pm   Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos   Tony Leukering    Tue, 20 Nov 2001   6:21pm   Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos   Michael Dossett    Tue, 20 Nov 2001   8:43pm   Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos   Dick Newell    Tue, 20 Nov 2001   11:48pm   Re: Italy. Mystery shrike   Koen Verbanck    Wed, 21 Nov 2001   1:41am   Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos   Norman D.van Swelm   Wed, 21 Nov 2001   6:49am   spread wings & digital photos   Andrew Kratter    Wed, 21 Nov 2001   8:43am   Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos (fwd)   ian paulsen    Wed, 21 Nov 2001   11:09am   Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos   Dick Newell    Wed, 21 Nov 2001   11:26am   Re: spread wings & digital photos   Dick Newell    Wed, 21 Nov 2001   11:46am   Records of juv. RN Stint   James H. Barton   Thu, 22 Nov 2001   6:37pm

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

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Black-crowned Night-heron sightings
From: andrew bernick <waxwing50(AT)HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 19 Nov 2001 9:27am

WANTED:

WING-TAGGED BLACK-CROWNED NIGHT-HERONS SIGHTINGS
------------------------------------------------

As part of a preliminary study on the foraging ecology and breeding
behavior of Black-crowned Night-herons nesting in the New York City area,
six BCNH fledglings were marked with yellow wing tags
on Hoffman Island (Lower NY Harbor) between 30 June and 18 August 2001.
They were marked on both wings, with alphanumeric codes.

If you had/have a sighting of one of these individuals, please send the
following info (as much as possible):

1. date
2. time
3. specific location
4. tag # (if readable)
5. number of tags on the individual (1 or 2, right or left wing)
6. other pertinent notes/observer contact info

Thank you,

Andrew Bernick
CUNY-College of Staten Island
2800 Victory Blvd
Biology Dept Rm 6S-143
Staten Island NY 10314

email: bernick(AT)postbox.csi.cuny.edu

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: more on BC's Whip-poor-will
From: Don Cecile <dcecile(AT)SD22.BC.CA>
Date: 19 Nov 2001 9:09pm

For those who may be interested, below is a description a friend sent me as
he attempts to discern the subspecies:

I took some measurements but they appear to be
inconclusive. The wing measurement is unreliable as the primaries are
loose. It is difficult to know EXACTLY where to measure the tail from (the
base I mean). However, the minimum measurement I get is 128 mm, which is
considered the maximum size for the eastern race. (Anything over that would
be arizonae.) The white on the tail measures 51 mm which fits
for either subspecies. The central tail feathers look more grey to me than
buff, which supports
eastern. The edge of the white on the tail is stained with buff, with a
hint of amber. It looks like its been stained by reddish soil, and that
makes me think of the American south-west.

Cheers,
Don


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Italy. Mystery shrike
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Menotti=20Passarella?= <aster_men(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 20 Nov 2001 3:03pm

A mystery shrike was photographed in Italy in
September some years ago. The foto is here:

http://www.gepa.coo.it/

and click on: MYSTERY

It seems as a form of Isabelline Shrike. Colors recall
me the Bull-headed Shrike Lanius bucephalus.

Greetings

Menotti Passarella
Italy

______________________________________________________________________

Scarica Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 personalizzato Yahoo!
Per saperne di pił vai alla pagina: http://it.ie.yahoo.com/


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Italy. Mystery jaeger
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Menotti=20Passarella?= <aster_men(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 20 Nov 2001 2:59pm

 --- Joseph Morlan <jmorlan(AT)CCSF.ORG> ha scritto: > Id
Frontiers,
>
> You are invited to comment on a controversial jaeger
> photographed in
> Alaska in late June.  See:
>
> http://fog.ccsf.cc.ca.us/~jmorlan/oct01.htm
>
> All opinions are welcome.
>
> --
> Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA 94044:
> mailto:jmorlan(AT)ccsf.org
> California Birding, mystery birds:
> http://fog.ccsf.org/~jmorlan/
> California Bird Records Committee:
http://www.wfo-cbrc.org/cbrc/

______________________________________________________________________

Scarica Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 personalizzato Yahoo!
Per saperne di pił vai alla pagina: http://it.ie.yahoo.com/


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: [megabirds] Bristle-thighed Curlew (fwd)
From: ian paulsen <ipaulsen(AT)KRL.ORG>
Date: 20 Nov 2001 4:58pm

HI:
  Can anyone help James out?

Ian Paulsen
Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
ipaulsen(AT)krl.org
A.K.A.: "Birdbooker"
"Rallidae all the way"

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 14:59:13 -0800
From: james christian <jchrist(AT)sharpshin.com>
Reply-To: megabirds(AT)yahoogroups.com
To: "megabirds(AT)yahoogroups.com" <megabirds(AT)yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [megabirds] Bristle-thighed Curlew

Hello Megabird list,
I was wondering if anyone can confirm that the bird in the picture below is a
bristle-thighed curlew.  A bristle-thighed had turned up at Point Reyes
north of San Francisco a few years ago and when I went to find it I ran into
this bird with three wimbrels.  this bird stood out as dramatically
different but now years later the photo seems unconvincing.
thanks for any ideas,
James Christian
http://www.james-christian.com/cgi/imageFolio.cgi?action=view&link=Field_work&image=curlew.jpg&img=8

--
James M. Christian
http://www.james-christian.com
Wildlife Film Discussion Forum
http://www.sharpshin.com

415 - 771 - 4350

I, a stranger and afraid, in a world I never made.
-A.E.Housman

Hope is the thing with feathers that perches in the soul.
-Emily Dickinson

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
StartMeUp jump starts your car's battery
using only the cigarette lighter.
$24.95 at Youcansave.com
http://us.click.yahoo.com/qbucSA/LTTDAA/ySSFAA/70TolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
megabirds-unsubscribe(AT)yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos
From: Peter Wilkinson <pcwilkinson(AT)clara.co.uk>
Date: 20 Nov 2001 5:04pm

Martin mentions the difficulty of studying underwings in conventional
museum study skins, something I imagine many of us will have
experienced.

At least one of our museums has in the last few years started
freeze-drying its new specimens with one wing conventionally closed and
one wing open. This does of course require somewhat greater storage
space and so far I understand they are only doing it for passerines.

Does anyone know if this is likely to become a common practice?

Peter Wilkinson
Wheathampstead, Herts, England
pcwilkinson(AT)clara.co.uk


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos
From: Tony Leukering <GreatGrayO(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 20 Nov 2001 6:21pm

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

In a message dated 11/20/01 5:08:22 PM Mountain Standard Time,
pcwilkinson(AT)CLARA.CO.UK writes:

> At least one of our museums has in the last few years started
> freeze-drying its new specimens with one wing conventionally closed and
> one wing open. This does of course require somewhat greater storage
> space and so far I understand they are only doing it for passerines.
>
> Does anyone know if this is likely to become a common practice?

I have seen and/or heard of a number of museums that are making one-wing-open
skins (among them, LA Co. Mus.; Univ. of MI Mus. of Zool.).  The birds do
require considerably more storage space, so most museums have some
restrictions on their capability to do this on a general basis.

It is a most helpful practice and ought to be encouraged.

Sincerely,

Tony Leukering
Brighton, CO

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


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos
From: Michael Dossett <phainopepla(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 20 Nov 2001 8:43pm

Hello,

Another method which is often used and takes a little
less space is to remove one wing and dry it separately
in the open position while leaving the other closed
and intact.  That way the wings can be stored
separately where they take up less space.  The
disadvantage is that unless there is a very good
cataloguing system, it may become impossible to know
which wing matches which bird in the collection.
Labels are lost or broken or fall off and what not.
This is more likely to become an issue once the wing
is separated from the body.

Michael Dossett
Seattle, Washington
phainopepla(AT)yahoo.com

--- Tony Leukering <GreatGrayO(AT)AOL.COM> wrote:
> In a message dated 11/20/01 5:08:22 PM Mountain
> Standard Time,
> pcwilkinson(AT)CLARA.CO.UK writes:
>
>
> > At least one of our museums has in the last few
> years started
> > freeze-drying its new specimens with one wing
> conventionally closed and
> > one wing open. This does of course require
> somewhat greater storage
> > space and so far I understand they are only doing
> it for passerines.
> >
> > Does anyone know if this is likely to become a
> common practice?
>
> I have seen and/or heard of a number of museums that
> are making one-wing-open
> skins (among them, LA Co. Mus.; Univ. of MI Mus. of
> Zool.).  The birds do
> require considerably more storage space, so most
> museums have some
> restrictions on their capability to do this on a
> general basis.
>
> It is a most helpful practice and ought to be
> encouraged.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Tony Leukering
> Brighton, CO
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos
From: Dick Newell <dick.newell(AT)APPLEONLINE.NET>
Date: 20 Nov 2001 11:48pm

Should not the taxidermists of the future be encouraged to take a suite of
digital photographs, under controlled lighting, including underwings, and
with a scale in the frame. These records would occupy zero storage space,
would not fade with time, and could be made accessible to everyone.
Dick Newell

On 20/11/01 11:40 PM, "Peter Wilkinson" <pcwilkinson(AT)clara.co.uk> wrote:

> Martin mentions the difficulty of studying underwings in conventional
> museum study skins, something I imagine many of us will have
> experienced.
>
> At least one of our museums has in the last few years started
> freeze-drying its new specimens with one wing conventionally closed and
> one wing open. This does of course require somewhat greater storage
> space and so far I understand they are only doing it for passerines.
>
> Does anyone know if this is likely to become a common practice?
>
> Peter Wilkinson
> Wheathampstead, Herts, England
> pcwilkinson(AT)clara.co.uk


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Italy. Mystery shrike
From: Koen Verbanck <verbanckk(AT)SKYNET.BE>
Date: 21 Nov 2001 1:41am

HI,

looks more like a Woodchat Shrike to me, but the colour of the mantle seems
paler then normal, but I quess this could be explained by several raisons
(i.e. wrong colour perception on the film,...)

> It seems as a form of Isabelline Shrike. Colors recall
> me the Bull-headed Shrike Lanius bucephalus.


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos
From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)WXS.NL>
Date: 21 Nov 2001 6:49am

Dick wrote:>Should not the taxidermists of the future be encouraged to take
a suite of
>digital photographs, under controlled lighting, including underwings, and
>with a scale in the frame. These records would occupy zero storage space,
>would not fade with time, and could be made accessible to everyone.<
Absolutely true and it may even reduce the necessity of large scale
collecting. Besides it would make museum collections much more available to
students from all over the world. In fact, I can see no reason why museums
don't start right away photographing their present collections. Selling CD's
may even make a handsome income.
As for open wings, the Zoological Museum began separating one wing per skin
from the late seventies onwards, a practice now also adopted by the curator
for birds of the RMNM Leyden (one million skins already! 10,000 CD's Dick).
Norman


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: spread wings & digital photos
From: Andrew Kratter <kratter(AT)FLMNH.UFL.EDU>
Date: 21 Nov 2001 8:43am

Several active museum in the U.S. are saving spread wings routinely from
many skins or associated skeletons, most notably the Burke Museum at the
University of Washington, but also our museum, LSU, and others.    Spread
wings are easier to curate than a wing left open with the skin.  It is easy
to identify skins that have a spread wing saved - they're missing a
wing!  In addition, I note on the tags that go with the specimens what was
saved (e.g., skin, wing, partial skeleton).

As far as digital photos, yes that would be great, but real specimens in
the collection will always be first and foremost. Vouchers are essential,
whether for photos, tissue samples, sound recordings, etc.  Photos provide
only a snippet of data that a bird in hand can (namely plumage and maybe
measurements, which are unrepeatable unless there is a voucher
skin).   Skeletons are becoming increasingly valuable (but in my opinion
are  not saved nearly to the level necessary - we save a full or partial
skel from nearly specimen in the field like Kevin Winker at Univ. Alaska
-  see his great article in J. Field Ornithology 71, 2000, pp 250-271,
).  Tissues, likewise.  Assessing molt, reproductive condition, age, fat
levels, parasites, stomach contents, and disease are all  enhanced with
specimens; for several of these categories it would be impossible to assess
them only with photos.  Another point is the expense and time that having a
photo collection would entail.  Most museums (at least here in the US) are
severely under-funded, and we cannot afford  to take away from our major
duties, preserving what we have already and adding new specimens.  Don't
forget that most museum specimens are available, either by visit or by loan
(the latter only between museums).  At the FLMNH we welcome visitation (by
appointment) of birders, ornithologists, governmental biologists, artists,
and whoever else has an interest.

Andy Kratter

Dr. Andrew Kratter, Collections Manager- Ornithology
Florida Museum of Natural History
PO Box 117800
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611 USA
Ph. (352) 392-3293
Fax (352) 846-0287
http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos
         (fwd)
From: ian paulsen <ipaulsen(AT)KRL.ORG>
Date: 21 Nov 2001 11:09am

HI ALL:
 Please see Dennis PaulsOn's comments below!

Ian Paulsen
Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
ipaulsen(AT)krl.org
A.K.A.: "Birdbooker"
"Rallidae all the way"

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 10:07:35 -0800
From: Dennis Paulson <dpaulson(AT)ups.edu>
To: ian paulsen <ipaulsen(AT)krl.org>
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos (fwd)

Ian, can you forward this to the list?
-------------------
Peter, I can answer your question to some degree.

Many North American collections are now in the practice of saving wings
from birds along with the rest of the specimen.  The Slater Museum has over
4000 extended wings now, and we consider them a very valuable resource.
The Burke Museum at the University of Washington has over 20,000 wings, the
largest such collection and with worldwide coverage.  Several other North
American museums have substantial wing collections as well. I don't know
what's happening on this front in the rest of the world, but I'm glad to
hear about it in the UK.

We have found it much better to remove the wing from the bird.  It can then
be extended fully, it can be studied and drawn or photographed (or
scanned!) without having to handle the skin, and storage of the specimens
is much facilitated.  I have visited museums where wings were outstretched
but left on the skins, and the only way they could be stored was each skin
resting on the wing of the one next to it.  You can imagine the fun if you
wanted to look at the last bird in the line, that domino theory they talk
about.

I can't avoid making an additional comment about freeze-dried birds.  I can
see doing this for mounts, but I'm disappointed to hear of it being done
for study skins.  A very significant part of the value of a bird specimen
is the data that are taken from it during preparation (sex, age, state of
breeding, fat content, stomach contents), and you don't get that from
freeze-dried specimens (I wonder if they're even checking the sex
internally).  In addition, curators of modern bird collections are trying
to get everything they can from specimens, so it is very common to make
combination skin/skeletons, getting the maximum use from an animal that has
died.  We save wings from all specimens skeletonized so they will be future
vouchers for the identity of the skeleton.  Perhaps the museum referred to
is a small educational institution, not interested in the research value of
the specimens, but they are sacrificing valuable information for the easy
fix of freeze-drying.

One final plea.  For those of you who examine skins, please be extremely
careful when trying to see the underwing.  The skin around the base of the
wing can be easily broken by an attempt to open it up, and you often find
such specimens in museums.  In fact, most people who work with study skins
just grit their teeth and accept that they can't see the underwing (as was
presumably noted), and that's why the saving of spread wings was a
long-overdue idea when it hit the museum world late last century. It's been
a wonderful resource for studies of wing molt, as well, as that's also very
difficult in standard study skins.

Dennis Paulson
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 23:40:23 -0000
>From: Peter Wilkinson <pcwilkinson(AT)clara.co.uk>
>To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
>Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos
>
>Martin mentions the difficulty of studying underwings in conventional
>museum study skins, something I imagine many of us will have
>experienced.
>
>At least one of our museums has in the last few years started
>freeze-drying its new specimens with one wing conventionally closed and
>one wing open. This does of course require somewhat greater storage
>space and so far I understand they are only doing it for passerines.
>
>Does anyone know if this is likely to become a common practice?
>
>Peter Wilkinson
>Wheathampstead, Herts, England
>pcwilkinson(AT)clara.co.uk

Dennis Paulson, Director                           phone 253-879-3798
Slater Museum of Natural History                 fax 253-879-3352
University of Puget Sound                       e-mail dpaulson(AT)ups.edu
Tacoma, WA 98416
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/museum.html


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Snipe Identification: more intriguing photos
From: Dick Newell <dick.newell(AT)APPLEONLINE.NET>
Date: 21 Nov 2001 11:26am

In answer to both Keith and Norman's submissions -

first Keith: digital images last for ever without degradation - OK you may
have to copy them from one medium to another every 20 years or so - but
there is zero loss of information in this copying, and it's very cheap to
do. However you care for a specimen it will fade and degrade over time.

Second Norman: depending on resolution and compression technique you could
perhaps get 5000 images on one CD. So at 5 images per specimen (say) you
could get 1000000 specimens on 1000 CD's. On DVD you could get a whole lot
more - and on the technology of tomorrow, perhaps all of the specimens in
the world on a pin-head! But if it's all on the internet - who cares? And
with global wireless communication, you could access them immediately from
the middle of the Kalahari or deep in the Amazon.

Such a library should will be augmented with photos from the field, sound
video etc.

It's going to happen.

Dick


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: spread wings & digital photos
From: Dick Newell <dick.newell(AT)APPLEONLINE.NET>
Date: 21 Nov 2001 11:46am

Andy,
I never suggested chucking the specimens out or not keeping them.
On the question of cost - it's not that high, after the initial investment
in a digital camera - and they are available now at a resolution that equals
film, then, unlike film, the marginal cost is nearly zero. The time taken to
take a few pictures is a fraction of the time taken to prepare a specimen.
Further, by making such a collection accessible easily to the whole world,
you can recover the cost by charging a small fee per access - this has got
to be a good business model for a museum. Further - if museum visitors could
peruse good pictures of the specimens first, it could reduce considerably
the amount of unnecessary handling and wear on the specimens.
There are already many examples of bird photo libraries e.g.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/birds-pix - I don't know how many thousands of
great pictures there are on there, but if they were organised and indexed -
my, what a resource! I hope people find my own meagre efforts on large skuas
useful in trying to resolve some pretty intractable identifications see:
http://www.magikcircle.com/birds/image.asp?title_id=347&group_id=0
(cheap shot: more photos to fill the gaps are welcome - end of cheap shot)
Dick

On 21/11/01 3:43 PM, "Andrew Kratter" <kratter(AT)FLMNH.UFL.EDU> wrote:

> Several active museum in the U.S. are saving spread wings routinely from
> many skins or associated skeletons, most notably the Burke Museum at the
> University of Washington, but also our museum, LSU, and others.    Spread
> wings are easier to curate than a wing left open with the skin.  It is easy
> to identify skins that have a spread wing saved - they're missing a
> wing!  In addition, I note on the tags that go with the specimens what was
> saved (e.g., skin, wing, partial skeleton).
>
> As far as digital photos, yes that would be great, but real specimens in
> the collection will always be first and foremost. Vouchers are essential,
> whether for photos, tissue samples, sound recordings, etc.  Photos provide
> only a snippet of data that a bird in hand can (namely plumage and maybe
> measurements, which are unrepeatable unless there is a voucher
> skin).   Skeletons are becoming increasingly valuable (but in my opinion
> are  not saved nearly to the level necessary - we save a full or partial
> skel from nearly specimen in the field like Kevin Winker at Univ. Alaska
> -  see his great article in J. Field Ornithology 71, 2000, pp 250-271,
> ).  Tissues, likewise.  Assessing molt, reproductive condition, age, fat
> levels, parasites, stomach contents, and disease are all  enhanced with
> specimens; for several of these categories it would be impossible to assess
> them only with photos.  Another point is the expense and time that having a
> photo collection would entail.  Most museums (at least here in the US) are
> severely under-funded, and we cannot afford  to take away from our major
> duties, preserving what we have already and adding new specimens.  Don't
> forget that most museum specimens are available, either by visit or by loan
> (the latter only between museums).  At the FLMNH we welcome visitation (by
> appointment) of birders, ornithologists, governmental biologists, artists,
> and whoever else has an interest.
>
>
> Andy Kratter
>
>
> Dr. Andrew Kratter, Collections Manager- Ornithology
> Florida Museum of Natural History
> PO Box 117800
> University of Florida
> Gainesville, FL 32611 USA
> Ph. (352) 392-3293
> Fax (352) 846-0287
> http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu/


[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Records of juv. RN Stint
From: "James H. Barton" <redwing1986(AT)MEDIAONE.NET>
Date: 22 Nov 2001 6:37pm

    Friends, I would like to consult descriptions of juvenile Red-necked
Stint ..C. ruficollis.. from North America, hopefully including
descriptions of the flight call.  I'm aware of a recent record by member
of this list, from Alaska.  What other records do we have in past 10
years?

    Thanks for  your help.

    Jim Barton
    redwing1986(AT)mediaone.net
    Cambridge, MA