 |
|
|
|
|
ID-FRONTIERS for July 6-12, 2003
[ Prev Week
| Next Week
| Calendar Month
| ID-FRONTIERS Info
]
|
Messages are displayed in the order they were received.
|
| Subject | From | Date | Time |
| Chukars and Rock Partridges | Phil Davis | Sun, 6 Jul 2003 | 6:16pm |
| QRY: anomalous pattern in summer adult HEGU
subsp. primaries. Vagrant? | Jim Barton | Mon, 7 Jul 2003 | 3:57pm |
| Re: QRY: anomalous pattern in summer adult HEGU
subsp. primaries. Vagrant? | Peter Adriaens | Tue, 8 Jul 2003 | 12:25am |
| Jaeger | Barbara Passmore | Wed, 9 Jul 2003 | 2:17pm |
| Jaeger - 6-29-03 - CLARIFIED DATE | Barbara Passmore | Wed, 9 Jul 2003 | 2:48pm |
| Re: Jaeger | Angus Wilson | Wed, 9 Jul 2003 | 3:50pm |
| Jaeger in Florida | Julian Hough | Wed, 9 Jul 2003 | 6:21pm |
| Re: Jaeger in FL | Martin Reid | Wed, 9 Jul 2003 | 6:28pm |
| Re: Jaeger in FL | Todd McGrath | Wed, 9 Jul 2003 | 8:15pm |
| that florida jaeger | Alvaro Jaramillo | Wed, 9 Jul 2003 | 10:30pm |
| Re: Jaeger in FL | Martin Reid | Thu, 10 Jul 2003 | 3:28am |
| Jaeger age & id. | Julian Hough | Thu, 10 Jul 2003 | 7:04am |
| | Paul Larkin | Thu, 10 Jul 2003 | 9:23am |
| Ursula Wood Quiz Bird | Rich Hoyer | Thu, 10 Jul 2003 | 9:55am |
| Jaeger in FL | Barbara Passmore | Thu, 10 Jul 2003 | 12:52pm |
| Re: Ursula Wood Quiz Bird | Norman D.van Swelm | Thu, 10 Jul 2003 | 4:02pm |
| Re: Ursula Wood Quiz Bird | Beck, Michael | Thu, 10 Jul 2003 | 4:13pm |
| Re: Jaeger in FL | Tony Leukering | Thu, 10 Jul 2003 | 5:26pm |
| Re: Jaeger in FL | Todd McGrath | Thu, 10 Jul 2003 | 5:46pm |
| Re: Jaeger in FL | D. Heindel | Thu, 10 Jul 2003 | 7:10pm |
| FL jaeger | Peter Moulton | Thu, 10 Jul 2003 | 8:11pm |
| RE : Jaeger in FL | =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pierr | Fri, 11 Jul 2003 | 1:29am |
| Re: Jaeger in FL | Killian Mullarney | Fri, 11 Jul 2003 | 3:03am |
| Re: Jaeger in FL | Phil Pickering | Fri, 11 Jul 2003 | 8:09am |
| Re: Ursula Wood Quiz Bird | gphillips | Fri, 11 Jul 2003 | 8:35am |
| Re: Ursula Wood Quiz Bird | Mike Patterson | Fri, 11 Jul 2003 | 9:08am |
| Re: Jaeger in FL | Alvaro Jaramillo | Fri, 11 Jul 2003 | 2:01pm |
| Re: Ursula Wood Quiz Bird | gphillips | Fri, 11 Jul 2003 | 2:40pm |
| Re: Jaeger in FL | Phil Pickering | Fri, 11 Jul 2003 | 3:20pm |
| Re: FL jaeger | Peter Adriaens | Sat, 12 Jul 2003 | 10:25am |
|
To use email addresses replace '(AT)' with '@'.
This is done to confuse the spam 'bots.
|
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Chukars and Rock Partridges
From: Phil Davis <pdavis(AT)IX.NETCOM.COM>
Date: 6 Jul 2003 6:16pm
Birdwd01:
For those that are interested in more of the Chukar vs. Rock Partridge
discussion, I have summarized the recent birdwg01 chronology, including two
images and comments by Peter Wilkinson (UK) and Carlo Catoni (Italy):
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/pdavisbb/chukars_and_partridges.htm
Comments on general Chukar vs. Rock Partridge identification and their
status in North America and Europe are welcome.
Phil
==================================
Phil Davis Davidsonville, Maryland USA
mailto:PDavis(AT)ix.netcom.com
==================================
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: QRY: anomalous pattern in summer adult HEGU
subsp. primaries. Vagrant?
From: Jim Barton <redwingatfp1986(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 7 Jul 2003 3:57pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Hello. Recently I was studying wing-tip patterns of large adult =
gulls from the stern of a very fast-moving whale watch boat off =
Provincetown, MA, looking for possible michahellis Yellow-legged Gulls. =
A large HEGU subsp came by just overhead, at very close range, =
presenting a pattern in the primaries which I have never observed =
before. Your opinions and speculations are solicited.
The bird was a noticeably large HEGU type with long wings. As it =
wheeled by the stern near feeding Humpbacks, the bird spread its =
wingtips. The amount of black in the primaries was widely distributed =
but restricted. No solid blocks or patches were present. Rather, the =
outer four to five primaries appeared to be black on the outer web and =
white and gray on the inner web, giving the wing a zebra character =
crossed vertically by alternate black and pale bars In addition, the =
outer primaries were crossed horizontally by two rows of large white =
spots, seemingly framed gray. The underwing presented a wide white =
trailing edge. The amount of white on the underside of the outer =
primaries was striking. My impression of P10/P9 was that they =
terminated in large white spots. Since I was looking for michahellis, I =
was looking first at the inner primaries to determine the extent of =
black. The inner web of P5/P6 appeared to be gray, the outer web black, =
forming a thin black line.
The little I could see of the upper wing did not appear different in =
tone from nearby smithsonianus. The bird had large head and rather long, =
thick bill. I did not observe the underside of the inner wing. =20
The bird did not in any respect suggest Thayer's, which, in any =
event, would be extraordinary for the location in summer. .The very =
broad white trailing edge to the wing might suggest Vega Gull, but the =
bird could not have been dark enough, even allowing for strong sun. To =
me, the large bill and long wings suggest argentatus. The strong =
sunlight could easily have washed out the difference in town between =
argentatus and smithsonianus. But I don't see anything on argentatus in =
my books that
fits the underwing pattern I saw.=20
Yours,=20
Jim Barton
redwingatfp1986(AT)comcast.net
brdbk(AT)aol.com=20
U.S. Coordinator - Proact
Campaigning for birds and their habitats
before it's too late
www.proactnow.org=20
. =20
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: QRY: anomalous pattern in summer adult HEGU
subsp. primaries. Vagrant?
From: Peter Adriaens <peter.adriaens(AT)DUTCHBIRDING.NL>
Date: 8 Jul 2003 12:25am
Hi Jim,
any chance of sending us a detailed sketch?
Peter
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Jaeger
From: Barbara Passmore <bkpass(AT)BELLSOUTH.NET>
Date: 9 Jul 2003 2:17pm
A photograph of a jaeger was sent to me on 7-5-03 as a Parasitic Jaeger for
posting on the website of FLORIDABIRDS-L. There has now been a discussion
started about whether it is a Parasitic or whether it is a Pomarine.
Would you all take a look and post what you think? I naturally want to
protect the integrity of my list and of my website, and I would like to have
some real expert opinions. I just want it to be right.
FloridaBirds-L website: http://bkpass.tripod.com/floridabirds.htm
Barbara Passmore
Listowner, FLORIDABIRDS-L
bkpass(AT)bellsouth.net
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Jaeger - 6-29-03 - CLARIFIED DATE
From: Barbara Passmore <bkpass(AT)BELLSOUTH.NET>
Date: 9 Jul 2003 2:48pm
The date the jaeger was photographed was on 6-29-03 at Huguenot Park,
Jacksonville FL
http://bkpass.tripod.com/floridabirds.htm
--
Barbara Passmore
bkpass(AT)bellsouth.net
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Jaeger
From: Angus Wilson <wilsoa02(AT)med.nyu.edu>
Date: 9 Jul 2003 3:50pm
Barbara Passmore is right to be cautious about the identification of a
non-breeding plumage jaeger, especially a landed bird where there is less
opportunity to assess the 'jizz'. There have been plenty of controversial
examples of birds photographed at close range.
To get the debate started, I vote for Parasitic Jaeger (aka Arctic Skua) on the
Florida bird. This quick opinion without reference to photos or literature, is
based largely on the shape and proportions of the bill. To me the bill does not
seem deep enough for Pomarine, and comparing the length of the 'nail' to the
length of the shaft, it does not stubby enough for Long-tailed. Needless to
say, I'm open to contrary opinions or comments on the plumage that might aid
identification.
Hope this helps!
Cheers, Angus Wilson
New York City
http://www.oceanwanderers.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Jaeger in Florida
From: Julian Hough <Jrhough1(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 9 Jul 2003 6:21pm
I agree with Angus, that the head and bill shape, noting that the dark tip
seemingly taking up 1/3 of the bill would suggest Parasitic as the most obvious
choice.
The age of this bird would seem to be the most interesting question, given the
relatively plain upperparts, barred chest and lack of streamers....
Any takers..
Julian Hough, CT, USA
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Jaeger in FL
From: Martin Reid <upupa(AT)AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: 9 Jul 2003 6:28pm
Dear All,
My tuppence-worth is that this is a first-summer Pomarine Jaeger. The bill
has a very prominent gonys and "nail" with a serious-looking hook at the
tip - this is very pom-like, and recalls the bill of the larger jaegers
(I've confused juv. Poms with Bonxies in the past.) While the upperparts
will be 2nd-gen and thus not much help for ID (they all have plain, dark
2nd-gen feathers,) the primaries have absolutely no sign of pale edging,
and they do not look to be badly-worn; Parasitic has strong pale fringes to
the first-gen primaries (which these outer Ps still are, on a
first-summer), and I feel that some sign of this fringe would be
visible. The legs look very strong and mostly dark - again favoring Pom.
It's possible that the undertail coverts have been replaced, but they
should still show narrower barring on Parasitic, I think.
Of course, the biggest feature is the tail, which this bird is conveniently
showing us most of, between the wings:- and the protruding central retrices
are broadly rounded as is typical of Pom at all ages, and all wrong for
Parasitic.
Cheers,
Martin
Martin Reid
Fort Worth, Texas
mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
http://www.martinreid.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Jaeger in FL
From: Todd McGrath <skua(AT)MSN.COM>
Date: 9 Jul 2003 8:15pm
ID Frontier Birders:
I hate identifying jaegers from photos, because it is impossible to get any
sort of size comparison, and while there is substantial overlap in the
measurements between species, I always find that they are easier to identify
in life, and easier still in flight, where shape and wing proportions can be
used to supprt plumage characters.
Caveats aside, this bird looks like a 1st summer Pomarine Jaeger to me. The
bill is a bit thick, and the goynedal angle a bit more pronounced than on a
typical Parasitic, but not completely outsized. I would expect more pale on
the back of the head in a Parasitic of this age, and I find that they are
often a warmer brown. I do not agree with Martin that the dark tips to the
primaries should still be present, as these wear quickly and can be
difficult to see by late fall/early winter. The heavy broad barring on the
undertail, as well as the stout legs also favor Pomarine.
I get to see hundreds of each jaeger species every year, and yet I
consistently struggle with photographs of standing birds without any size
references. I will be interested to see how others view this bird.
Todd McGrath
SKUA(AT)MSN.COM
Marina Del Rey, CA
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: that florida jaeger
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 9 Jul 2003 10:30pm
Birders
I was going to write a similar note to Martin's mentioning that I think
this bird is a Pomarine Jaeger and he beat me to it. The bill is thick, the
ungues (is that the plural of unguis?) are large and create a blob-tip, the
hook is noticeable, thickset structure, thick legs, relatively long legs (I
think that Poms have longer legs than Parasitics and LT), and that the
central rectrix looked broad and round-tipped. Additionally the fact that
the legs have turned black and the bill remains bicolored is good for
Pomarine, by the time the legs turn black the bill should be pretty
unicolored dark on a Parasitic.
I agree with Julian that the age of the bird is the interesting
question. Two folks have mentioned that its a first summer bird, but why?
And more importantly, does anyone actually understand the sequence of
moults jaegers go through and could give us a run down of what they are? I
am not sure that the Skuas and Jaegers book (Olsen and Larsson) is all that
helpful, sometimes the info is not delivered clearly, and I just don't know
if they are correct. First of all, how do Juveniles lose their plumage? Is
it a complete moult or a partial moult? When does it happen, in the winter
or the next summer? They suggest its a complete moult, but then you look at
photos of ragged summer (in their SY, first summer) birds in their book,
and at least I think there is no way they went through a complete moult
before that stage. Now the Florida bird has at least two feather ages, and
the primaries look moderately fresh to me. Those are surely not retained
juvenile feathers, so the pale tip question is a non-issue. If there isn't
a complete moult (involving all flight feathers) in the first winter or
summer, then this bird can't be in its SY (second calendar year) plumage
(first summer in another words - but not suggesting that there are separate
pre-alternate, and pre-basic moults, just thinking of it as a bird in its
first summer of life). If there is a complete moult in the first winter or
spring, and this bird is at the extreme tail end of it, then why are there
those photos of really cruddy, messed up, worn summer jaegers in their
book? It all leaves me a bit confused. Is there any clarification anyone
can share that gets to the basics of the moult extents and timing in the
first couple of years in the life of jaegers? It may be too much to ask I
realize, we still know little about ageing these birds and the available
literature is either confusing or confused - I am not sure which. Tern
moults are probably a good model, rather than gull moults to understand
this group but I am not sure we know tern moults all that clearly either.
take care all
Al
Alvaro Jaramillo
Biologist
San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory
P.O. Box 247
Alviso, CA 95002
(408)-946-6548
http://www.sfbbo.org/
chucao(AT)comcast.net
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Jaeger in FL
From: Martin Reid <upupa(AT)AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: 10 Jul 2003 3:28am
Dear Todd, Al, et al,
Good points, reminding me how cautious we need to be with jaegers in odd
situations.
I think I am seeing some upper mantle feathers that have obvious whitish
fringes. I am assuming that these feathers are only pale-fringed in the
first-generation, but maybe I'm wrong to do this? Continuing with that
assumption, it seems extremely unlikely to me that first-generation mantle
feathers would be retained into the 2nd summer (=3CY) - especially is this
rather fresh condition - hence my stab at aging it as First-summer.
I would agree with Todd re: the primary tips, if it were not for the
apparent situation here - remarked upon by Al - that the primaries seem
unusually fresh.
Anyone who studies large gulls will have seen the occasional one in late
Spring that is a real head-scratcher because it has enough obvious
first-gen feathers to age it as 2CY - yet many of these tracts are oddly
fresh, including the primaries. I dunno what these birds represent, but I
have tended to assume that they are the result of an unusually late
hatching date. Maybe this jaeger is such a beast, which may also
contribute to it being in the transition zone between the major wintering
grounds and the breeding grounds in late June.
I echo Al's concerns about our real knowledge of jaeger molts; it reminds
me of a similar situation with our only truly bi-hemispherical large gull,
Larus fuscus fuscus.....
Cheers,
Martin
Martin Reid
Fort Worth, Texas
mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
http://www.martinreid.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Jaeger age & id.
From: Julian Hough <Jrhough1(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 10 Jul 2003 7:04am
Dear All,
Having respectfully read Alvaro and Martin's posts, I revisited the photo
briefly this am (on my work monitor) and I can see why they are going for
Pomarine, and maybe my hip-shot id. was wrong.
The central rectrices do look rounded, but I cannot make enough detail out to be
sure and the undertail covert barring looks good for Pom, being blackish and
broad.
However, on bill structure and head shape, I still think that the bill is not
quite as heavy as I would expect for a typical Pom, but cannot argue with
plumage details since I am not sure what age it is, and as someone posted, it is
often better to get a feel for the bird when it is in the flesh and flying
around.
As for age, I agree with Alvaro that it is not a first-summer (2nd Cal yr) due
to the uniform and freshness of the upperparts. The mantle seems to show a
remnant pale fringe, but without seeing the underwings to assess the amount of
retained immature baring, or lack thereof, it seems a hard bird to age.
I watched one first-winter (2nd Cal yr) Pomarine Jaeger, down to feet in the UK
in March. It basically looked like a juvenile with retained pale tips to all the
wingcoverts, but had replaced a few scaps.The bill was distinctly bi-coloured
and the legs were pale. I would assume that in June, such a bird would be
similar in appearance, yet further along in moult. The Florida bird, with it's
uniform wings and dark legs would suggest the bird is in at least its 3rd Cal
year.(?)
I have seen a number of Pomarine Jaegers in late May/June off North Carolina
which have shown a bewildering array of moult in the wings. I think trying to
fathom out complex moult and age criteria from the literature is often
mindboggling.
I could post shots later that would be great examples to age!
A lack of experience with immature jaeger plumages in winter and spring make it
difficult to accurately age these birds. Alvaro's request for anyone with
additional info would be illuminating.
Best,
Julian Hough,
CT, USA
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject:
From: Paul Larkin <paullarkin(AT)PGEN.NET>
Date: 10 Jul 2003 9:23am
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Chaps,
May I first say that I agree with all the comments about ID ing from =
photos vs in the field, very difficult.
Just a few comments taken from my limited experience to add to the =
debate about the Florida Skua (jaeger). I see good numbers of passage =
birds in the UK each year of both Pom and Arctic (Parasitic). More so of =
Arctic. Many of these are sitting on the water. A good distinguishing =
feature under these conditions is that the head of Arctic looks small cf =
the body, whilst that of Pom does not. This, and the bill, which to my =
eyes, does not look heavy enough for Pom makes me inclined to call this =
an Arctic. The complete lack of any pale areas on the legs may suggest =
that this bird is older than one might expect as perhaps does the lack =
of any pale edgings to the upperparts (unless every one has worn off). A =
few years ago I had good, frequent and prolonged views of summering 2nd =
& 3rd cy Poms all of which, unlike this bird, showed a capped effect to =
the head. The general appearance of 2 nd cy birds had not changed from =
the previous autumn apart from a paler hind neck and cheek, the 3rd cy =
birds looked like scruffy adults but in flight showed barring on the =
underwing coverts and axillaries. If this bird is 2cy or older, the lack =
of a capped effect may suggest it is destined to become a dark or =
intermediate phase bird, which, the percentages would say, should be an =
Arctic.
It would be interesting to know what the original observers feelings =
were about the ID as they probably picked up more cues than we can from =
the photo, if they thought Arctic I suspect there first impressions are =
right.
Paul
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Ursula Wood Quiz Bird
From: Rich Hoyer <calliope(AT)THERIVER.COM>
Date: 10 Jul 2003 9:55am
Hi All,
What do you think Ursula Wood is holding in the photo on the following web
page? Manx Shearwater?
http://www.albionmusic.co.uk/review.html
If no one knows, we could probably ask her; I assume she's still alive.
Good Birding,
Rich
---
Rich Hoyer
Tucson, Arizona
Senior Field Leader
WINGS, Inc.
http://www.wingsbirds.com
---
Note: I will be gone July 11 - 19
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Jaeger in FL
From: Barbara Passmore <bkpass(AT)BELLSOUTH.NET>
Date: 10 Jul 2003 12:52pm
Hi, all,
I have some additions on the Jaeger scene.
Charles Buhrman has made available additional photos of the jaeger taken at
the same place and on the same date, June 29, 2003, at Huguenot Park,
Jacksonville FL. It is believed to be the same bird previously called to
your attention and will add more light on the subject, I believe.
To see these additions, you may use the previous URL which will work, or
this one which is directly to the page:
http://bkpass.tripod.com/PARASITICJAEGER1.htm..
Thinking the two people who actually saw the bird should have their say, I
will add that Bob Richter, who took the large photo you have seen, wrote me
that he had seen the bird with its tail spread and it was not a Pomarine.
Charles Buhrman, the birder who took the last photos, also writes me as
follows:
> I can NOT shake the experience of seeing that this Jaeger was the
size of the laughing gulls that were mobbing it! The first picture show the
two birds together and my first comment was that this Jaeger was the size of
a Laughing Gull. [NOTE: This picture was not included.]
A Pomarine Jaeger is larger than a Ringbill Gull. I'll stick with Parasitic
>for now.
>The two points I wanted to make were:
> 1) Non adult jaegers cannot be reliably told from one another at sea.
> The discussion on this bird's correct ID has added to this point
>2) I'm a pretty good photographer with my new Canon DSLR setup!
I am sure you will agree that these are very fine photos. I hope you will
want to revisit the bird. I am sorry I didn't have these additional photos
available when I first wrote you.
Thanks to all who have and who will respond. You have always been generous
and I see you are still.
Barbara Passmore
Listowner, FLORIDABIRDS-L
--
Barbara Passmore
bkpass(AT)bellsouth.net
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Ursula Wood Quiz Bird
From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)wxs.nl>
Date: 10 Jul 2003 4:02pm
Rich Hoyer wrote:> What do you think Ursula Wood is holding in the photo on
the following web
> page? Manx Shearwater?
>
> http://www.albionmusic.co.uk/review.html
>
> If no one knows, we could probably ask her; I assume she's still alive.<
My humble guess is Razorbill in winterplumage.
Norman
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Ursula Wood Quiz Bird
From: "Beck, Michael" <Michael.Beck(AT)ACCPAC.COM>
Date: 10 Jul 2003 4:13pm
I would have thought a Little Grebe Tachybaptus ruficollis in definitive
basic plumage, but have little experience with these little fellows.
--michael
Vancouver, BC
-----Original Message-----
From: Norman D.van Swelm [mailto:Norman.vanswelm(AT)WXS.NL]
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 4:03 PM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Ursula Wood Quiz Bird
Rich Hoyer wrote:> What do you think Ursula Wood is holding in the photo on
the following web
> page? Manx Shearwater?
>
> http://www.albionmusic.co.uk/review.html
>
> If no one knows, we could probably ask her; I assume she's still alive.<
My humble guess is Razorbill in winterplumage.
Norman
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Jaeger in FL
From: Tony Leukering <GreatGrayOwl(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 10 Jul 2003 5:26pm
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Hi all:
I agree with the Pom camp on this one. The bird looks wide-winged,
wide-tailed, central rects are rounded, strong barring on undertail covs, and
the color
would be at least somewhat odd for a youngish Parasitic.
I also agree with Alvaro that the age is the most interesting thing about the
bird and I would also lean toward a third-year bird (that is, in it's third
calendar year). If this is, indeed, a Pom, then we have a better chance to age
it, as that is the species that actually winters in reasonable numbers in
areas with significant birder populations, such that we get to see this
plumage,
at least on occasion. My experience matches that of Julian's, second-year
Poms in June look much more like juvs than they do like adults. I grant you
that jaeger molt timing and extent is very poorly understood (for obvious
reasons), but if Poms are at all like medium or large gulls, then this is a
third-year - IMHO. I've been known to be wrong.
Sincerely,
Tony Leukering
Brighton, CO
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Jaeger in FL
From: Todd McGrath <skua(AT)MSN.COM>
Date: 10 Jul 2003 5:46pm
Birders:
These photos do not change my view of the bird with regards to species. I
believe it to be a sub-adult Pomarine Jaeger. The broad wing structure,
heavy body, and rounded central tail retrices make a pretty convincing case
for Pomarine. The problem is age. This looks like a young light-morph, or
intermediate morph bird. There are some whitish feathers in the throat and
face that give me the impression that this bird might lighten up
sumstantially. The pale barring on mantle seems better for a younger bird,
although even adults in basic plumage show that. The uppertail is still
pretty barred. I wonder if the legs are as dark as they are shown in the
first photo, because it looks there is some spotting on the feet, that would
also indicate a younger bird. I would expect a second summer bird in June to
have longer central tail retrices, although I suppose it is possible they
have not grown out yet. I think separation of first and second summer birds
(or second calendar year and third calendar year, depending on which
terminology you would like to use) is still very difficult. It is possible
to identify young jeagers at sea and on land, but like Gulls there are
always a few or more that are too tough to call.
Structure is often useful, size less so. There is a wide range of overlap
between Pom and Parasitic in size with the smallest male Poms looking
smaller than the largest female Parasitics.
Todd McGrath
SKUA(AT)MSN.COM
Marina Del Rey, CA
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Jaeger in FL
From: "D. Heindel" <birdfish(AT)earthlink.net>
Date: 10 Jul 2003 7:10pm
HI all,
I thought Pommy at first glance of the first
picture based on bulk, & structure, but was
to chicken, er, busy, to say anything. It looks
soooo barrel chested and heavy bodied. Like Todd
says, a single shot on the ground is the worst situation
possible for ID. Can I buy a flight shot was
my thought.
I would think the thickness of undertail covert
barring to be on the Pommy side of the line.
Same for central rex shape. Bill looks big enough too.
The flight shot shows a VERY straight broad wing, very
broad throughout its length. with a somewhat
roundish terminus. This shape seems VERY Pommy
(or SoPoSkua-ish) to me as well. As opposed to the
more bent angeled narrower more pointed Parasitic wing.
Although hard to say for sure, I seem to see at least
6 white shafted primaries. Shouldn't that be conclusive?
Or has that been disproved as a mark?
Age? fuggadaboutit! Surely not juv. & not ad., and
maybe closer to what I call "imm." rather than
"sub-ad.", but can I see the underwing?
Fly it around in front of us, and it shouldn't
be too hard though...
Count me in the Pommy camp.
best all,
Mitch - Torrance, CA
Mitch Heindel
birdfish(AT)earthlink.net
> [Original Message]
> From: Todd McGrath <skua(AT)MSN.COM>
> To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
> Date: 7/10/2003 5:46:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Jaeger in FL
>
> Birders:
>
> These photos do not change my view of the bird with regards to species. I
> believe it to be a sub-adult Pomarine Jaeger. The broad wing structure,
> heavy body, and rounded central tail retrices make a pretty convincing
case
> for Pomarine. The problem is age. This looks like a young light-morph, or
> intermediate morph bird. There are some whitish feathers in the throat and
> face that give me the impression that this bird might lighten up
> sumstantially. The pale barring on mantle seems better for a younger bird,
> although even adults in basic plumage show that. The uppertail is still
> pretty barred. I wonder if the legs are as dark as they are shown in the
> first photo, because it looks there is some spotting on the feet, that
would
> also indicate a younger bird. I would expect a second summer bird in June
to
> have longer central tail retrices, although I suppose it is possible they
> have not grown out yet. I think separation of first and second summer
birds
> (or second calendar year and third calendar year, depending on which
> terminology you would like to use) is still very difficult. It is possible
> to identify young jeagers at sea and on land, but like Gulls there are
> always a few or more that are too tough to call.
>
> Structure is often useful, size less so. There is a wide range of overlap
> between Pom and Parasitic in size with the smallest male Poms looking
> smaller than the largest female Parasitics.
>
>
> Todd McGrath
> SKUA(AT)MSN.COM
> Marina Del Rey, CA
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: FL jaeger
From: Peter Moulton <moultonpj(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 10 Jul 2003 8:11pm
Hello all,
sign me on with the Pomarine camp too. In addition to
the marks mentioned by others, the portrait seems to
show that the malar area will come in as dark as the
crown when the bird achieves a definitive plumage; the
very black smudge through the eye that gives the bird
such a "fierce" demeanor is more typical of Poms than
Parasitics in my experience; and there doesn't seem to
be much suggestion of a pale frontal area.
As to the bird's age, I like 2CY better than 3CY, but
the seemingly all-dark, or nearly all-dark, feet and
legs would argue for 3CY. The whole rest of the bird
suggests to me that it's a younger rather than an
older nonadult, but my opinion is hardly set in stone.
Cheers,
Pete Moulton
=====
QUESTION AUTHORITY (short form of the Scientific Method)
If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, someone will still construe it
as a hybrid.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: RE : Jaeger in FL
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pierre-Andr=E9_CROCHET?= <crochet(AT)CEFE.CNRS-MOP.FR>
Date: 11 Jul 2003 1:29am
Dear all,
Here follows my opinion on the FL skua (as we say here) together with the
opinion of Jacques Leclerc, one of the best specialists of skuas in Europe.
Jacques had not seen the flight shots when he replied, I'll ask him if they made
him change his mind. We are both in the Arctic skua (Parasitic Jaeger) camp.
For me, after comparing the pictures with a range of pics of pom and par, the
structure is clearly para. Bill is not that heavy, and to me certainly not heavy
enough for most pom. In addition, the head shape is wrong for pom and perfect
for para: very flat forehead and round hind crown. Pom has usually a higher
forehead, giving a round (not flat) head shape and most importantly a squarish
(broken) head crown. The long bodied impression fits para better than pom also.
In addition, the additional pictures show a dark hood (adult pattern) which has
the correct shape for para but is wrong for pom (dark mask extending to the bill
but not below). Furthermore, Olsen and Larson (skuas ID guide) mentions a pale
blaze on the forehead in these immature birds is diagnostic of para. I think I
can see such a blaze in the new pictures.
The flight shots do not change my mind: I can see much more of a para
structure.
Here follows the analysis of J. Leclerc (my translation)
"This bird is indeed difficult. First, the structure points toward a para: bill
without strong gonys, not deep at the base, but deeper toward the tip, head
shape not very squarish, sloopy forehead, no long tail projection (at this age,
second-summer (i.e. third-calendar) a pom should have longer central tail
feathers). Tarsi not very broad either. The coloration: difficult to say on the
picture if the head is uniformly dark (pom) or with a dark mask (para); I have
the feeling that there is a dark mask. Just a controversial point: the under
tail coverts, barred on pale background, typical of pom..."
I suggest you show these pics to other European experts (try contacting Klaus
Malling Olsen for example) before labelling this bird a pomarine...
Best,
Pierre
Pierre-André Crochet
CEFE-CNRS
1919, route de Mende
34293 Montpellier cedex 5
France
tel: + 33 6 07 32 60 75
fax: + 33 4 67 41 21 38
crochet(AT)cefe.cnrs-mop.fr
-----Message d'origine-----
De : Barbara Passmore [mailto:bkpass(AT)BELLSOUTH.NET]
Envoyé : jeudi 10 juillet 2003 21:52
À : BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Objet : [BIRDWG01] Jaeger in FL
Hi, all,
I have some additions on the Jaeger scene.
Charles Buhrman has made available additional photos of the jaeger taken at
the same place and on the same date, June 29, 2003, at Huguenot Park,
Jacksonville FL. It is believed to be the same bird previously called to
your attention and will add more light on the subject, I believe.
To see these additions, you may use the previous URL which will work, or
this one which is directly to the page:
http://bkpass.tripod.com/PARASITICJAEGER1.htm..
Thinking the two people who actually saw the bird should have their say, I
will add that Bob Richter, who took the large photo you have seen, wrote me
that he had seen the bird with its tail spread and it was not a Pomarine.
Charles Buhrman, the birder who took the last photos, also writes me as
follows:
> I can NOT shake the experience of seeing that this Jaeger was the
size of the laughing gulls that were mobbing it! The first picture show the
two birds together and my first comment was that this Jaeger was the size of
a Laughing Gull. [NOTE: This picture was not included.]
A Pomarine Jaeger is larger than a Ringbill Gull. I'll stick with Parasitic
>for now.
>The two points I wanted to make were:
> 1) Non adult jaegers cannot be reliably told from one another at sea.
> The discussion on this bird's correct ID has added to this point
>2) I'm a pretty good photographer with my new Canon DSLR setup!
I am sure you will agree that these are very fine photos. I hope you will
want to revisit the bird. I am sorry I didn't have these additional photos
available when I first wrote you.
Thanks to all who have and who will respond. You have always been generous
and I see you are still.
Barbara Passmore
Listowner, FLORIDABIRDS-L
--
Barbara Passmore
bkpass(AT)bellsouth.net
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Jaeger in FL
From: Killian Mullarney <kmullarney(AT)EIRCOM.NET>
Date: 11 Jul 2003 3:03am
Watching this discussion unfold reminds me of an informal gathering of
identification enthusiasts from Europe and North America held in in Santa
Barbara CA twenty years ago, when jaeger/skua identification came up for
discussion. The first slide that was projected - which I recall was a pretty
good shot of a juvenile bird in flight - attracted a wide range of opinion
with roughly equal numbers of delegates opting for Pom, Parasitic and
Long-tailed.....
Clearly, we have not made quite so much progress with jaeger/skua id as in
many other areas of identification.
Like Angus, Julian, Paul and no doubt many others who have not publicly
expressed an opinion I immediately felt that this bird looked like a
sub-adult (3 cal-year +) Parasitic. I read the various opinions supporting
the Pom id, but could not agree with some of the subjective assessments of
bill size, structure, even the shape of the central rectrices. I couldn't
believe there were not additional shots (given how approachable the bird
appeared to have been) and hoped we might see some of these. Last night,
when the very helpful additional images were posted, along with the
testimonies of at least two observers, Bob Richter and Charles Buhrman, I
considered the matter 'done and dusted' and was reminded that it is always
best to base identification of contentious birds, such as this one, on as
wide a range of material as possible.
I am amazed, now, to see that so many correspondents are still advocating
that this is a Pom.... Whatever about the original shot, which is confusing,
it seems to me that the subsequent images, especially the close-up head &
bill portrait clearly show a Parasitic. As Pierre-André says, there is a
hint of the paler forehead coming through, and the distribution of dark
around the gape/malar area are strongly indicative of Parasitic. And what
about the bill in this shot? If it were a Pom with a bill like that other
Poms would laugh at it!
Seriously though, I think there are numerous examples of Parasitics -
especially sub-adults lacking obviously pointed central rectrices, being
more 'barred' and somehow 'meaner-looking' than they are as full adults in
breeding/alternate plumage - being mistaken for Poms on the grounds that
they are 'too big, too heavy and too broad-winged for Parasitic.."
Identifications that rely heavily on these unavoidably subjective criteria
without the back-up of some 'harder' evidence are frequently incorrect.
For what it is worth, I am definitely in the Parasitic camp on this one!
Killian Mullarney
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barbara Passmore" <bkpass(AT)BELLSOUTH.NET>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 8:51 PM
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Jaeger in FL
> Hi, all,
>
> I have some additions on the Jaeger scene.
>
> Charles Buhrman has made available additional photos of the jaeger taken
at
> the same place and on the same date, June 29, 2003, at Huguenot Park,
> Jacksonville FL. It is believed to be the same bird previously called to
> your attention and will add more light on the subject, I believe.
>
> To see these additions, you may use the previous URL which will work, or
> this one which is directly to the page:
> http://bkpass.tripod.com/PARASITICJAEGER1.htm..
>
> Thinking the two people who actually saw the bird should have their say, I
> will add that Bob Richter, who took the large photo you have seen, wrote
me
> that he had seen the bird with its tail spread and it was not a Pomarine.
>
> Charles Buhrman, the birder who took the last photos, also writes me as
> follows:
>
> > I can NOT shake the experience of seeing that this Jaeger was the
> size of the laughing gulls that were mobbing it! The first picture show
the
> two birds together and my first comment was that this Jaeger was the size
of
> a Laughing Gull. [NOTE: This picture was not included.]
> A Pomarine Jaeger is larger than a Ringbill Gull. I'll stick with
Parasitic
> >for now.
>
> >The two points I wanted to make were:
> > 1) Non adult jaegers cannot be reliably told from one another at sea.
> > The discussion on this bird's correct ID has added to this point
> >2) I'm a pretty good photographer with my new Canon DSLR setup!
>
> I am sure you will agree that these are very fine photos. I hope you will
> want to revisit the bird. I am sorry I didn't have these additional
photos
> available when I first wrote you.
>
> Thanks to all who have and who will respond. You have always been
generous
> and I see you are still.
>
> Barbara Passmore
> Listowner, FLORIDABIRDS-L
>
>
>
>
> --
> Barbara Passmore
> bkpass(AT)bellsouth.net
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Jaeger in FL
From: Phil Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 11 Jul 2003 8:09am
I haven't had time to study the Florida bird, but I wanted to
mention that I've noticed that some Parasitics (and Long-taileds)
at pretty much any age can have rounded R2s that extend out
noticeably beyond the outer rects. When trying to assess the R1s
care should be taken not to mistake R2s for R1s which might
be missing or still growing.
Cheers,
Phil Pickering
Lincoln City, OR
philliplc(AT)harborside.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Ursula Wood Quiz Bird
From: gphillips <gphillips(AT)A-ZNET.COM>
Date: 11 Jul 2003 8:35am
Little Grebe T. ruficollis do not look as crisp or contrasting (black and
white) as the bird in the photo. But I think you're on the right track. It
looks more like a Horned Grebe in basic/winter plumage. There is also a
somewhat light-colored eye (i.e., what might be a red eye?) just above the
line of demarcation of black on the cheek. The bill structure, although
foreshortened, seems ok for Horned Grebe too.
Gerard Phillips.
Cayuga County, NY.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Beck, Michael" <Michael.Beck(AT)ACCPAC.COM>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Ursula Wood Quiz Bird
> I would have thought a Little Grebe Tachybaptus ruficollis in definitive
> basic plumage, but have little experience with these little fellows.
>
> --michael
>
> Vancouver, BC
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Norman D.van Swelm [mailto:Norman.vanswelm(AT)WXS.NL]
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 4:03 PM
> To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Ursula Wood Quiz Bird
>
>
> Rich Hoyer wrote:> What do you think Ursula Wood is holding in the photo
on
> the following web
> > page? Manx Shearwater?
> >
> > http://www.albionmusic.co.uk/review.html
> >
> > If no one knows, we could probably ask her; I assume she's still alive.<
>
> My humble guess is Razorbill in winterplumage.
> Norman
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Ursula Wood Quiz Bird
From: Mike Patterson <celata(AT)pacifier.com>
Date: 11 Jul 2003 9:08am
I have enlarged Ursula's bird and posted the result
at: http://home.pacifier.com/~neawanna/temp/ursulabird.jpg
I agree with the Razorbill folks...
Rich Hoyer wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> What do you think Ursula Wood is holding in the photo on the following web
> page? Manx Shearwater?
>
> http://www.albionmusic.co.uk/review.html
>
> If no one knows, we could probably ask her; I assume she's still alive.
>
> Good Birding,
>
> Rich
> ---
> Rich Hoyer
> Tucson, Arizona
>
> Senior Field Leader
> WINGS, Inc.
> http://www.wingsbirds.com
> ---
> Note: I will be gone July 11 - 19
--
Mike Patterson
Astoria, OR
celata(AT)pacifier.com
A child who becomes acquainted with the birds about him
hears every sound and puzzles out its meaning with a cleverness
that amazes those with ears who hear not.
-Neltje Blanchan
http://www.pacifier.com/~mpatters/bird/bird.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Jaeger in FL
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 11 Jul 2003 2:01pm
Thanks to Barbara for posting the new photos!
Looking at these new photos, particularly the close up of the head I
must admit that Parasitic looks like the good choice. The original photo is
pixilated, and I think this makes the bill look thicker based and more
blob-tipped than it really is, the new close up shows that the bill is
indeed good for Parasitic. Those rounded central tail feathers do confuse
me, and I think I need to go and look at some specimens and see what they
tell me. I wish that those flight shots were not so pixilated (higher level
of compression used? Blow ups of small images?) so that one could count
tail feathers and see if there are any moult limits on the flight feathers.
The flight shots appear to show a gap where R6 should be, suggesting that
they could be missing. The round blob-tipped and longer rectrices may in
fact be R5, as Phil Pickering suggests. I must admit that I have never paid
attention to these feathers and wonder if this is the norm, that R5 are
actually longer than R1-4? Again, a visit to the skin collections is in
order. With fresh eyes, this bird looks like a Parasitic, the apparent wide
and round-tipped 'central' tail feathers are the only issue that bothers
me, particularly on a bird that is likely in its 3d Calendar year.
Now to the age question. The photos of the upperparts show
feathers of apparently three different ages. The greyish feathers are newer
than the brown feathers (see median coverts), then there are a couple of
very pale and worn feathers near the shoulder of the bird (front
scapulars). There may even be two ages of primaries (see sitting bird,
upperpart view) but I am not sure of that, if this is the case then the
moult has been arrested kind of like in many terns. In any case, the fact
that there are three age groups of feathers on the upperparts, and the real
worn nature of those oldest feathers is good for a third calendar year
bird, not a second calendar year bird. There may even be three ages on the
breast feathers. The dark cap, apparent in the close up and the adult-like
colour of the new feathers all point away from a second calendar year bird
of course. I think that the white underpart feathers with dark bars are
actually retained juvenile feathers (as are the two very worn upper
scapulars), but I guess the underparts could be second generation feathers.
In any case it looks like a pale bellied juvenile will become a dark morph
adult, that is neat.
cheers
Alvaro
Alvaro Jaramillo
Biologist
San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory
P.O. Box 247
Alviso, CA 95002
(408)-946-6548
http://www.sfbbo.org/
chucao(AT)comcast.net
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Ursula Wood Quiz Bird
From: gphillips <gphillips(AT)A-ZNET.COM>
Date: 11 Jul 2003 2:40pm
Rich et al,
I thank Mike for posting the enlarged photo, it certainly clarified the
white auricular toward rear of the cheek which I dismissed. Also the thin
black line just beneath Mike's arrow is hard to explain on a basic Horned
Grebe and works just fine for an Alcid. Unfortunately, the bill in the
enlargement is only slightly improved on my monitor. But I realize I
misinterpreted the entire "look" of the bird's face/bill.
No harm done I hope.
Gerard
Cayuga, NY
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Patterson" <celata(AT)PACIFIER.COM>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Ursula Wood Quiz Bird
> I have enlarged Ursula's bird and posted the result
> at: http://home.pacifier.com/~neawanna/temp/ursulabird.jpg
>
> I agree with the Razorbill folks...
>
> Rich Hoyer wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > What do you think Ursula Wood is holding in the photo on the following
web
> > page? Manx Shearwater?
> >
> > http://www.albionmusic.co.uk/review.html
> >
> > If no one knows, we could probably ask her; I assume she's still alive.
> >
> > Good Birding,
> >
> > Rich
> > ---
> > Rich Hoyer
> > Tucson, Arizona
> >
> > Senior Field Leader
> > WINGS, Inc.
> > http://www.wingsbirds.com
> > ---
> > Note: I will be gone July 11 - 19
>
> --
> Mike Patterson
> Astoria, OR
> celata(AT)pacifier.com
>
> A child who becomes acquainted with the birds about him
> hears every sound and puzzles out its meaning with a cleverness
> that amazes those with ears who hear not.
>
> -Neltje Blanchan
>
> http://www.pacifier.com/~mpatters/bird/bird.html
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Jaeger in FL
From: Phil Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 11 Jul 2003 3:20pm
After looking at the new flight photos I'm pretty sure the extending
tail feathers are R5s (R2s by Olsen/Larsson numbering). The central
rects normally would not separate to this extent leaving a gap
such as is visible, even when the tail is fully fanned, which it isn't
here. Also in the first flight photo it looks like there might be a
growing short central rect barely visible in the lower part of the gap.
Cheers,
Phil Pickering
Lincoln City, OR
philliplc(AT)harborside.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: FL jaeger
From: Peter Adriaens <peter.adriaens(AT)DUTCHBIRDING.NL>
Date: 12 Jul 2003 10:25am
Hi all,
on the structure of this bird (in flight): I am not sure how useful other
birders will find this, but I often try to assess structure of flying
jaegers by comparing the width of the wings (at the base) to the length of
the rear end (part of the body projecting beyond the wings, i.e. rump +
tail, excluding any elongated central rectrices). In Pomarine Skua, the
rear end usually looks shorter than the width of the wings to me (which may
recall Great Skua/Bonxie to an extent), giving the bird a rather front-
heavy appearance (again reinforced by the large head and bulky breast).
Parasitic Skuas look normally better-proportioned, with the rear end
roughly equal to the width of the wings. In Long-tailed Skua, the rear end
is longer still, and the wings narrower, creating a very elongated
appearance (rear end distinctly longer than width of wings).
As for the Florida jaeger, some people have stated that "the wings look
broad, very Pom-like", while others have said that to them the wings
seem "NOT broad, and very Parasitic-like". Both have looked at the same
photographs. Clearly, the problem is that the term 'broad' is not well-
defined. If you compare the wings on these photos with the extent of rump +
tail, they certainly do not look broader - and even on the basis of
this 'character' alone, I would go for Parasitic Skua/Jaeger.
Regards,
Peter
|
|
|
|
BIRDxxxx
BIRDCHAT
ID-FRONTIERS
US:NewEngland