 |
|
|
|
|
ID-FRONTIERS for October 19-25, 2003
[ Prev Week
| Next Week
| Calendar Month
| ID-FRONTIERS Info
]
|
Messages are displayed in the order they were received.
|
| Subject | From | Date | Time |
| 1st year Ruddy Ducks | Ian Paulsen | Sun, 19 Oct 2003 | 5:59pm |
| Possible Franklin's Gull | Bob Richter | Tue, 21 Oct 2003 | 7:07pm |
| Baird's Sparrow | Will Russell | Tue, 21 Oct 2003 | 8:29pm |
| Fw: [WestPalBirds] Eastern Black Redstart in
Holland | Rob Gordijn | Wed, 22 Oct 2003 | 11:54am |
| many new wings (fwd) | Ian Paulsen | Wed, 22 Oct 2003 | 7:50pm |
| Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper | Scott Spangenberg | Thu, 23 Oct 2003 | 5:26am |
| Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper | Kevin McGowan | Thu, 23 Oct 2003 | 6:22am |
| Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper | Peter Adriaens | Thu, 23 Oct 2003 | 10:55am |
| It's a Pec..... | julian hough | Thu, 23 Oct 2003 | 4:55pm |
| Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper | Scott Spangenberg | Thu, 23 Oct 2003 | 9:08pm |
| Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper | Chris Corben | Fri, 24 Oct 2003 | 8:16pm |
| Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper | Steven Mlodinow | Sat, 25 Oct 2003 | 9:04am |
|
To use email addresses replace '(AT)' with '@'.
This is done to confuse the spam 'bots.
|
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: 1st year Ruddy Ducks
From: Ian Paulsen <birdbooker(AT)ZIPCON.NET>
Date: 19 Oct 2003 5:59pm
HI ALL:
I was wondering if anyone knows how to separate 1st year male Ruddy Ducks
from females?
--
Ian Paulsen
Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
A.K.A.: "Birdbooker"
"Rallidae all the way!"
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Possible Franklin's Gull
From: Bob Richter <slothrop(AT)ATTBI.COM>
Date: 21 Oct 2003 7:07pm
I would appreciate opinions on a possible Franklins Gull photographed
21, October 2003 in Duval County (Jacksonville), Florida. A Franklin's
was reported over the weekend just north and at the same location on 10/20.
I have zero experience with this species. The did stand out from the
(many, many) laughing gulls in the area.
Link to the photos is:
http://home.comcast.net/~slothrop/
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Baird's Sparrow
From: Will Russell <willrussell(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 21 Oct 2003 8:29pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Baird's Sparrow is an uncommon and local migrant and winter resident in =
southeastern Arizona. Normally, I look for them in the winter and, when =
found, they show a variably bright ochre-yellow supercilium with =
irregular areas of the same color on the nape and auriculars. David =
Sibley's book shows an average individual. While these tones are =
apparent when looking at a stationary bird, they may not be obvious on a =
flying bird, especially one that's flying directly away as most flushed =
Baird's (and other grassland...) Sparrows seem to do.
This past weekend, I was slowly driving a dirt road on the western edge =
of the San Rafael grassland in Santa Cruz County, Arizona, flushing =
sparrows from the grass near the road. Many of them flew just a few =
feet and perched on the low wires of a nearby fence that paralleled the =
road. On two occasions, I was amazed to flush sparrows with bright =
peach-colored heads. One lit on the fence and proved (as expected...by =
elimination...) to be a Baird's Sparrow but the remarkably bright, =
extensive head and nape color was a complete surprise. =20
It seems possible that very fresh Baird's Sparrows may be remarkably =
bright but that much of the head color fades quickly in the abrasive =
environment of bright sun and grass. Perhaps we wait too long to search =
for Baird's... Birds as bright as the two I saw would be immediately =
identifiable however flushed. =20
Will Russell
will(AT)wingsbirds.com (office)
willrussell(AT)comcast.net (home)
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Fw: [WestPalBirds] Eastern Black Redstart in
Holland
From: Rob Gordijn <robgordijn(AT)GMX.NET>
Date: 22 Oct 2003 11:54am
----- Original Message -----
From: "Leo Boon" <leo(AT)cursorius.com>
To: <WestPalBirds(AT)yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 8:28 PM
Subject: [WestPalBirds] Eastern Black Redstart in Holland
A male Eastern Black Redstart was discovered by Laurens Steijn this
afternoon at IJmuiden, Holland. Late afternoon it was rediscovered and some
30 lucky observers could see the bird.
All features point out towards the subspecies phoenicuroides. I hope to get
some images on the Cursorius site later this evening.
Does anybody has any information, images or articles on these Redstarts
(include articles of hybrids Black Redstart x Redstart). Could you sent this
to me.
Regards,
Leo
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/70TolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
© WestPalBirds
---------------------
WestPalBirds also provides information for the monthly Western Palearctic
bird news section in Birdwatch magazine (www.birdwatch.co.uk)
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WestPalBirds-unsubscribe(AT)yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: many new wings (fwd)
From: Ian Paulsen <birdbooker(AT)ZIPCON.NET>
Date: 22 Oct 2003 7:50pm
HI:
FYI
--
Ian Paulsen
Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
A.K.A.: "Birdbooker"
"Rallidae all the way!"
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 15:35:31 -0700
From: Dennis Paulson <dpaulson(AT)ups.edu>
To: tweeters(AT)u.washington.edu
Subject: many new wings
I've just added a lot of additional shorebird wings, kindly furnished
by the Burke Museum at the University of Washington, to the Slater
Museum wing-photos site
(http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/wingphotos.html). I now have put
wings on the site of pretty much all the bird species we have, but I
will still be adding a few from time to time. Any bird we receive
that is not yet represented on that site gets high priority for
preparation!
Dennis
--
Dennis Paulson, Director phone 253-879-3798
Slater Museum of Natural History fax 253-879-3352
University of Puget Sound e-mail dpaulson(AT)ups.edu
1500 N. Warner, #1088
Tacoma, WA 98416-1088
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/museum.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Scott Spangenberg <scottspangenberg(AT)MINDSPRING.COM>
Date: 23 Oct 2003 5:26am
On Monday, September 15, 2003, at 11:16 PM, 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, [clip...]
Hello, folks
Thanks to all of you who responded to my post about a possible
Sharp-tailed Sandpiper last month. Because duplication of some
comments, and some fairly severe restrictions on the amount of time I
can spend on this, I have decided to address the responses
collectively. Below, I have supplied bold text quoted from a response,
occasionally with some additional variations that add meaning, followed
by my "Spangenberg:" and my response. I apologize for not replying
individually to everyone.
Because many of the responses were made in the context of expected
plumage patterns for juvenile Sharp-tailed Sandpiper, and our bird was
not a juvenile of any species, I was hoping that some folks might
re-examine the images as an adult bird in transitional plumage as Kenn
Kaufman suggested. I was disappointed that this did not occur, but I'm
hoping to spark some more discussion. The new and old images can be
found at http://www.scottspangenberg.com/Birds/CalidrisSp01/
I infer from some of the comments that two or three people may not have
realized that I had posted more than five images. There were actually
twenty images originally, and now there are twenty nine. I had made
diamond shaped controls so people can page through sets of thumbnail
images or individual images in order to make it easier for folks to
compare images. If you look at the top of the thumbnail image column
and the top of the large image area, you will see two diamond shaped
objects in each area. The left of each pair has a triangle on its left
inside, and the right of each pair has a triangle on its right inside.
Clicking on the right diamond advances the thumbnail set or the image.
Clicking on the left diamond rewinds the thumbnail set or the image,
respectively. There were 20 images before, and you should now see 29
images with new ones I've just added to the beginning.
For whatever it's worth, I have based my conclusions on the following
references plus Google image searches for Sharp-tailed and Pectoral
Sandpiper:
Shorebirds: an Identification Guide, by Hayman, Marchant, and Prater
Advanced Birding, by Kenn Kaufman
The Sibley Guide to Birds, by David Allen Sibley
Birds of Europe, by Mullarney, Svensson, Zetterstrom, and Grant
Birds of Europe with North Africa and the Middle East, by Lars Jonsson
Birds of Australia, by Simpson, Day, and Trusler
Australian Birds, second edition, by Slater, Slater, and Slater
1. (Janzen et al) Lack of a rufous cap/the crown doesn't seem to be
quite rufous enough.
(McGowan) 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.
Spangenberg: Well, at least some folks have no trouble seeing rufus in
the crown or perceiving at least something of a cap. Since this bird is
an adult, it doesn't bother me at all that the crown is not rufus
enough for a juvenile Sharp-tailed. Whether it is rufus enough for an
adult Sharp-tailed is a pretty tricky question. From Kaufman's
Advanced Birding and Hayman/Marchant/Prater, I gather that there is a
fair amount of overlap in how rufus/chestnut(bright rufus) there can be
in the crown of an adult of either species, so I don't know how one
could use it for species separation unless the crown was completely
devoid of any rufus color. Several people mentioned a lack of rufus in
the crown. Actually, there is a great deal of rufus in the cap of this
bird; the edges between and around the dark streaks of the crown are
completely enclosed by rufus except for one small grayish white spot at
the front.
This apparent insufficiency of rufus in the crown that some folks have
perceived may also have to do with the fact that the original images I
posted were not adjusted to compensate for differences in the linearity
of different monitors and video controllers. In general, Intel boxes
present the same image darker than Macintosh boxes do. (And I happen
to find it more convenient and efficient to capture and manage my
photos with my Mac than with one of my Windows or Unix boxes.) Sun
computers present the same image as being either darker or lighter than
both (I forget which way.) To remedy this, I have taken some images
that John Idzikowski kindly brightened for me, brightened several more
myself (and made them more contrasty), added a couple of additional
zoomed shots, and placed them all at the beginning of the image set.
In general, the literature seems to suggest that the capped appearance
of Sharp-tailed compared to Pectoral is strongest for juvenile birds,
which this is not. Kaufman says this more directly. To my eye, there
is strong contrast between the crown and the lower parts of the head
every where except the back of the head, and the crown does resemble a
cap tilted forward.
2. (Janzen, Hough, et al) The breast pattern doesn't seem right for a
Sharp-tailed Sandpiper.
Spangenberg: More specifically, the breast pattern of this bird is not
right for a juvenile Sharp-tailed Sandpiper, Sharp-tailed Sandpiper in
full breeding plumage, Sharp-tailed Sandpiper full winter plumage, or
any plumage of Pectoral Sandpiper, including transitional plumages.
The mix of feather wear indicates that this is a bird in transitional
plumage. A Pectoral or Sharp-tailed in transitional plumage in
September is not a juvenile of either species. A Pectoral Sandpiper in
transition from alternate/breeding plumage to basic/winter plumage will
have alternate plumage breast feathers showing dense streaking ending
in a straight line that are being replaced by basic plumage feathers
that show dense streaking ending in a straight line. That is, it
should be hard to tell new breast feathers from old on an adult
Pectoral in September unless the bird is in your hand.
A Sharp-tailed Sandpiper in transition from alternate to basic plumage
can be expected to show dense streaks being replaced by fine streaks or
no streaks, which results in a messy pattern on the underparts of a
molting bird. (The fact that the scalloped center of the breast band
on a Sharp-tailed may be sparsely filled with fine streaks instead of
unmarked feathers does not seem to be widely known.) For reference
images for #2 and #3 (below), I refer you to my images IMG_2309, IMG_
2305, IMG_ 2298, and IMG_ 0891. The middle and lower parts of the
breast of this bird do not have dense streaks going all the way across.
The breast of this bird has a very messy, asymmetric, and non-uniform
pattern where dense streaks near the center of the breast band are
being replaced by sparse, fine streaks. Knowing when the photo was
taken, I would say that when the remaining darker streaks in the center
are replaced by the sparse, fine streaks as has already occurred
elsewhere on the center of the breast, this bird will have the darker
streaks of the breast neatly scalloped by an area of sparse, fine
streaks in the center.
3. (Janzen) There is also strong contrast between the lower margin of
the breast band and the white belly, which would
again be consistent with a Pectoral Sandpiper.
Spangenberg: (This is really a more specific version of number 2, so I
chose to answer it separately.) There is indeed moderately strong
contrast as you describe at the sides of the breast, although not as
much as I'm used to seeing on Pectoral Sandpipers. There is not strong
contrast at the center, and the dense breast streaks do not form a
straight line across at their lower edge. At the center of the lower
edge and the center of the breast, dense streaks are broken up by open
areas and fine streaks and a few thick but light streaks. In fact, the
thickest streaks are not all that dark and at the center of the breast,
the dense streaking has largely been replaced except for a big thumb of
dense streaks jutting in from the bird's right. Looking at the lower
edge of the breast, I would not describe the streaks, whether thick and
dense or fine and sparse, as ending abruptly. This reduced contrast
and the occurrence of fine streaks in the center is consistent with
Sharp-tailed Sandpiper and inconsistent with Pectoral Sandpiper.
4. (Janzen) There also doesn't seem to be as much rufous coloration in
the breast band as one would expect for a
Sharp-tailed Sandpiper.
Spangenberg: Only if you are thinking of the bird as a juvenile, which
this is not. An alternate plumage Sharp-tailed would be expected to
have the upper breast (in fact, the upper breast through the face)
suffused with a buffy color and heavily streaked with brown. A basic
plumage Sharp-tailed would be expected to have a breast suffused with a
grayish cast and finely streaked with brown. A basic or alternate
plumage Pectoral should have a breast that is heavily suffused with
buff-brown. (All according to Hayman/Marchant/Prater.) The breast of
this bird is a very lightly suffused with buff, with odd patches of
whitish or grayish wash, consistent with an adult Sharp-tailed in
transition from alternate to basic plumage.
7. (Janzen et al) The supercilium doesn't seem to be as conspicuously
white or as wide as one would expect for a Sharp-tailed Sandpiper.
Spangenberg: It is true that the supercilium is not as conspicuously
white, or as wide directly above the eye, as one might expect for a
juvenile Sharp-tailed Sandpiper. But it isn't a juvenile. I'm not
sure the relative whiteness of the supercilium would be a useful
characteristic for separating adult birds even in the best of light,
however. For one thing, the supercilium of adult Sharp-tailed
Sandpipers is not as white as that of juvenile Sharp-tails. In
addition, Sharp-tailed Sandpipers can exhibit fine streaking in the
supercilium that can close off the supercilium above the eye, and split
the front half of the supercilium into two parts. (This feature is not
illustrated in either the Princeton or Slater field guides to
Australian birds, but in the coffee table version of Mullarney's book
and in Hayman/Marchant/Prater or Sibley it's very clearly illustrated.)
The shape of the supercilium seems to be a much more useful
characteristic for the variable lighting conditions that exist in the
field. In the Pectoral, the supercilium is widest in front of the eye
and tends to become more narrow behind the eye. In the Sharp-tailed,
it tends to become much wider behind the eye. On this bird, we have a
supercilium that widens dramatically behind the eye, is pinched/closed
by fine streaks above the eye, and is separated into two parts in front
of the eye. The words dull and mottled are applied in descriptions of
the adult, Pectoral Sandpiper's supercilium, but fine streaks in the
supercilium are only mentioned in the context of the Sharp-tailed
Sandpiper.
8. (Janzen) The eye-ring doesn't seem to be as white or as prominent
as one would expect for a Sharp-tailed Sandpiper.
Spangenberg: Well, I will certainly grant you that I have seen photos
of Sharp-tailed Sandpipers that showed a much whiter and thicker eye
ring than this bird exhibits, but only for juveniles. It also seems to
me that juvenile Pectorals have thicker eye rings than adults. (Anyone
care to comment?) For photos and illustrations of adult Sharp-tails,
however, I see no difference in the thickness of the eye rings compared
to this bird. On most Pectorals that I have studied, but not all, it
takes some care to perceive the complete eye ring distinct from the
surrounding area. On the other hand, this bird had an eye ring that
was obvious, distinctly whitish rather than buffy, and obviously
complete even when viewed with my binoculars or through my SLR camera.
I'm not comfortable using subtle differences in the relative whiteness
of the eye ring as a point of separation; the range of color of the
light falling on the bird is much larger than difference in whiteness
described for the two species. I wonder whether transitional plumage
may widen the possibilities for eye ring color for both species.
9. (Janzen) There seem to be some white streaks in the crown,
suggesting a split supercilium, which would again suggest a Pectoral
Sandpiper.
Spangenberg: I understand what you mean by a split supercilium, and I
have often seen this on juvenile Pectoral Sandpipers. A split
supercilium is mentioned by Hayman et al only in the context of a
juvenile Pectoral. (Has anyone ever seen an adult Pectoral with this
feature?) However (if we were talking about juvenile birds), when I
have seen this split supercilium on Pectoral Sandpipers, the
supercilium became narrow behind the eye before the split, and narrowed
further after/as a result of the split. In contrast, the supercilium
on this bird widens quite broadly and becomes more bold behind the eye.
In fact, although there are some fine streaks in the widest part, this
bird's supercilium is more conspicuous behind the eye than in front in
spite of the fine streaks. I don't see any white streaks in the crown,
only dark brown and rufus streaks, with the exception of one small dot
of gray just above the front of the supercilium.
10. (Lauten) I am not seeing a distinct rufous cap, salmony wash across
the breast
Spangenberg: That's because it isn't a juvenile bird. This is an adult.
10. (Hoyer) The worn condition and dull color of the wing coverts and
scapulars indicate an adult.
Spangenberg: Agreed. I don't know whether this is a one year old adult
or an older bird, but it is certainly an adult. I suspect that it
might be a one year old adult because of the necklace/gorget at the
margin between the neck and the upper breast, but that's only a
suspicion.
11. (Hoyer) The amount of rufus and the grizzled streaking in the face
are perfect for Sharp-tailed
Spangenberg: I wouldn't know whether it was perfect or not, so I'll
take your word on that, but these two characteristics certainly help
make the face of this bird look more like the photos and illustrations
of adult Sharp-tailed Sandpipers I have been able to find than any of
Pectoral.
12. (Hoyer) the manner of the breast streaking seems to eliminate
Pectoral.
Spangenberg: Agreed. In fact, having re-studied Ken Kaufman's comments
in Advanced Birding on separating these two species, the messiness of
the breast pattern and the combination of fine streaks mostly in the
center and heavy streaks mostly on the sides seems completely
uncharacteristic of any plumage of Pectoral Sandpiper, and very
characteristic of an adult Sharp-tailed molting into basic plumage. In
response to Killian Mullarney's indirect question about how uncommon
the kind of breast pattern that this bird exhibits is for Pectoral
Sandpiper, it is very uncommon (never in my experience) for a Pectoral
to show an asymmetric pattern of dense streaking on its breast. Unless
I have completely misinterpreted what people have written in the field
guides and other references, a combination of dense streaks on the
sides of the breast with fine or fine and dense streaks in the center
of the breast is unheard of for Pectoral, and to be expected for at
least some adult Sharp-tailed Sandpipers in transition from alternate
to basic plumage.
13. (Hoyer) 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.
Spangenberg: Both species seem to have cleaner underparts when in their
basic plumage. I am aware that Pectoral Sandpipers can show some
streaks along the flanks even during the moult back to basic plumage.
However, I can find no mention of chevron marks along the flanks of
Pectoral Sandpipers in any plumage. This bird shows two wide chevrons
and two narrow chevrons on the right flank, which you may find easier
to perceive on my brightened, more contrasty images and blowups. (The
narrow chevrons look like the remnants of wider chevron to me.) They
aren't bold by any means, but they showed up plainly on LCD displays of
both cameras, and on prints of an unmodified original image. If I
understand the Kaufman's comments on transitional plumage Sharp-tailed
correctly, then even remnants of dark chevrons on the flanks are
diagnostic for Sharp-tailed Sandpiper, yet I revently noticed that
Mullarney's illustration of adult Summer-to-Winter Pectoral in The
Birds of Europe does show two very narrow chevrons on the flank. At
least one of the chevron marks on each flank of our bird seems much
wider than these. Can Pectoral Sandpipers really show chevrons on the
flanks as well as streaks? If so, would one separate the two species
according to the width of the chevrons?
If anyone still can't see chevrons on my newer images, I'll be happy to
send you a print if you promise to move your speakers away from your
monitor.
14. (Hough) a short, somewhat slightly down-curved bill also eliminate
Sharp-tailed.
Spangenberg: I don't understand this comment. Both species have short,
slightly down-curved bills. If anything, Sharp-tailed Sandpipers have
the shorter bills of the two species. Whatever was intended, the bill
length of this bird does not present strong evidence for or against
Sharp-tailed by itself. It doesn't look unusually short to me, which I
had thought that it should for Sharp-tailed. In my mind, the length of
this bird's bill is the weakest point in an argument for Sharp-tailed.
However, bill lengths can be tricky to judge even with side-by-side
comparisons available, so Rich Frechette and I looked at the ratio of
bill length to head length. The proportion of the length of the bill
to the length of the head seems to be the same as the same proportion
for an Australian Sharp-tailed whose photograph can be found at
http://www.gt-works.com/yachoo/kissa/colum/australia/img_002/
uzurasigi.jpg and less than some other Pectoral images I've measured.
(I also have a link to this photo in my web pages.) Still, I haven't
read any research that analyzes usefulness of this ratio. Stronger
evidence for Sharp-tailed can be found in the fact that the only strong
color on the bill is at the base of the lower mandible. I read that
Pectorals can have as much of the base as 1/3rd the entire length show
color that contrasts strongly with the rest of the dark bill. On this
bird, with the exception of the yellowish orange at the very base of
the lower mandible, the only other color I can see is a slight brownish
wash on the base of the upper mandible. While on the subject of the
bill, the contrast between the dark brown eye stripe and the base of
the bill is also a feature useful for separating these two species. I
have discussed this as part of my response to comment #17.
15. (McGowan) The shape characters just point to a cold or otherwise
fluffed individual, and not to Sharp-tail.
Spangenberg: This bird certainly wasn't cold; we waded barefoot from
the boat to the beach with no discomfort. Birds who are tired or sick
do tend to stay fluffed up until they recover. The thing that was
different about this bird was that it maintained this posture even
during very active feeding. And yes, I do understand that this is not a
diagnostic characteristic.
16. (McGowan) none of the photographs show it in what I consider the
rather characteristic "leaning forward" posture that Sharp-tails often
adopt.
Spangenberg: Did you look at all the photos, or just the first five?
IMG_0867-IMG_0890, IMG_2296, IMG_2301, and IMG_2303 all show this
posture, or at least they seem to do so to me.
17. (McGowan) The eyestripe is cream, not white.
Spangenberg: I think supercilium was intended rather than eyestripe. I
also think that it is worth examining the new images before attaching a
name to the color of the supercilium. In any case, I don't recall
reading that about a cream supercilium for any plumage of Pectoral.
Buffy, buffy-brown, nearly absent, or whitish, yes, but not cream. If
anything, that sounds more like a color for Sharp-tailed than for
Pectoral. However, since the eyestripe has been mentioned, I refer
everyone to figure 30 on page 78 of Advanced Birding. In this
illustration, Kaufman shows dark eyestripes touching a dark base on the
upper mandible for Sharp-tails, and a dark eyestripe adjacent to a
medium-dark base on the upper mandible for Pectoral Sandpipers. I find
it very interesting that the base of the upper mandible on the bird the
bird we observed is just as dark as the brown eyestripe that touches
it. I also find it interesting that the eyestripe of our bird reaches
unbroken all the way to the base of the upper mandible, while the
eyestripe for Pectoral usually seems to be separated from the base of
the upper mandible by a whitish spot. Of the two characteristics, I
gather that the contrast with the base of the bill is more significant
than whether the eyestripe connects with the bill.
18. (McGowan) The chest band is not buffy, and has a lot of streaking,
as in Pectoral.
Spangenberg: I expect that it will be easier to perceive the buffy wash
on the new images. It is definitely there, and covers most of the
upper breast except for two or three small patches. Even more
significant is the fact that most of the streaking in the center of the
breast is fine streaking, not dense. Fine streaking in the center of
the breast and heavy streaking on the sides of the breast is actually
extremely unlike Pectoral Sandpiper in any plumage.
19. (McGowan) The dark necklace on the chest looks to be an artifact of
the extreme hunched posture.
Spangenberg: You may be right about that. It's hard to tell for sure
which is the "natural" posture of this individual even though the only
time the necklace thinned out was when the bird stretched unusually far
out to catch some food (It was sufficiently small duration that I had a
heck of a time trying to capture the moment when the neck was stretched
far enough to thin the necklace and make a dip in the back of the
bird's neck), but I can certainly see what you are talking about. In
the first image of the two, the bird has a thin but distinct gorget.
In the stretched out posture of the next image to which you refer, it
is plain to see that the necklace is composed of a dense area of fine
streaks, more dense than any other area of fine streaks on the breast.
Both fine streaks and a necklace/gorget in the center of the breast are
mentioned for juvenile Sharp-tailed (see Mullarney and
Hayman/Marchant/Prater; is this perhaps a one-year old adult?), but
neither is mentioned anywhere for any plumage of Pectoral. For these
reasons, the feature revealed at the base of the neck in either posture
is more consistent with Sharp-tailed Sandpiper than Pectoral Sandpiper.
20. (McGowan, et al) The undertail coverts are unmarked,
Spangenberg: No, the undertail coverts are actually heavily marked by
dark, solid arrowhead streaks on the part of the undertail coverts
where the vent is located. There are 6-10 of these streaks are on each
side. They do not appear to occur on the center of the undertail
coverts. One of the newer images that I've added shows that the
arrowhead marks are dark centers on white-tipped feathers of the
undertail coverts, and most or all have a dark rachis. Since Pectorals
can have dark streaks fairly far back on the flanks, a few dark streaks
on the sides of the undertail coverts might be possible for some
plumages of Pectoral (comments anyone?), but cluster of them (as this
bird exhibits) is not only more consistent with Sharp-tailed, it is
actually characteristic of Sharp-tailed.
21. (McGowan et al) "...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."
Spangenberg: I really wish I had tested the images on a few more
computers in comparison with the LCD screen of my cameras. After
reading the responses, I checked the images on a couple computers at
work, and I was dismayed at how poorly the features I mentioned showed
on Windows boxes with CRT monitors. Just so you know, there are
chevrons on both flanks that are plainly visible on the camera itself
and on prints from the original images. On one or two of the newer
images, you should be able to see two wide chevrons and two narrow
chevrons (which are probably the faded bases of wider chevrons) on the
right flank. I don't see a rachis, dark or white, on any of the flank
feathers, but I do see a dark rachis on many of the streaked feathers
on undertail coverts at the sides of the vent. I'm not sure whether
we're talking about the same marks or even the same flanks, but I
really hope that the newer images makes it easier for everyone to see
both sets of marks.
Scott Spangenberg
scottspangenberg(AT)mindspring.com
http://www.scottspangenberg.com
Amherst, NH
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Kevin McGowan <kjm2(AT)CORNELL.EDU>
Date: 23 Oct 2003 6:22am
At 08:25 AM 10/23/2003 -0400, Scott Spangenberg wrote:
>Thanks to all of you who responded ... I have decided to address the responses
>collectively. ... The new and old images can be
>found at http://www.scottspangenberg.com/Birds/CalidrisSp01/
I haven't had time to go over all your points, but I have a couple of
comments after a quick look.
>16. (McGowan) none of the photographs show it in what I consider the
>rather characteristic "leaning forward" posture that Sharp-tails often
>adopt.
>Spangenberg: Did you look at all the photos, or just the first five?
>IMG_0867-IMG_0890, IMG_2296, IMG_2301, and IMG_2303 all show this
>posture, or at least they seem to do so to me.
I disagree with your assessment. In 2296 and 2301 the bird IS leaning
forward to peck at the ground. None of these photos shows the posture I
mean. For comparison, look at the juv Sharp-tail I have as the lead image
on my page at <http://birds.cornell.edu/crows/sharptailsand.htm>. It is
possible that your bird was so fluffed and drawn in that it might have
destroyed any impression of this fairly subjective character.
>20. (McGowan, et al) The undertail coverts are unmarked,
>Spangenberg: No, the undertail coverts are actually heavily marked by
>dark, solid arrowhead streaks on the part of the undertail coverts
>where the vent is located.
No, they are not marked. Your images show this clearly (e.g., 0878). The
problem here is not with how it looks on my computer screen, but my
interpretation of the images based on years of handling bird
specimens. The dark marks you seem to be referring to are dark feather
bases to ruffled feathers. Nearly all bird body feathers have dark
grayish, rather fluffy, bases that usually do not show at all. When the
more tightly connected body feathers are disheveled, the darker bases
show. This is the situation I perceive in your flank photos. This is why
they appear white tipped and in clusters. The black marks on Sharp-tailed
undertail feathers show easily on the outside of the feather, not near the
ruffled bases. Compare your image 0878 with mine of Sharp-tailed 092a or 187a.
Cheers,
Kevin
*****************************************************
Kevin J. McGowan, Ph.D.
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: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Peter Adriaens <peter.adriaens(AT)dutchbirding.nl>
Date: 23 Oct 2003 10:55am
Hi,
I have looked at all of the photographs, and have read all of the
comments. My view on this bird:
>
> Spangenberg: Well, at least some folks have no trouble seeing rufus in
> the crown or perceiving at least something of a cap. Since this bird is
> an adult, it doesn't bother me at all that the crown is not rufus
> enough for a juvenile Sharp-tailed. Whether it is rufus enough for an
> adult Sharp-tailed is a pretty tricky question. From Kaufman's
> Advanced Birding and Hayman/Marchant/Prater, I gather that there is a
> fair amount of overlap in how rufus/chestnut(bright rufus) there can be
> in the crown of an adult of either species, so I don't know how one
> could use it for species separation unless the crown was completely
> devoid of any rufus color.
>
While there may be exceptions, the general rule seems to be that, in
autumn adults, the rufous crown is less prone to wear and fading than the
edges to the scapulars and tertials. Birds that still show clear rufous
edges to (some of) the tertials and scapulars typically have an obviously
rufous crown too. Here is a photograph of an autumn bird with the dullest
crown I could find, but note just how worn this bird is:
http://birdingwa.iinet.net.au/birds/species/sharp_tailed_sandpiper.htm
The South Beach bird is not very worn, yet its crown is only dull rufous
-- nothing like a typical ST Sandpiper.
>
> This reduced contrast
> and the occurrence of fine streaks in the center is consistent with
> Sharp-tailed Sandpiper and inconsistent with Pectoral Sandpiper.
>
Not too sure about adults, but a quick search turned up the following
photographs of juvenile Pec Sands that certainly show much finer streaks
in the center:
http://www.club300.se/galleri/pictures.asp?id=2329
http://aves.desdeinter.net/corrpec.htm
>
> The shape of the supercilium seems to be a much more useful
> characteristic for the variable lighting conditions that exist in the
> field. In the Pectoral, the supercilium is widest in front of the eye
> and tends to become more narrow behind the eye. In the Sharp-tailed,
> it tends to become much wider behind the eye.
>
It is not too difficult to find photographs of adult Pec Sands that show a
broad/wide supercilium behind the eye; see e.g. this Spanish vagrant:
http://www.terra.es/personal7/jidies/melanotos02.htm
>
> 12. (Hoyer) the manner of the breast streaking seems to eliminate
> Pectoral.
> Spangenberg: Agreed. In fact, having re-studied Ken Kaufman's comments
> in Advanced Birding on separating these two species, the messiness of
> the breast pattern and the combination of fine streaks mostly in the
> center and heavy streaks mostly on the sides seems completely
> uncharacteristic of any plumage of Pectoral Sandpiper, and very
> characteristic of an adult Sharp-tailed molting into basic plumage. In
> response to Killian Mullarney's indirect question about how uncommon
> the kind of breast pattern that this bird exhibits is for Pectoral
> Sandpiper, it is very uncommon (never in my experience) for a Pectoral
> to show an asymmetric pattern of dense streaking on its breast. Unless
> I have completely misinterpreted what people have written in the field
> guides and other references, a combination of dense streaks on the
> sides of the breast with fine or fine and dense streaks in the center
> of the breast is unheard of for Pectoral
>
See URLs above.
> Spangenberg: Both species seem to have cleaner underparts when in their
> basic plumage. I am aware that Pectoral Sandpipers can show some
> streaks along the flanks even during the moult back to basic plumage.
> However, I can find no mention of chevron marks along the flanks of
> Pectoral Sandpipers in any plumage.
>
Not too sure if we give the same meaning to the word 'chevrons', but at
least the following Swedish juvenile shows pointed marks on the rear
flank, much as in the South Beach bird:
http://www.club300.se/galleri/pictures.asp?id=2352
> Whatever was intended, the bill
> length of this bird does not present strong evidence for or against
> Sharp-tailed by itself. It doesn't look unusually short to me, which I
> had thought that it should for Sharp-tailed. In my mind, the length of
> this bird's bill is the weakest point in an argument for Sharp-tailed.
> However, bill lengths can be tricky to judge even with side-by-side
> comparisons available, so Rich Frechette and I looked at the ratio of
> bill length to head length. The proportion of the length of the bill
> to the length of the head seems to be the same as the same proportion
> for an Australian Sharp-tailed whose photograph can be found at
> http://www.gt-works.com/yachoo/kissa/colum/australia/img_002/
> uzurasigi.jpg and less than some other Pectoral images I've measured.
> (I also have a link to this photo in my web pages.) Still, I haven't
> read any research that analyzes usefulness of this ratio.
>
To my eyes, the bill of the South Beach bird looks too long for ST
Sandpiper, and matches Pectoral Sandpiper in all photographs. Compare e.g.
with the following photographs:
http://www2.kongju.ac.kr/srcho/guide1/sandpiper/sharptailed.htm
> Stronger evidence for Sharp-tailed can be found in the fact that the
only strong
> color on the bill is at the base of the lower mandible. I read that
> Pectorals can have as much of the base as 1/3rd the entire length show
> color that contrasts strongly with the rest of the dark bill. On this
> bird, with the exception of the yellowish orange at the very base of
> the lower mandible, the only other color I can see is a slight brownish
> wash on the base of the upper mandible. While on the subject of the
> bill, the contrast between the dark brown eye stripe and the base of
> the bill is also a feature useful for separating these two species. I
> have discussed this as part of my response to comment #17.
>
I disagree. In the photographs, I can see a dull, slightly orange-tinged
area on the upper mandible, just in front of the nostril. This area is
distinctly paler than the bill tip and the eyestripe, and is connected to
the pale (orange) base of the lower mandible.
> Since Pectorals
> can have dark streaks fairly far back on the flanks, a few dark streaks
> on the sides of the undertail coverts might be possible for some
> plumages of Pectoral (comments anyone?), but cluster of them (as this
> bird exhibits) is not only more consistent with Sharp-tailed, it is
> actually characteristic of Sharp-tailed.
>
Not sure what you mean exactly by a 'cluster', but the Swedish juvenile
mentioned earlier seems quite similar to the South Beach bird in this
respect, I think.
Finally, here are some more photographs of autumn adult ST Sandpipers, for
comparison:
http://homepage2.nifty.com/stints/calidris/sharptail-aswA.html
http://homepage2.nifty.com/stints/calidris/sharptail-aswB.html
http://www.dirkmoerbeek.nl/800/ned/acuminata02.htm
In conclusion, I think this bird is still too similar to Pectoral
Sandpiper (though not the most typical, I admit) to warrant an
identification as ST Sand.
Best regards,
Peter Adriaens
Belgium
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: It's a Pec.....
From: julian hough <jrhough1(AT)SNET.NET>
Date: 23 Oct 2003 4:55pm
In response to Scott's lengthy remarks about the Chatham adult Pectoral
Sand, I feel, with respect, that it's a bit of overkill and about not
seeing the wood for the trees.
I've seen many Sharp-taileds and many more Pectorals; I've looked for
them as vagrants in Britain, seen them as vagrants in Britain, watched
and sketched many in Australia, and finally found several in Alaska. It
never raised a doubt in my mind that it was a Pec..it looks like one. It
doesn't look like a Sharp-tailed.
My comments about bill shape, which Scott refers to, needs
clarification. I may have been drinking when I wrote the comment, but
basically I meant to say that, to me, Sharp-taileds often (but not
always) have a shorter, more downcurved bill than Pecs.
As for some of his points:
1) The crown of the Chatham bird is not rufous. It is basically heavily
dark-streaked with buffish stripes, warm brown at best. Sharp-taileds
have basically rufous, better yet, chestnut crowns overlain with dark
streaks. Tthe proportion of chestnut visible to dark streaking is more
so you get the impression of a more prominent cap.
2. The breast pattern is much closer to a Pec, regardless of the pattern
of the individual feathers. The radial looking pointed streaks at the
carpal are way more Pec-like than any Sharp-tailed in adult plumage at
that time of year. I can't imagine seeing a bird with this breast
pattern in Australia and trying to make it a Sharp-tailed.
3. Pecs do show flank markings, usually mid-to rear flanks, though
typically slightly wider than Sharp-tailed.
4. Adult Sharp-taileds do show a prominent white eyering.The Chatham
bird shows no such obvious eyering and is typical of a Pec, most of
which show a thin pale eyering.
5. Not mentioned before but on my monitor the legs are bright yellow!
Sharp-taileds often show more olive legs, though i'm sure some can show
more yellowy legs. That the Chatham bird has yellow legs just like a Pec
reaffirms the id.
Finally, although Scott's posting has caused us to look at features that
we may have been oblivious to in the field, the bird is a sum of all
it's parts, and in my view adds up to a late autumn adult Pectoral Sand.
No more from me on this.
Julian Hough,
CT, USA
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Scott Spangenberg <scottspangenberg(AT)MINDSPRING.COM>
Date: 23 Oct 2003 9:08pm
Thanks to everyone for responding to my queries about identification of
this bird. The consensus has been that it is the more likely bird,
Pectoral Sandpiper, as is usually the case. Thanks to very specific
information that folks have given me, and the many references photos of
individual birds that I had not been able to find on my own, I am quite
satisfied that I understand all the details of why it is a Pectoral
(albeit one with some odd plumage characteristics), which is even more
valuable than the identification.
Scott Spangenberg
Amherst, NH
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Chris Corben <corben(AT)HOARYBAT.COM>
Date: 24 Oct 2003 8:16pm
I haven't had time to get into this before, or even to read the many
responses to Scott's original posting, but I have read Scott's summary and
the responses since that. I think Scott deserves congratulations for his
detailed documentation and summary. But.....
it's not a Sharpy.
There isn't anything about this bird which suggests to me a Sharpy rather
than a Pec, though I admit that the head pattern is slightly unusual for a
Pec. I come from a background of seeing countless Sharpys in a wide range of
plumages in Aus, some juvenal Sharpys in the USA and Pecs in both countries,
mainly juvenals in USA and birds which looked like adults in basic in Aus.
So that's my gut reaction, based on what the bird as a whole looks like.
As for non-subjective criteria, I guess the thing which strikes me most is
the bill shape, which is typical for Pec and dead wrong for Sharpy. Even
though Sharpys in photos can look long-billed, they don't have a bill like
this bird, whose bill tapers off to a fine, somewhat down-curved tip which
seems to droop and taper more suddenly at the end. A Sharpy's bill is more
evenly tapered and curved, blunter at the tip and a good deal shorter,
giving it a quite different appearance when seen well. The fact that there
are several views of this bird and that all of them show a Pec's bill counts
strongly in my opinion.
There are a couple of points I would like to make about the Sharpy-Pec issue
in general. First of all, these species do quite closely resemble each
other. Each resembles the other far more than either resembles anything
else. Furthermore, although there a number of ways in which they normally
differ, each is rather variable. Usually, in Australia, you would detect a
Pec amongst Sharpys by its different head pattern, bill shape, or the
darker, more sombre patterns of the scapulars, assuming it wasn't facing you
and showing off a typical Pec breast pattern. However, it isn't always a
simple task. Some Pecs look surprisingly like Sharpys and can be really hard
to pick out when feeding amongst them. The features which seem most
consistent are the bill and of course the call. Having said that, I've never
had any doubt about the identity of a bird which I was able to watch for
long enough at close enough range.
Secondly, I think I can throw some light on one of the points which seems
most troubling to people - the breast pattern. There isn't any way the
Chatham bird looks typical of a Pec. Yet I have seen a number of Pecs in
which the
breast pattern seemed diluted and lacking the typical dark, heavy streaks.
Typically, such birds show a sort of barred effect on the breast, and you
can see this in these photos. I suggest that this effect is a result of the
fresh breast feathers growing out with broad pale fringes which obscure the
underlying pattern. And this is exactly what the Chatham bird looks like.
Look at the feathers at the sides of the breast where they overlap the much
darker scapulars and wing coverts. You can see that these feathers are
mostly pale, and you can see signs of the same thing elsewhere in the chest.
Sometimes, when you see a Pec like this, the wind will ruffle the breast
feathers and then you can see that they are extensively dark underneath the
pale tips. The little dark marks you can see in the Chatham bird are just
the narrow tips of much larger dark central streaks which will be revealed
when the tips wear off. The broad, pale tips obscure most of the dark parts
of the underlying feathers. It is also possible that the feathers are not
yet fully grown, and thus you could have a situation where more of the dark
streaks are revealed when feather growth is complete. The breast of the
Chatham bird looks much more like a Pec in fresh plumage than like any
version of a Sharpy.
Fresh feathers having broad pale tips which hide underlying feather patterns
is actually very common in shorebirds. For example, the alternate throat
feathers of a Red-necked Stint emerge with white tips which initially
obscure the bright color of the throat. In some cases, the entire throat can
be in alternate plumage but none of the color is visible unless something
disturbs the feathers. It apparently doesn't take long for the white tips to
wear away, firstly revealing color overlaid with white barring and then
solid color.
The situation in Pecs is analogous and I suggest that individuals might
vary in the extent of pale tipping to fresh feathers, and therefore in how
much the underlying pattern is initially obscured.
Cheers, Chris.
Chris Corben
corben(AT)hoarybat.com
www.hoarybat.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Possible Sharp-tailed Sandpiper
From: Steven Mlodinow <SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 2003 9:04am
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Greetings All
Having seen only one ad ST Sandpiper, I am far from expert. I do see a lot of
Pecs, though, and more than my share of juv ST Sands.
The streaking on this bird's chest looks very Pec like. STs usually have some
chevrons on the sides, and the chest markings are less streak-like and more
spotted.
I'd expect a ST to have a more chestnut crown.
The bill looks big and the legs bright for a typical ST.
All of this looks rather like a Pec to me, excepting the rich hues washed
across the face. Don't really know what to make of that.
Cheers
SteveMlodinow
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
|
|
|
|
BIRDxxxx
BIRDCHAT
ID-FRONTIERS
US:NewEngland