B-Mail(sm): ID-FRONTIERS for September 14-20, 2003

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Early onset of 1st pre-basic molt in
         Short-billed Dowitcher
From: Nicholas Block <sparrowhawk17(AT)yahoo.com>
Date: 14 Sep 2003 8:53am

Hello all,

On a September 1 DFO field trip to Prewitt Reservoir in Colorado (I think
it's in Washington County), we observed six juvenile Short-billed
Dowitchers.  Six SBDO at one spot in CO is rather unusual in itself, but I
clearly remember one being in the early stages of its pre-basic molt.  I
believe it was only mantle feathers that had been replaced, but I cannot
remember exactly where on the mantle.  In any case, it certainly appears
that molt before the wintering grounds does occur on _hendersoni_ and
_griseus_, just rarely.  Don's point about _caurinus_ is interesting,
though.  Has anyone recorded molt during migration on this subspecies?

Nick Block
Fort Collins, CO
sparrowhawk17(AT)yahoo.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Mystery Warbler from NJ
From: Steven Mlodinow <SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 14 Sep 2003 11:36am

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

Greetings

Single photos of birds at odd angles do provide an interesting challenge. As
Joe Morlan's photo quizzes have shown, the guesses can sometimes be
spectacularly divergent. At least we can be confident this bird is a warbler.

I guess this bird looks, to me, most like an aberrant Common Yellowthroat.
Take away that neck-band thingy, and the olive auriculars, bright eyering,
relatively stout bill, yellow throat and upper chest and dull lower chest/upper
belly all fit. So does the back color.

What about the tail? Yikes! The apparently yellowish tail base seems to
extend across all retrices and should thus eliminate Am Redstart parentage. Com
Yellowthroats can show quite a bit of yellow-green at the base of their tails.
Not as bright yellow as it seems in this photo, but I wonder if that lemon
yellow color is partly photographic artifact. Soooo, if I had to bet, I'd place
my
dollars on an aberrant Common Yellowthroat.

Cheers
Steven Mlodinow
SGMlod(AT)aol.com

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

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Mystery Warbler from NJ
From: Frank Gallo <Peeplo(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 14 Sep 2003 6:14pm

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

Hi All,

Structurally, I would agree that it looks like a Common Yellowthroat.

Frank Gallo

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

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Mystery Warbler from NJ
From: Sebastian Patti <sebastianpatti(AT)HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 15 Sep 2003 8:21am

. . .the bird doesn't seem to have rictal bristles . . .that would militate
in FAVOR of Common Yellowthroat, si???

sebastianpatti(AT)hotmail.com
Sebastian T. Patti
(Lincoln Park)
Chicago, ILLINOIS 60614-3354
PHONE: 312/603-4416 (o) 773/248-0570 (h)
FAX: 312/603-2041 (o) 773/248-0264 (h)

>From: Steven Mlodinow <SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM>
>Reply-To: SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM
>To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
>Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Mystery Warbler from NJ
>Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 14:35:56 EDT
>
>Greetings
>
>Single photos of birds at odd angles do provide an interesting challenge.
>As
>Joe Morlan's photo quizzes have shown, the guesses can sometimes be
>spectacularly divergent. At least we can be confident this bird is a
>warbler.
>
>I guess this bird looks, to me, most like an aberrant Common Yellowthroat.
>Take away that neck-band thingy, and the olive auriculars, bright eyering,
>relatively stout bill, yellow throat and upper chest and dull lower
>chest/upper
>belly all fit. So does the back color.
>
>What about the tail? Yikes! The apparently yellowish tail base seems to
>extend across all retrices and should thus eliminate Am Redstart parentage.
>Com
>Yellowthroats can show quite a bit of yellow-green at the base of their
>tails.
>Not as bright yellow as it seems in this photo, but I wonder if that lemon
>yellow color is partly photographic artifact. Soooo, if I had to bet, I'd
>place my
>dollars on an aberrant Common Yellowthroat.
>
>Cheers
>Steven Mlodinow
>SGMlod(AT)aol.com

_________________________________________________________________
Use custom emotions -- try MSN Messenger 6.0!
http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_emoticon

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Scott Spangenberg <scottspangenberg(AT)MINDSPRING.COM>
Date: 15 Sep 2003 8:05pm

On Friday September 5, Rich Frechette, Eric Masterson, Dan Fallon, and
I travelled to South Beach in Chatham, Massachusetts.  While we never
found either the Curlew Sandpiper or any Stints, we saw essentially the
same variety of shorebirds that other folks reported for South Beach.

Most interesting, however, was a thick-necked, dumpy Calidris sandpiper
with a bicolored bill and yellow legs whose profile looked nothing like
any Pectoral Sandpiper we had ever seen before.  This bird positively
gave us fits, and I would like to have your feedback on what you think
it is.  Although I thought that it was probably Pectoral Sandpiper,
there were a number of details about it what I saw that really bothered
me, not the least of which was the shape of the bird.

I spent most of my evenings over the last week studying my photos and
comparing them to illustrations, photos, and descriptions of Pectoral,
Sharp-tailed, and Cox's Sandpipers (not much available on the last one
of course).  My perception now is that Sharp-tailed is a much better
fit than Pectoral, but I have no prior experience with Sharp-tailed,
and this bird appears to be an adult.  So I need some feedback from
folks who have more experience with this species and differentiating it
from Pectoral Sandpiper.  I have posted some photos with captions at
http://www.scottspangenberg.com/Birds/CalidrisSp01/

GENERAL IMPRESSIONS
-Large size compared to Semipalmated Sandpiper and Semi-palmated
Plover, same size as nearby Pectoral Sandpipers.
-Yellow legs
-Bicolored Bill
-Neckless appearance while active as well as while inactive
(In other words, this bird had the general characteristics of Pectoral,
Sharp-tailed, or Cox's Sandpipers, but did not have the form of
Pectoral Sandpiper, the most likely candidate at this site and time.)

SPECIFIC DETAILS OF OBSERVATIONS
**-The bird appeared thick-necked and hunched at all times. When the
bird stretched forward to feed, there was only the slightest
indentation at the back of the neck. (See photos on my web site.)
Neckless appearance (perfect match with outline of Sharp-tailed
illustration in Sibley) even when feeding.
-White throat instead of merely a white chin as PESA exhibits.
-Obvious necklace below the throat (described variously as a necklace
or thin gorget, which is not mentioned for any PESA plumage.  I found
this on many photos of STSA obtained with a Google image search, and on
no photos of PESA.
-Cap contrasts strongly with lower parts of head.  In a photo of the
top of the birds head, this contrast goes all the way around the head.
In other photos, there does not appear to be much contrast at the back
of the head.  The contains rufous/chestnut, but is not strikingly
rufous/chestnut. I found what I read about the usefulness of these two
points for species separation a little confusing unless they only apply
to juvenile birds.
**-Supercilium widens behind eye, and while not as bold as I would have
expected for this to be a Sharp-tailed, is bolder than supercilium of
any other PESA we saw, or any photos or illustrations that I have been
able to find.
- A buffy white eye ring that was obvious even when the bird was facing
us obliquely. (I am somewhat confused about the significance of this
observation. One of the things I read seemed to suggest that Pectoral
does not have an obvious eye ring, but that doesn't seem to always be
true in my experience.  I certainly have been able to perceive eye
rings on Pectoral Sandpipers before.  Perhaps what is meant is an
obvious and complete eye ring?)
-A dark eye stripe in front (dark lores) and behind the eye, with
obvious contrast between the eye stripe and the area immediately below
it
-Bicolored bill, with orange base of bill (although a couple time it
looked olive) and the outer part was black. The bill curves down
slightly.  Our collective observation through the scopes was that the
orange was limited to the base of the bill, but some of my photos seem
to show that more than the base is lighter than the tip.
-Scapular set is complete (not missing or whitish at either end),
therefore the plumage is not juvenile.  Heavy feather wear adds weight
to the idea that this is an adult bird.  There is some rufous on the
scapular feathers, and some white or buffy-white edges as well instead
of brown scapulars with plain buffy edges as I expect for Pectoral.
-Feathers of upperparts in general have dark brown centers and buffy
edges.
**-Upper tail coverts have rufous edges instead of being dark brown all
the way to the edge
**-While the bird did not run around as much as any of the other
shorebirds, it was nevertheless quite active while feeding, which made
it difficult to judge tail shape.  Fortunately, one of my photos caught
the bird with a slightly raised tail, and lowered primaries and
tertials. The retrices are quite sharply pointed, and the middle two
are quite a bit longer than the adjacent feathers.  In flight, there
was no big flash of white on the sides of the tail.
**-Streaking does not extend below carpal joint as one would expect
with PESA, and appears to have much less streaking in the center of the
breast than on the sides.  This is most apparent from a 45 degree view.
  Seen straight on, the bird has very light streaking across a large
part of the central breast, and heavy streaking is limited to the
sides.  The streaking on breast has a subtle but perceptible
buffy/yellowish wash underneath. This was is more apparent in the
photos than during our observation.
**-Subtle gray chevron marks on underparts at the flanks, just below
the edge of the wing, which appear to be fading rapidly.  Further back,
adjacent to the undertail coverts, there are dark arrow-shaped marks.
These were not as readily apparent in the photos as through my scope,
so I included some photos where I have cranked up the contrast to bring
out these marks.  I have never ever seen a Pectoral with these marks,
but these marks are specifically described for Sharp-tailed Sandpiper,
I have found them on every illustration of Sharp-tailed that I can get
my hands on.
-Long tarsus and short tibia on yellow legs without any green cast.
The small areas of the fronts were black.  Most of the time, the only
part of the tibia that was visible was the joint with the tarsus, even
when the bird was leaning forward and down.

Our spotting scopes included 60mm Kowa, 60mm Bushnell, and 80mm Pentax
scopes, with 20X and 20-60X eyepieces on the Pentax.  I did the
photography using a 6.3 megapixel Canon D60 with a 100-400mm image
stabilized lens, which yields an effective magnification of just under
13X, and a 5 megapixel Canon G5 attached to a digiscoping eyepiece for
my Pentax scope.

Scott Spangenberg
scottspangenberg(AT)mindspring.com
www.scottspangenberg.com
Amherst, NH 03031
603-673-0525

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Tim Janzen <tjanzen(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 15 Sep 2003 10:35pm

Dear Scott,
        I think that this is a juvenile Pectoral Sandpiper.  In my opinion
plumage
features which would suggest that this bird is not a Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
would include:
1.  The crown doesn't seem to be quite rufous enough.  The black streaks
through the crown are relatively wide, which would be more typical of a
Pectoral Sandpiper.
2.  The breast pattern doesn't seem right for a Sharp-tailed Sandpiper.
There is relatively prominent dark streaking coming all the way across the
center of the breast, which would be typical of a Pectoral Sandpiper, but
not consistent with a Sharp-tailed Sandpiper.  There is also reasonably
strong contrast between the lower margin of the breast band and the white
belly, which would again be consistent with a Pectoral Sandpiper.  There
also doesn't seem to be as much rufous coloration in the breast band as one
would expect for a Sharp-tailed Sandpiper.
3.  The supercilium doesn't seem to be as conspicuously white or as wide as
one would expect for a Sharp-tailed Sandpiper.
4.  The eye-ring doesn't seem to be as white or as prominent as one would
expect for a Sharp-tailed Sandpiper.
5.  There seem to be some white streaks in the crown, suggesting a split
supercilium, which would again suggest a Pectoral Sandpiper.

Sincerely,
Tim Janzen
12367 SE Ridgecrest Rd.
Portland, OR  97236
E-mail:  tjanzen(AT)comcast.net

-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]On Behalf Of Scott Spangenberg
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 8:16 PM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper

On Friday September 5, Rich Frechette, Eric Masterson, Dan Fallon, and
I travelled to South Beach in Chatham, Massachusetts.  While we never
found either the Curlew Sandpiper or any Stints, we saw essentially the
same variety of shorebirds that other folks reported for South Beach.

Most interesting, however, was a thick-necked, dumpy Calidris sandpiper
with a bicolored bill and yellow legs whose profile looked nothing like
any Pectoral Sandpiper we had ever seen before.  This bird positively
gave us fits, and I would like to have your feedback on what you think
it is.  Although I thought that it was probably Pectoral Sandpiper,
there were a number of details about it what I saw that really bothered
me, not the least of which was the shape of the bird.

I spent most of my evenings over the last week studying my photos and
comparing them to illustrations, photos, and descriptions of Pectoral,
Sharp-tailed, and Cox's Sandpipers (not much available on the last one
of course).  My perception now is that Sharp-tailed is a much better
fit than Pectoral, but I have no prior experience with Sharp-tailed,
and this bird appears to be an adult.  So I need some feedback from
folks who have more experience with this species and differentiating it
from Pectoral Sandpiper.  I have posted some photos with captions at
http://www.scottspangenberg.com/Birds/CalidrisSp01/

GENERAL IMPRESSIONS
-Large size compared to Semipalmated Sandpiper and Semi-palmated
Plover, same size as nearby Pectoral Sandpipers.
-Yellow legs
-Bicolored Bill
-Neckless appearance while active as well as while inactive
(In other words, this bird had the general characteristics of Pectoral,
Sharp-tailed, or Cox's Sandpipers, but did not have the form of
Pectoral Sandpiper, the most likely candidate at this site and time.)

SPECIFIC DETAILS OF OBSERVATIONS
**-The bird appeared thick-necked and hunched at all times. When the
bird stretched forward to feed, there was only the slightest
indentation at the back of the neck. (See photos on my web site.)
Neckless appearance (perfect match with outline of Sharp-tailed
illustration in Sibley) even when feeding.
-White throat instead of merely a white chin as PESA exhibits.
-Obvious necklace below the throat (described variously as a necklace
or thin gorget, which is not mentioned for any PESA plumage.  I found
this on many photos of STSA obtained with a Google image search, and on
no photos of PESA.
-Cap contrasts strongly with lower parts of head.  In a photo of the
top of the birds head, this contrast goes all the way around the head.
In other photos, there does not appear to be much contrast at the back
of the head.  The contains rufous/chestnut, but is not strikingly
rufous/chestnut. I found what I read about the usefulness of these two
points for species separation a little confusing unless they only apply
to juvenile birds.
**-Supercilium widens behind eye, and while not as bold as I would have
expected for this to be a Sharp-tailed, is bolder than supercilium of
any other PESA we saw, or any photos or illustrations that I have been
able to find.
- A buffy white eye ring that was obvious even when the bird was facing
us obliquely. (I am somewhat confused about the significance of this
observation. One of the things I read seemed to suggest that Pectoral
does not have an obvious eye ring, but that doesn't seem to always be
true in my experience.  I certainly have been able to perceive eye
rings on Pectoral Sandpipers before.  Perhaps what is meant is an
obvious and complete eye ring?)
-A dark eye stripe in front (dark lores) and behind the eye, with
obvious contrast between the eye stripe and the area immediately below
it
-Bicolored bill, with orange base of bill (although a couple time it
looked olive) and the outer part was black. The bill curves down
slightly.  Our collective observation through the scopes was that the
orange was limited to the base of the bill, but some of my photos seem
to show that more than the base is lighter than the tip.
-Scapular set is complete (not missing or whitish at either end),
therefore the plumage is not juvenile.  Heavy feather wear adds weight
to the idea that this is an adult bird.  There is some rufous on the
scapular feathers, and some white or buffy-white edges as well instead
of brown scapulars with plain buffy edges as I expect for Pectoral.
-Feathers of upperparts in general have dark brown centers and buffy
edges.
**-Upper tail coverts have rufous edges instead of being dark brown all
the way to the edge
**-While the bird did not run around as much as any of the other
shorebirds, it was nevertheless quite active while feeding, which made
it difficult to judge tail shape.  Fortunately, one of my photos caught
the bird with a slightly raised tail, and lowered primaries and
tertials. The retrices are quite sharply pointed, and the middle two
are quite a bit longer than the adjacent feathers.  In flight, there
was no big flash of white on the sides of the tail.
**-Streaking does not extend below carpal joint as one would expect
with PESA, and appears to have much less streaking in the center of the
breast than on the sides.  This is most apparent from a 45 degree view.
  Seen straight on, the bird has very light streaking across a large
part of the central breast, and heavy streaking is limited to the
sides.  The streaking on breast has a subtle but perceptible
buffy/yellowish wash underneath. This was is more apparent in the
photos than during our observation.
**-Subtle gray chevron marks on underparts at the flanks, just below
the edge of the wing, which appear to be fading rapidly.  Further back,
adjacent to the undertail coverts, there are dark arrow-shaped marks.
These were not as readily apparent in the photos as through my scope,
so I included some photos where I have cranked up the contrast to bring
out these marks.  I have never ever seen a Pectoral with these marks,
but these marks are specifically described for Sharp-tailed Sandpiper,
I have found them on every illustration of Sharp-tailed that I can get
my hands on.
-Long tarsus and short tibia on yellow legs without any green cast.
The small areas of the fronts were black.  Most of the time, the only
part of the tibia that was visible was the joint with the tarsus, even
when the bird was leaning forward and down.

Our spotting scopes included 60mm Kowa, 60mm Bushnell, and 80mm Pentax
scopes, with 20X and 20-60X eyepieces on the Pentax.  I did the
photography using a 6.3 megapixel Canon D60 with a 100-400mm image
stabilized lens, which yields an effective magnification of just under
13X, and a 5 megapixel Canon G5 attached to a digiscoping eyepiece for
my Pentax scope.

Scott Spangenberg
scottspangenberg(AT)mindspring.com
www.scottspangenberg.com
Amherst, NH 03031
603-673-0525

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: KACastelein and DJLauten <birdsong(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 10:04am

Folks,

When I first saw this bird, I actually reserved judgement because I
wasn't quite sure what it was.  I am not seeing on my screen a well
defined cap, that has lots of rufous, and I don't even find the
supercilium to be very prominent.  I have no experience with adult fall
Sharpies, all the ones we see here are juveniles.  This is not a typical
juvenile at all, which it seems everyone agrees with.  I think Ken has
some valid points, and I am still in the camp that I'd like to hear what
other people think.  I am open to changing my mind, but I am still
leaning towards Pectoral.

Dave Lauten

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Rich Hoyer <calliope(AT)THERIVER.COM>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 9:15am

Hi Birders,

Now with much expert opinions in favor of Pectoral Sandpiper, I'm not above
reconsidering my opinion (Lauten's response arrived 4 seconds before mine).
I don't get a lot of shorebird experience here in AZ, and I've certainly
never seen an adult Sharp-tail this late in the season.

I'm not so sure the lack of chevrons on the underside can so easily be
dismissed as I suggested. The only reference to this I can find in my
limited library is Paulson's Shorebirds of the Pacific Northwest, which
states that even worn individuals show these clearly.

However, I'm confused that others say that the bird has no rufous in the
crown and a buffy supercilium. It's always a problem when judging photos
(especially on computers) but my iMac clearly shows a well-defined rufous
cap and a white, flaring supercilium. The bill does look long, which favors
Pectoral. (Didn't Julian mean to say long, not short?)

How many of us here have seen adult Sharp-tailed Sandpipers in
mid-September? Are there any Australians here who can chime in? Can the
pattern of the scapulars tell us anything?

I wouldn't place any importance on the birds posture or shape.

Good Birding,

Rich
---
Rich Hoyer
Tucson, Arizona

Senior Field Leader
WINGS, Inc.
http://www.wingsbirds.com
---

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Kenn Kaufman <kennk(AT)IX.NETCOM.COM>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 9:19am

I'm looking at these pix on a small laptop monitor, and won't have a
chance to look at them on a good monitor for several days; but from what
I can see here, I'm not ready to jump on the Pectoral bandwagon.  At
least some of the people who are immediately ruling out Sharp-tailed seem
to be thinking only of juveniles, and of course the juv Sharp-tailed is a
very different creature.  But molting adult Sharp-taileds in late summer
and fall can be very tricky.  They can indeed lose most of the chevrons
on the flanks while retaining most of the streaking or spotting on the
chest.  The relative lack of markings in the center of the lower chest on
the Chatham bird, clearly visible in several of Scott's photos, seems
interesting, and I think the I.D. of this bird should be pursued a little
further.  Would any of the experts from the U.K. or Europe care to weigh
in on this?  I know that molting adult Sharp-taileds have caused some
headaches in Britain in the past.

Kenn Kaufman
Tucson, Arizona

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Mystery Warbler from NJ
From: Mike Patterson <celata(AT)pacifier.com>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 10:24am

You know my first reaction was: why isn't this a Common
Yellowthroat?  Aside from the uncharacteristically bright
yellow in the tail, that is.

I actually thought I was seeing rictal bristals, barely
visible on right side of the bill (bird's right).  So,
I figured: let's be provacative....

But after this note, I downloaded the photo and made
it really big.  What I was calling rictal bristals was
actually a digital halo.  No rictal bristal on this bird
that I can find.  That eliminates a lot of warblers.

But that's still a lot of yellow in the tail.  Way
more than I expect in a west coast hatch-year yellowthroat
and I handle 20 or 30 a year.....

Sebastian Patti wrote:
>
>  . .the bird doesn't seem to have rictal bristles . . .that would militate
> in FAVOR of Common Yellowthroat, si???
>
> sebastianpatti(AT)hotmail.com
> Sebastian T. Patti
> (Lincoln Park)
> Chicago, ILLINOIS 60614-3354
> PHONE: 312/603-4416 (o) 773/248-0570 (h)
> FAX: 312/603-2041 (o) 773/248-0264 (h)
>

--
Mike Patterson
Astoria, OR
celata(AT)pacifier.com

I do not know which to prefer,
  The beauty of inflections
    Or the beauty of innuendoes,
      The blackbird whistling
        Or just after.

                                - Wallace Stevens

http://www.pacifier.com/~mpatters/bird/bird.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: KACastelein and DJLauten <birdsong(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 7:57am

Scott,

I tend to agree with Tim Janzen on this bird.  I am not seeing a
distinct rufous cap, salmony wash across the breast, and there is too
much streaking across the breast - features that hint that the bird is
not a Sharp-tail.  I'm curious to hear what others think.

Dave Lauten
Bandon OR
birdsong(AT)harborside.com

Scott Spangenberg wrote:

> On Friday September 5, Rich Frechette, Eric Masterson, Dan Fallon, and
> I travelled to South Beach in Chatham, Massachusetts.  While we never
> found either the Curlew Sandpiper or any Stints, we saw essentially the
> same variety of shorebirds that other folks reported for South Beach.
>
> Most interesting, however, was a thick-necked, dumpy Calidris sandpiper
> with a bicolored bill and yellow legs whose profile looked nothing like
> any Pectoral Sandpiper we had ever seen before.  This bird positively
> gave us fits, and I would like to have your feedback on what you think
> it is.  Although I thought that it was probably Pectoral Sandpiper,
> there were a number of details about it what I saw that really bothered
> me, not the least of which was the shape of the bird.
>
> I spent most of my evenings over the last week studying my photos and
> comparing them to illustrations, photos, and descriptions of Pectoral,
> Sharp-tailed, and Cox's Sandpipers (not much available on the last one
> of course).  My perception now is that Sharp-tailed is a much better
> fit than Pectoral, but I have no prior experience with Sharp-tailed,
> and this bird appears to be an adult.  So I need some feedback from
> folks who have more experience with this species and differentiating it
> from Pectoral Sandpiper.  I have posted some photos with captions at
> http://www.scottspangenberg.com/Birds/CalidrisSp01/
>
> GENERAL IMPRESSIONS
> -Large size compared to Semipalmated Sandpiper and Semi-palmated
> Plover, same size as nearby Pectoral Sandpipers.
> -Yellow legs
> -Bicolored Bill
> -Neckless appearance while active as well as while inactive
> (In other words, this bird had the general characteristics of Pectoral,
> Sharp-tailed, or Cox's Sandpipers, but did not have the form of
> Pectoral Sandpiper, the most likely candidate at this site and time.)
>
> SPECIFIC DETAILS OF OBSERVATIONS
> **-The bird appeared thick-necked and hunched at all times. When the
> bird stretched forward to feed, there was only the slightest
> indentation at the back of the neck. (See photos on my web site.)
> Neckless appearance (perfect match with outline of Sharp-tailed
> illustration in Sibley) even when feeding.
> -White throat instead of merely a white chin as PESA exhibits.
> -Obvious necklace below the throat (described variously as a necklace
> or thin gorget, which is not mentioned for any PESA plumage.  I found
> this on many photos of STSA obtained with a Google image search, and on
> no photos of PESA.
> -Cap contrasts strongly with lower parts of head.  In a photo of the
> top of the birds head, this contrast goes all the way around the head.
> In other photos, there does not appear to be much contrast at the back
> of the head.  The contains rufous/chestnut, but is not strikingly
> rufous/chestnut. I found what I read about the usefulness of these two
> points for species separation a little confusing unless they only apply
> to juvenile birds.
> **-Supercilium widens behind eye, and while not as bold as I would have
> expected for this to be a Sharp-tailed, is bolder than supercilium of
> any other PESA we saw, or any photos or illustrations that I have been
> able to find.
> - A buffy white eye ring that was obvious even when the bird was facing
> us obliquely. (I am somewhat confused about the significance of this
> observation. One of the things I read seemed to suggest that Pectoral
> does not have an obvious eye ring, but that doesn't seem to always be
> true in my experience.  I certainly have been able to perceive eye
> rings on Pectoral Sandpipers before.  Perhaps what is meant is an
> obvious and complete eye ring?)
> -A dark eye stripe in front (dark lores) and behind the eye, with
> obvious contrast between the eye stripe and the area immediately below
> it
> -Bicolored bill, with orange base of bill (although a couple time it
> looked olive) and the outer part was black. The bill curves down
> slightly.  Our collective observation through the scopes was that the
> orange was limited to the base of the bill, but some of my photos seem
> to show that more than the base is lighter than the tip.
> -Scapular set is complete (not missing or whitish at either end),
> therefore the plumage is not juvenile.  Heavy feather wear adds weight
> to the idea that this is an adult bird.  There is some rufous on the
> scapular feathers, and some white or buffy-white edges as well instead
> of brown scapulars with plain buffy edges as I expect for Pectoral.
> -Feathers of upperparts in general have dark brown centers and buffy
> edges.
> **-Upper tail coverts have rufous edges instead of being dark brown all
> the way to the edge
> **-While the bird did not run around as much as any of the other
> shorebirds, it was nevertheless quite active while feeding, which made
> it difficult to judge tail shape.  Fortunately, one of my photos caught
> the bird with a slightly raised tail, and lowered primaries and
> tertials. The retrices are quite sharply pointed, and the middle two
> are quite a bit longer than the adjacent feathers.  In flight, there
> was no big flash of white on the sides of the tail.
> **-Streaking does not extend below carpal joint as one would expect
> with PESA, and appears to have much less streaking in the center of the
> breast than on the sides.  This is most apparent from a 45 degree view.
>  Seen straight on, the bird has very light streaking across a large
> part of the central breast, and heavy streaking is limited to the
> sides.  The streaking on breast has a subtle but perceptible
> buffy/yellowish wash underneath. This was is more apparent in the
> photos than during our observation.
> **-Subtle gray chevron marks on underparts at the flanks, just below
> the edge of the wing, which appear to be fading rapidly.  Further back,
> adjacent to the undertail coverts, there are dark arrow-shaped marks.
> These were not as readily apparent in the photos as through my scope,
> so I included some photos where I have cranked up the contrast to bring
> out these marks.  I have never ever seen a Pectoral with these marks,
> but these marks are specifically described for Sharp-tailed Sandpiper,
> I have found them on every illustration of Sharp-tailed that I can get
> my hands on.
> -Long tarsus and short tibia on yellow legs without any green cast.
> The small areas of the fronts were black.  Most of the time, the only
> part of the tibia that was visible was the joint with the tarsus, even
> when the bird was leaning forward and down.
>
> Our spotting scopes included 60mm Kowa, 60mm Bushnell, and 80mm Pentax
> scopes, with 20X and 20-60X eyepieces on the Pentax.  I did the
> photography using a 6.3 megapixel Canon D60 with a 100-400mm image
> stabilized lens, which yields an effective magnification of just under
> 13X, and a 5 megapixel Canon G5 attached to a digiscoping eyepiece for
> my Pentax scope.
>
>
> Scott Spangenberg
> scottspangenberg(AT)mindspring.com
> www.scottspangenberg.com
> Amherst, NH 03031
> 603-673-0525
>
>

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Rich Hoyer <calliope(AT)THERIVER.COM>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 8:00am

Hi Birders,

I would agree that this is an adult Sharp-tailed Sandpiper. The worn
condtion and dull color of the wing coverts and scapulars indicate an adult.
The amount of rufous and the grizzled streaking in the face are perfect for
Sharp-tailed, and the manner of the breast streaking seems to eliminate
Pectoral. It does seem a bit clean below, but that could easily be the
result of post-breeding body molt, and even then, some streaks are visible
on the flanks. Excellent photos sure help.

Good Birding,

Rich
---
Rich Hoyer
Tucson, Arizona

Senior Field Leader
WINGS, Inc.
http://www.wingsbirds.com
---

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)wxs.nl>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 1:34pm

Pectoral, Killian, is not just THEIR bird. It breeds well into the Taimyr
Peninsula and my guess is that most Pectorals in Europe originate from
Arctic Russia rather than the New World. Having said this I don't think the
bird in question is either a Pectoral or a Sharp-tail. I vote for the
unknown hybrid.
Cheers, Norman

Killian wrote:> At the risk of sounding as if I'm trying to teach the
proverbial grandmother
> how to suck eggs - after all, Pectoral is one of YOUR  birds - I really
> can't see anything in these photos to indicate it is not simply  a
moulting
> adult Pectoral, with perhaps an unusual breast pattern. I don't see adult
> Pecs at this time of year (the vast majority of birds that show up in
Europe
> in the fall are juveniles) so I don't know how unusual it is for a bird to
> have such reduced markings in the centre of the breast, but even if it is
> exceptional, there is far more 'wrong' for an adult Sharp-tailed, in my
> view.<
>
> Killian Mullarney
> Ireland

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Martin Reid <upupa(AT)AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 9:05am

I agree with Julian that this is an adult Pec Sand (a juv should show much
fresher, brighter scap and covert fringes, and less-worn primaries.)  I
have noted that some Pecs have light streaking on the most-lateral lower
flanks, and that from time to time these are quite visible, creating a
"molting-STSA-like" effect.  More importantly, there is no sign of any
streaks/marks on the undertail coverts - some of which is visible in a
couple of the images; adult STSA retains much of this utc streaking in
Basic plumage, and I would expect to see at least some hint of it in a bird
in this stage of plumage (mostly Alternate.)  Finally, STSA tend to have a
shorter, darker bill with less pale at the base - the bill on this bird
looks typical of Pec. Sand, to me.
The apparent unevenness of the pectoral streaking is unusual, but not
unprecedented - I've seen a couple of birds like this at this time of year
(and like Scott I gave them a lot of scrutiny!)
Cheers,
Martin

Martin Reid
Fort Worth, Texas
mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
http://www.martinreid.com

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Killian Mullarney <kmullarney(AT)EIRCOM.NET>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 9:34am

At the risk of sounding as if I'm trying to teach the proverbial grandmother
how to suck eggs - after all, Pectoral is one of YOUR  birds - I really
can't see anything in these photos to indicate it is not simply  a moulting
adult Pectoral, with perhaps an unusual breast pattern. I don't see adult
Pecs at this time of year (the vast majority of birds that show up in Europe
in the fall are juveniles) so I don't know how unusual it is for a bird to
have such reduced markings in the centre of the breast, but even if it is
exceptional, there is far more 'wrong' for an adult Sharp-tailed, in my
view.

Killian Mullarney
Ireland

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rich Hoyer" <calliope(AT)THERIVER.COM>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 3:59 PM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper

> Hi Birders,
>
> I would agree that this is an adult Sharp-tailed Sandpiper. The worn
> condtion and dull color of the wing coverts and scapulars indicate an
adult.
> The amount of rufous and the grizzled streaking in the face are perfect
for
> Sharp-tailed, and the manner of the breast streaking seems to eliminate
> Pectoral. It does seem a bit clean below, but that could easily be the
> result of post-breeding body molt, and even then, some streaks are visible
> on the flanks. Excellent photos sure help.
>
> Good Birding,
>
> Rich
> ---
> Rich Hoyer
> Tucson, Arizona
>
> Senior Field Leader
> WINGS, Inc.
> http://www.wingsbirds.com
> ---
>

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Sharp-tailed Sand id.
From: julian hough <jrhough1(AT)SNET.NET>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 10:11am

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

To expand on some of my comments, given the responses on this bird.

To me, Sharp-taileds have a dumpy jizz and a shorter, slightly decurved bill.
The rufous cap looks set far forward on the head and accentuates the prominence
of the somewhat flared super behind the eye. The eyering is prominent and all
the above contributes to a characteristic look.

The underparts are not what I would expect from a Sharp-tailed at this time of
year, even for a moulting bird. The moult would make the underparts appear a lot
 messier (especially on the lower breast?) in life rather than the clean look
shown by Scott's photos. The pattern on Scotts bird looks too neatly confined to
 the upperbreast.

I think the pattern of the scapulars show more pointed centres than Pec (I'm at
work so i'm going from memory).

Julian Hough,
CT, USA

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

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Harry Hussey <hhussey3(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 3:05pm

Hi Norman,
  Re:"my guess is that most Pectorals in Europe
originate from Arctic Russia rather than the New
World."
I wouldn't say so:look at the high numbers in Ireland
of late,accompanied by a few Semi-P Sands,White-rumped
Sands,Am.Golden Plovers,LB
Dowitchers,Buff-breasts,Lesser Yellowlegs,Baird's
Sand,Stilt Sand,Wilson's Phalarope and a poss.Semi-P
Plover!Surely at least THESE Pecs have crossed the
Atlantic?
As for the mystery bird:well,I've only seen one
Sharp-tailed and all my Pecs have been juvs,but this
doesn't look that different from a Pec to me,as I'm
sure that there must be some variation within the
species(but then I'm writing this after a long day in
the field and I may change my mind when more alert!).
                 Harry Hussey,Cork,Ireland
--- "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)WXS.NL>
wrote:
> Pectoral, Killian, is not just THEIR bird. It breeds
> well into the Taimyr
> Peninsula and my guess is that most Pectorals in
> Europe originate from
> Arctic Russia rather than the New World. Having said
> this I don't think the
> bird in question is either a Pectoral or a
> Sharp-tail. I vote for the
> unknown hybrid.
> Cheers, Norman
>
> Killian wrote:> At the risk of sounding as if I'm
> trying to teach the
> proverbial grandmother
> > how to suck eggs - after all, Pectoral is one of
> YOUR  birds - I really
> > can't see anything in these photos to indicate it
> is not simply  a
> moulting
> > adult Pectoral, with perhaps an unusual breast
> pattern. I don't see adult
> > Pecs at this time of year (the vast majority of
> birds that show up in
> Europe
> > in the fall are juveniles) so I don't know how
> unusual it is for a bird to
> > have such reduced markings in the centre of the
> breast, but even if it is
> > exceptional, there is far more 'wrong' for an
> adult Sharp-tailed, in my
> > view.<
> >
> > Killian Mullarney
> > Ireland

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: "Kevin J. McGowan" <kjm2(AT)CORNELL.EDU>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 8:33am

At 11:16 PM 9/15/2003 -0400, Scott Spangenberg wrote:
>On Friday September 5, ...  My perception now is that Sharp-tailed is a
>much better
>fit than Pectoral, but I have no prior experience with Sharp-tailed,
>and this bird appears to be an adult.  So I need some feedback from
>folks who have more experience with this species and differentiating it
>from Pectoral Sandpiper.  I have posted some photos with captions at
>http://www.scottspangenberg.com/Birds/CalidrisSp01/

It certainly is an interesting bird, and I can see why it is being
considered as a Sharp-tail.  Still, on a quick look, I'd have to go with
Pectoral.  The shape characters just point to a cold or otherwise fluffed
individual, and not to Sharp-tail.  In fact, none of the photographs show
it in what I consider the rather characteristic "leaning forward" posture
that Sharp-tails often adopt.  It does not have much of a capped
appearance, perhaps more than most Pectorals, but nothing near Sharp-tail,
and it has no rufous in the cap.  The eyestripe is cream, not white. The
chest band is not buffy, and has a lot of streaking, as in Pectoral.  The
dark necklace on the chest looks to be an artifact of the extreme hunched
posture.  (If you look at img_0873, the neck ring is obvious, but if you go
to the next one, img_0869, where the neck is stretched out just a bit, the
ring turns into a diffuse dark spot.)  The undertail coverts are unmarked,
and the few faint dark flank marks look just right for Pectoral Sandpiper
(as shown by every individual in my photographic collection for which I
have sufficient detail).  They do not look to me to be chevrons, but each
feather seems to have a dark rachis.

Kevin

*****************************************************
Kevin J. McGowan
Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology
159 Sapsucker Woods Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
607/254-2432
fax 607/254-2111
kjm2(AT)cornell.edu
http://birds.cornell.edu/crows/

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: possible sharp-tailed sandpiper
From: Jim Barton <redwingatfp1986(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 10:11am

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

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

    Hello, I saw a bird in the Belle Isle Marsh in East Boston in =
September a number of years ago whose upper parts were much like those =
of the bird in question.  But what attracted me to the EBoston bird as a =
possible Short-Tailed were chest and flank markings very different from =
the Chatham bird and very different from what I was accustomed to seeing =
on Pectoral.  The chest was lightly and unevenly streaked/spotted.  The =
background was pale. .  Some of the markings extended half way down the =
chest.  Other markings did not extend so far.  The markings were sparse, =
reflecting a late stage of molt. On the Chatham bird,  the markings on =
the chest are quite dense and do appear to have an even rather than a =
ragged lower edge. =20

    There were chevrons on the flanks of the EBoston bird.  I have =
trouble finding markings on the flanks of the Chatham bird. The bill of =
the EBoston bird was shorter than the bills I'm accustomed to seeing on =
Pecs.   The bill of the Chatham bird looks long to me, and is what I'd =
expect to see on a Pec. =20

    On looking up STSA in my books, I came to the conclusion that the =
chest markings, flank markings and bill of the EBoston bird were all =
consistent with that species.  On the other hand, I had not noted a dark =
cap, a prominent supercilium or a white eye-ring in the field  So I =
reported the bird to our shorebird census as Large calidrid sp.=20

    Maybe that's what's in order here.  The upper parts of the Chatham =
bird look much like the upper parts of the EBoston bird, which gave me =
pause in calling that bird STSA.  The under parts of the Chatham bird =
don't resemble those of the EBoston bird, which my research did give me =
to believe were consistent with STSA. =20

    Scott, thanks so much for photos and for mounting them in way that =
makes in easy to switch back and forth between them.

     Jim Barton
redwingatfp1986(AT)comcast.net
Cambridge, MA
US Coordinator, Proact
campaigning for birds and their habitats
before it's too late
www.proact-campaigns.net

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

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: julian hough <jrhough1(AT)SNET.NET>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 8:08am

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

To reply to Dave, I agree with Tim. The bird is an adult Pectoral Sand.
Adult Sharp-tails have basically the whole underparts scalloped, not a distinct
pec band of streaks. The lack of a rufous cap and a short, somewhat slightly
down-curved bill also eliminate Sharp-tailed.

Hope this helps Scott sleep a little better...

Julian Hough,
Ct, USA

KACastelein and DJLauten <birdsong(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM> wrote:
Scott,

I tend to agree with Tim Janzen on this bird. I am not seeing a
distinct rufous cap, salmony wash across the breast, and there is too
much streaking across the breast - features that hint that the bird is
not a Sharp-tail. I'm curious to hear what others think.

Dave Lauten
Bandon OR
birdsong(AT)harborside.com

Scott Spangenberg wrote:

> On Friday September 5, Rich Frechette, Eric Masterson, Dan Fallon, and
> I travelled to South Beach in Chatham, Massachusetts. While we never
> found either the Curlew Sandpiper or any Stints, we saw essentially the
> same variety of shorebirds that other folks reported for South Beach.
>
> Most interesting, however, was a thick-necked, dumpy Calidris sandpiper
> with a bicolored bill and yellow legs whose profile looked nothing like
> any Pectoral Sandpiper we had ever seen before. This bird positively
> gave us fits, and I would like to have your feedback on what you think
> it is. Although I thought that it was probably Pectoral Sandpiper,
> there were a number of details about it what I saw that really bothered
> me, not the least of which was the shape of the bird.
>
> I spent most of my evenings over the last week studying my photos and
> comparing them to illustrations, photos, and descriptions of Pectoral,
> Sharp-tailed, and Cox's Sandpipers (not much available on the last one
> of course). My perception now is that Sharp-tailed is a much better
> fit than Pectoral, but I have no prior experience with Sharp-tailed,
> and this bird appears to be an adult. So I need some feedback from
> folks who have more experience with this species and differentiating it
> from Pectoral Sandpiper. I have posted some photos with captions at
> http://www.scottspangenberg.com/Birds/CalidrisSp01/
>
> GENERAL IMPRESSIONS
> -Large size compared to Semipalmated Sandpiper and Semi-palmated
> Plover, same size as nearby Pectoral Sandpipers.
> -Yellow legs
> -Bicolored Bill
> -Neckless appearance while active as well as while inactive
> (In other words, this bird had the general characteristics of Pectoral,
> Sharp-tailed, or Cox's Sandpipers, but did not have the form of
> Pectoral Sandpiper, the most likely candidate at this site and time.)
>
> SPECIFIC DETAILS OF OBSERVATIONS
> **-The bird appeared thick-necked and hunched at all times. When the
> bird stretched forward to feed, there was only the slightest
> indentation at the back of the neck. (See photos on my web site.)
> Neckless appearance (perfect match with outline of Sharp-tailed
> illustration in Sibley) even when feeding.
> -White throat instead of merely a white chin as PESA exhibits.
> -Obvious necklace below the throat (described variously as a necklace
> or thin gorget, which is not mentioned for any PESA plumage. I found
> this on many photos of STSA obtained with a Google image search, and on
> no photos of PESA.
> -Cap contrasts strongly with lower parts of head. In a photo of the
> top of the birds head, this contrast goes all the way around the head.
> In other photos, there does not appear to be much contrast at the back
> of the head. The contains rufous/chestnut, but is not strikingly
> rufous/chestnut. I found what I read about the usefulness of these two
> points for species separation a little confusing unless they only apply
> to juvenile birds.
> **-Supercilium widens behind eye, and while not as bold as I would have
> expected for this to be a Sharp-tailed, is bolder than supercilium of
> any other PESA we saw, or any photos or illustrations that I have been
> able to find.
> - A buffy white eye ring that was obvious even when the bird was facing
> us obliquely. (I am somewhat confused about the significance of this
> observation. One of the things I read seemed to suggest that Pectoral
> does not have an obvious eye ring, but that doesn't seem to always be
> true in my experience. I certainly have been able to perceive eye
> rings on Pectoral Sandpipers before. Perhaps what is meant is an
> obvious and complete eye ring?)
> -A dark eye stripe in front (dark lores) and behind the eye, with
> obvious contrast between the eye stripe and the area immediately below
> it
> -Bicolored bill, with orange base of bill (although a couple time it
> looked olive) and the outer part was black. The bill curves down
> slightly. Our collective observation through the scopes was that the
> orange was limited to the base of the bill, but some of my photos seem
> to show that more than the base is lighter than the tip.
> -Scapular set is complete (not missing or whitish at either end),
> therefore the plumage is not juvenile. Heavy feather wear adds weight
> to the idea that this is an adult bird. There is some rufous on the
> scapular feathers, and some white or buffy-white edges as well instead
> of brown scapulars with plain buffy edges as I expect for Pectoral.
> -Feathers of upperparts in general have dark brown centers and buffy
> edges.
> **-Upper tail coverts have rufous edges instead of being dark brown all
> the way to the edge
> **-While the bird did not run around as much as any of the other
> shorebirds, it was nevertheless quite active while feeding, which made
> it difficult to judge tail shape. Fortunately, one of my photos caught
> the bird with a slightly raised tail, and lowered primaries and
> tertials. The retrices are quite sharply pointed, and the middle two
> are quite a bit longer than the adjacent feathers. In flight, there
> was no big flash of white on the sides of the tail.
> **-Streaking does not extend below carpal joint as one would expect
> with PESA, and appears to have much less streaking in the center of the
> breast than on the sides. This is most apparent from a 45 degree view.
> Seen straight on, the bird has very light streaking across a large
> part of the central breast, and heavy streaking is limited to the
> sides. The streaking on breast has a subtle but perceptible
> buffy/yellowish wash underneath. This was is more apparent in the
> photos than during our observation.
> **-Subtle gray chevron marks on underparts at the flanks, just below
> the edge of the wing, which appear to be fading rapidly. Further back,
> adjacent to the undertail coverts, there are dark arrow-shaped marks.
> These were not as readily apparent in the photos as through my scope,
> so I included some photos where I have cranked up the contrast to bring
> out these marks. I have never ever seen a Pectoral with these marks,
> but these marks are specifically described for Sharp-tailed Sandpiper,
> I have found them on every illustration of Sharp-tailed that I can get
> my hands on.
> -Long tarsus and short tibia on yellow legs without any green cast.
> The small areas of the fronts were black. Most of the time, the only
> part of the tibia that was visible was the joint with the tarsus, even
> when the bird was leaning forward and down.
>
> Our spotting scopes included 60mm Kowa, 60mm Bushnell, and 80mm Pentax
> scopes, with 20X and 20-60X eyepieces on the Pentax. I did the
> photography using a 6.3 megapixel Canon D60 with a 100-400mm image
> stabilized lens, which yields an effective magnification of just under
> 13X, and a 5 megapixel Canon G5 attached to a digiscoping eyepiece for
> my Pentax scope.
>
>
> Scott Spangenberg
> scottspangenberg(AT)mindspring.com
> www.scottspangenberg.com
> Amherst, NH 03031
> 603-673-0525
>
>

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

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Gary Rosenberg <ghrosenberg(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 16 Sep 2003 11:57pm

Hi Everyone,

I have been following this thread with interest and thought the readers
might find this set of video captures interesting. The quality of the
captures is not great - sorry! The bird was video-taped at Gambell in
early June, 1999. I remember the bird caught my eye because it was with
a "normal" looking Pectoral Sandpiper, and this individual was
extremely bright in plumage, with lots of bright rufous edging,
especially on the cheek and crown, had a fairly prominent supercilium,
and had some buff wash on the breast. Hopefully you can see these
features on these jpegs. Just shows how variable Pecs can be!

http://home.comcast.net/~ghrosenberg/Pectoral_Sandpiper_1.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~ghrosenberg/Pectoral_Sandpiper_2.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~ghrosenberg/Pectoral_Sandpiper_3.jpg

Gary

Gary H. Rosenberg
Tucson, AZ
ghrosenberg(AT)comcast.net

http://www.wingsbirds.com
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/ghrosenberg/ArizonaBirdCommittee.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Pec Sand
From: julian hough <jrhough1(AT)SNET.NET>
Date: 17 Sep 2003 4:25am

Gary's shots of the Gambell bird, and it may not be as bright on my
monitor, show a bird that doesn't look too unusual from birds I have
seen in summer on the east coast.
I have seen a few birds which have had brighter faces and richer
chestnut crowns, but still, these birds if seen well,  fall short of the
basic suite of characters to suggest a Sharp-tailed Sand.
Based on some comments on this thread, I think that the lack of records
in the US of adult Sharp-tailed Sandpipers is probably the handicapping
feature while in Europe, it seems that generally most records involve a
higher proportion of adults as opposed to juveniles.

Julian Hough,
CT, USA

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Santa Cruz CA Nutting's Flycatcher - voice data!
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 17 Sep 2003 11:05am

Birders

Joe Morlan has posted some interesting new information regarding the Santa
Cruz Nutting's Flycatcher. This involves some call notes captured on video
which have been digitized and compared to calls of Ash-throated and
Nutting's Flycatcher. I prepared some sonograms to aid in comparison. I
think the sonograms and calls speak for themselves.

http://home.pacbell.net/robbie22/Flycatcher/flycatcher.htm

Go to the bottom of the page for the new information

cheers

Alvaro

Alvaro Jaramillo
chucao(AT)comcast.net ***** NOTE NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS****
Montara, California

Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide
http://www.fieldguides.com/home.htm

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: [surfbirdsnews]Gull in Colorado
From: Dick Newell <dick.newell(AT)MACUNLIMITED.NET>
Date: 18 Sep 2003 4:23am

I would put my money on Kelp Gull, I cannot see it as a Lesser Black-backed
Gull. Although perhaps not quite the same thing, this prompted me to post
one of my Cape Gull (= vetula Kelp Gull) pictures here:

http://www.magikcircle.com/birds/image.asp?title_id=940

All aspects of structure and soft part colour (except the iris of course)
seem spot on. The Colorado gull seems to lack a mirror on P10, explained
because it is growing a primary so the outer primaries are of a subadult.

Being on a northern hemisphere primary moult schedule doesn't bother me.

Dick Newell, Cambridge, UK

On 18/9/03 10:41 am, "Andrew Birch" <andyrbirch(AT)yahoo.com> wrote:

> Some photos of an interesting gull in Colorado are
> posted on the N American page at the link below.
> Originally thought to possibly be a Lesser
> Black-backed, there are now obvious concerns over bill
> shape, mantle and leg colour being reminiscent of Kelp
> Gull. Any thoughts, help from anyone appreciated.
> Thanks, Andy
>
> http://www.surfbirds.com/cgi-bin/gallery/display.cgi?gallery=gallery10
> _______________________________________________
> surfbirdsnews mailing list
> surfbirdsnews(AT)lists.surfbirds.com
> http://lists.surfbirds.com/mailman/listinfo/surfbirdsnews
>

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: A cursory review of 'The Gull Book'
From: Annika Forsten <annika.forsten(AT)FI.INTRUM.COM>
Date: 18 Sep 2003 5:44am

Hi everybody,

Jonathan Simms wrote some nice things about the new gull book and I agree.

However:

>The Ugly
>- one page of errata that came with the volume. Some of us could also see
>this as a good thing, but considering the considerable delays in publishing
>this book, it would have been nice to have it right the first time.

Unfortunately this errata is only the tip of the iceberg, and even the
errata contains an error. In fact, the captions for the photographs are the
wrong ones, in not just a handful of cases, but in lots. The mix-up is so
bad that it is impossible to make any sense of it, ie. figure out which
caption belongs to which photograph. In fact some captions seem to belong
to photographs not in the book at all. (For examples see photographs
571-578, they are all wrong, although some seem to have a suitable caption.)

In due course a correct set of captions will be published somewhere by
someone, until then, have fun trying to identify the correct and the
erroneous captions. And watch this space for info on where you can find the
correction file. With the correct set of captions, the book will be very
useful indeed.

annika forsten

annika.forsten(AT)fi.intrum.com    tel: +358-(0)9-22911812
+358(0)50-5953779 mobile          +358(0)9-22911889 fax

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Gull Book, revisited (fwd)
From: Ian Paulsen <birdbooker(AT)ZIPCON.NET>
Date: 18 Sep 2003 1:48pm

HI:
 FYI

--
Ian Paulsen
Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
A.K.A.: "Birdbooker"
"Rallidae all the way!"

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 15:33:23 -0500
From: Anthony X. Hertzel <axhertzel(AT)sihope.com>
To: tweeters(AT)u.washington.edu
Subject: Gull Book, revisited

After compiling five pages of errors in the new Olsen and Larsson
gull book, I finally called the publisher to try and learn if A) they
are aware of the problem, and B) what they plan on doing about it.

It turns out that Princeton University Press was actually not
directly involved in the production of the book but bought it from a
second party whom they declined to identify (though I have my
suspicions who this might be). Princeton is aware of most of the
errors and decided just yesterday to recall the book. The man I spoke
with was uncertain what the method would be for the recall or how
people would be notified, but full refunds will be given. He was also
uncertain if the book would be reissued with corrections but thought
this likely.

Unfortunately, if you've discovered errors in the book, at this point
there isn't anyone in particular that you can contact. This may
change but exactly how and when has yet to be decided.

--
Anthony X. Hertzel -- axhertzel(AT)sihope.com

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Gull Book, revisited
From: Michel Bertrand <bertrmi(AT)colba.net>
Date: 18 Sep 2003 3:14pm

Forwarded by Ian Paulsen :
> Unfortunately, if you've discovered errors in the book, at this
> point there isn't anyone in particular that you can contact.
> Anthony X. Hertzel
_____________________________

Why not the authors ?  They will surely be involved if a corrected edition
is produced.  I still have not the book ; but, having it and finding errors,
I would write to Klaus Malling Olsen.

     MICHEL BERTRAND
     Sainte-Julie, Qc
     bertrmi(AT)colba.net

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Gull Book, revisited
From: Glenn A dEntremont <gdentremont(AT)JUNO.COM>
Date: 18 Sep 2003 6:48pm

To be fair to the author(s) and working in the printing industry for a
few years, these errors could be in the production of the book;
especially if produced in a non-English speaking country.  The half-tones
(pictures) are done separately from the prose and then reunited.  It is
amazing how this process can go wrong.  If printing in a language not
your own, how will the pressperson know if it does not make sense?  Also,
there is no way a press operator will know if the captions to half-tones
are correct.

Secondly, dealing with imports, it is obvious that some manufacturers
abroad (countries?) do little, if any, QA (Quality Assurance).  Our
company is currently trying to salvage a customer from such a QA mess.

        Glenn

>
> Why not the authors ?  They will surely be involved if a corrected
> edition
> is produced.

Glenn d'Entremont
gdentremont(AT)juno.com
Stoughton, MA

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re + : Gull Book, revisited
From: Michel Bertrand <bertrmi(AT)colba.net>
Date: 19 Sep 2003 8:52am

Glenn A dEntremont, answering my previous message has written :

> To be fair to the author(s)

I'm just adding that I was not wanting to be unfair with the author(s) and I
apologize if my message has been understood as so. My goal was only
practical. I had understood that some people were not knowing where to send
their comments about the new Gull guide because there are copies coming both
from Princeton University Press and Helm. I have also worked in edition and
was only meaning that "normally" the author(s) are asked for their
corrections when a revised edition is produced. So, as there are two
publishers for that book, I was suggesting that the most effective way to
send comments would be to send them to Klaus Malling Olsen, the author of
the text. It could be a good idea to do it with copies to Princeton and Helm
which will know, then, that the author have received such comments.

Unfair ?  Because it seems Princeton will recall the book, what I wish is to
be able to purchase the corrected edition as soon as possible and I am very
grateful to the authors for producing the guide I was waiting to go a step
forward the Grant's guide.

Be happy...

     MICHEL BERTRAND
     Sainte-Julie, Qc
     bertrmi(AT)colba.net

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Gull book replacement
From: Laurie Larson <llarson(AT)PRINCETON.EDU>
Date: 19 Sep 2003 12:21pm

I wrote to Princeton University Press and asked about the replacement
program. This reply is posted by permission. The web site hasn't been
updated yet; check back later. I assume that purchasers of the European
edition will need to contact Helm.

hope this helps,
Laurie Larson
llarson(AT)princeton.edu

>
> Laurie
>
> Thank you for your email. I am truly sorry about the problems with this
> book. We have issued a recall and there will be a new printing with the
> errors corrected. You will be able to claim a replacement copy once
> the new
> printing is in. Please refer to the website under my name below to see
> details. The notice will be posted within the next few days.
>
> R
>
> Robert Kirk
> Executive Editor - Field Guides & Natural History
> Princeton University Press
> 41 William Street
> Princeton, NJ 08540
> Tel: (609) 258 4884
> Fax: (609) 258 6305
> Email: Robert_Kirk(AT)pupress.princeton.edu
> Website: www.nathist.princeton.edu
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Laurie Larson [mailto:llarson(AT)princeton.edu]
>> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:18 PM
>> To: Robert_Kirk(AT)pupress.princeton.edu
>> Subject: Gulls
>>
>>
>> Mr Kirk,
>>
>> Recently I purchased a copy of the long-awaited new guide to Gull
>> identification by Olsen and Larsson ISBN: 0-691-11327-0. I was
>> disappointed to discover many problems in the photo captions, maps,
>> etc. which appear to be production-related, rather than errors on the
>> author's part. I understand that this is a title originally published
>> in Europe and that Princeton University Press is not responsible for
>> the editorial or production problems. Still, I venture to hope that
>> there will be a corrected edition as soon as possible. Does the Press
>> have any plans for a refund or exchange/replacement program for
>> purchasers of the faulty edition? I will be very grateful for any
>> information you can provide.
>>
>> Many thanks in advance for your time,
>> Laurie Larson
>>

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Gull book replacement
From: Joseph Morlan <jmorlan(AT)CCSF.ORG>
Date: 19 Sep 2003 12:33pm

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 15:20:39 -0400, Laurie Larson <llarson(AT)PRINCETON.EDU>
wrote:

> The web site hasn't been
>updated yet; check back later.

The site has been updated:

http://pup.princeton.edu/titles/7362.html

--
Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA 94044 jmorlan(AT)ccsf.org
California Birding & new rarities http://fog.ccsf.org/~jmorlan/
California Bird Records Committee http://www.wfo-cbrc.org/cbrc/

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Gull Book. Comment from Klaus-Malling Olsen
From: Harry Lehto <hlehto(AT)OJ287.ASTRO.UTU.FI>
Date: 19 Sep 2003 3:32pm

Dear All,
     regarding the new Gull guide by Olsen and Larson. I suggest that you
get in touch with the publishing houses with your suggestions.

I have discussed this matter personally with Klaus-Malling and he asked
me to convey the following message to the BIRDWG01-list (see below).
Please note that my intention is to keep this email as a single one-way
message, but even as such hope that it will clarify the matter a bit.

Regards
Harry J Lehto
hlehto(AT)utu.fi
=======================================================
Klaus says:

"Having just received the photoes for Gulls back from the editor, I am
 currently going through the photoes, published in the Gulls of
 Europe, Asia and North America .

 Indeed, there are a number of mistakes, where photoes have been switched
 off, and the "running order" have been disturbed, most serious in
 Heuglin's Gull and Herring Gulls, but also concerning some plate texts.
 Unfortunetaly, as soon as one photo have been wrongly placed, it affects
 the whole section. Sharp-eyed readers will find number of such
 inconsequences, as I did when comparing the photoes to the captions.
 The maps, too, hold a number of wrong colours, disturbing the impression.
 It is sad, but readers should be aware, that neither a second correcture
 nor a blue print, despite being promised by the editor, ever reached
 the authors. By July, I had expected a second correcture to arrive.
 What I received was the completed book! The original distribution maps
 was less colurfull, but more precise - the new ones, again, were never
 seen and accepted by the author.

 Readers should also be aware, that the author were mailed the colour
 seperations only (for acceptance). The author NEVER received a version
 of the photoes and the photo captions combined! It was most frustrating
 to see, that the book itself contained too many errors, which easily
 could have been found, if the editor has cared about mailing the final
 manuscript to the author, not just one correcture and a set of
 uncommented colour seperations"

Klaus Malling Olsen

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: [surfbirdsnews]Gull in Colorado
From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)wxs.nl>
Date: 19 Sep 2003 3:33pm

In the flight shot of two adults Kelps in Colorado taken this week it seems
primary mo(u)lt has advanced till ca p6 leaving four P7-10 to go. If this is
true these birds seem to have adopted a northern mo(u)lt cycle!
Norman

Dick Newell wrote:>> I would put my money on Kelp Gull, I cannot see it as a
Lesser Black-backed
> Gull. Although perhaps not quite the same thing, this prompted me to post
> one of my Cape Gull (= vetula Kelp Gull) pictures here:
>
> http://www.magikcircle.com/birds/image.asp?title_id=940
>
> All aspects of structure and soft part colour (except the iris of course)
> seem spot on. The Colorado gull seems to lack a mirror on P10, explained
> because it is growing a primary so the outer primaries are of a subadult.
>
> Being on a northern hemisphere primary moult schedule doesn't bother me.
>
> Dick Newell, Cambridge, UK
>
> On 18/9/03 10:41 am, "Andrew Birch" <andyrbirch(AT)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Some photos of an interesting gull in Colorado are
> > posted on the N American page at the link below.
> > Originally thought to possibly be a Lesser
> > Black-backed, there are now obvious concerns over bill
> > shape, mantle and leg colour being reminiscent of Kelp
> > Gull. Any thoughts, help from anyone appreciated.
> > Thanks, Andy
> >
> > http://www.surfbirds.com/cgi-bin/gallery/display.cgi?gallery=gallery10
> > _______________________________________________
> > surfbirdsnews mailing list
> > surfbirdsnews(AT)lists.surfbirds.com
> > http://lists.surfbirds.com/mailman/listinfo/surfbirdsnews

The Virtual Birder

ID-FRONTIERS for September 14-20, 2003

Send feedback on these pages to: BMail@greatblue.com
B-Mail Message Content Disclaimer
Layout Copyright © 1999-2001 Great Blue Media Works
Last Updated: Saturday, October 13, 2007 1:52pm MT

The Virtual Birder

ID-FRONTIERS for September 14-20, 2003

Send feedback on these pages to: BMail@greatblue.com B-Mail Message Content Disclaimer Layout Copyright © 1999-2001 Great Blue Media Works Last Updated: Saturday, October 13, 2007 1:52pm MT

Send feedback on these pages to: BMail@greatblue.com
B-Mail Message Content Disclaimer
Layout Copyright © 1999-2001 Great Blue Media Works
Last Updated: Saturday, October 13, 2007 1:52pm MT