 |
|
|
|
|
ID-FRONTIERS for October 26-31, 2003
[ Prev Week
| Next Week
| Calendar Month
| ID-FRONTIERS Info
]
|
Messages are displayed in the order they were received.
|
| Subject | From | Date | Time |
| IDing Semip and Ringed Plovers | Martin Reid | Sun, 26 Oct 2003 | 5:35am |
| Re: IDing Semip and Ringed Plovers | Colin Bradshaw | Sun, 26 Oct 2003 | 7:27am |
| Re: IDing Semip and Ringed Plovers | Dick Newell | Sun, 26 Oct 2003 | 12:07pm |
| Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush | Rich Hoyer | Mon, 27 Oct 2003 | 7:05pm |
| Re: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush | Matt Sharp | Tue, 28 Oct 2003 | 8:37am |
| Re: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush | Mike Patterson | Tue, 28 Oct 2003 | 9:25am |
| Re: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush | Bill Elrick | Tue, 28 Oct 2003 | 9:38am |
| Re: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush | John Idzikowski | Tue, 28 Oct 2003 | 11:44am |
| Re: Bill Elrick's Thrush | Mike Patterson | Tue, 28 Oct 2003 | 12:03pm |
| Well I am clearly confused regarding this bird. | Matt Sharp | Tue, 28 Oct 2003 | 1:51pm |
| Re: Bill Elrick's Thrush | Bill Elrick | Tue, 28 Oct 2003 | 2:56pm |
| Re: Well I am clearly confused regarding this
bird. | Bill Elrick | Tue, 28 Oct 2003 | 3:13pm |
| Re: Well I am clearly confused regarding this
bird. | Mike Patterson | Tue, 28 Oct 2003 | 3:23pm |
| Re: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush | Bill Elrick | Tue, 28 Oct 2003 | 4:18pm |
| FW: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush | Rich Hoyer | Tue, 28 Oct 2003 | 6:31pm |
| Re: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush | Bill Elrick | Wed, 29 Oct 2003 | 7:50am |
| Re: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush | Mike Patterson | Wed, 29 Oct 2003 | 8:32am |
| OR mystery thrush | Alvaro Jaramillo | Wed, 29 Oct 2003 | 9:40am |
| Frigatebird id help needed | Trevor Hardaker | Wed, 29 Oct 2003 | 1:51pm |
| NJ Mystery Thrush | Alvaro Jaramillo | Wed, 29 Oct 2003 | 2:17pm |
|
To use email addresses replace '(AT)' with '@'.
This is done to confuse the spam 'bots.
|
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: IDing Semip and Ringed Plovers
From: Martin Reid <upupa(AT)AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: 26 Oct 2003 5:35am
Dear All,
Given the recent Semip Plover from Ireland I'd like to encourage more
discussion of this ID challenge, using this unusual presumed Semip. Plover:
http://www.martinreid.com/charadrius.html
- I'd be pleased to get any additional data on observed variation in the
forms, and comments on the ID of the bird at this URL (and the Californian
individual linked therein.)
Cheers,
Martin
Martin Reid
Fort Worth, Texas
mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
http://www.martinreid.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: IDing Semip and Ringed Plovers
From: Colin Bradshaw <drcolin.bradshaw(AT)btinternet.com>
Date: 26 Oct 2003 7:27am
Having been involved in the first in the first of the 2 Irish Semi-p
plovers, I've spent a long tome looking at small plovers recently.
I have no doubt that martin's bird is NOT a Ringed Plover. Secondly I remain
to be convinced that it is an adult!
There are staggering variation in breast and facial markings of 1st year
small plovers in September. I guess this is a function of age. If they are
3-4 months old they often have much darker breast bands and better defined
facial pattern. This bird looks like an adult on the 1st side on photo but
am I alone in thinking that in the others the dark facial markings are brown
rather than black. The breast band seems very broad for 1st basiv so I'm
unconvinced either way
There are two features that stand out as SPP features to me. The first is
that thin dark almost parallel-sided loral line. I checked maybe 150 CRPL
over a 1 week period and NONE showed this feature. Most have a blurred broad
dark area over the lores. A small number about 3 out of 150 had a pale area
separarting the dark mask from the base of the bill. This was most apparent
when looking at the bird straight on so that the bill looked isolated in a
pale surround.
The second feature is the shape of the cheek patch. CRPl shows a relatively
smooth edge with the broadest part usually behind the eye. SPPL shows a
distinct angle on the outline. This bird shows it quite well - though the
position varies in different photos. The first photo shows what I woulkd
consider a classic SPPL face pattern [without the eye-ring]
All in all you really need them to call or see their feet!
Cheers
Colin
-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]On Behalf Of Martin Reid
Sent: 26 October 2003 12:38
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] IDing Semip and Ringed Plovers
Dear All,
Given the recent Semip Plover from Ireland I'd like to encourage more
discussion of this ID challenge, using this unusual presumed Semip. Plover:
http://www.martinreid.com/charadrius.html
- I'd be pleased to get any additional data on observed variation in the
forms, and comments on the ID of the bird at this URL (and the Californian
individual linked therein.)
Cheers,
Martin
Martin Reid
Fort Worth, Texas
mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
http://www.martinreid.com
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 09/10/2003
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 09/10/2003
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: IDing Semip and Ringed Plovers
From: Dick Newell <dick.newell(AT)MACUNLIMITED.NET>
Date: 26 Oct 2003 12:07pm
Of course, we have (at least) 2 kinds of Ringed Plover over here, tundrae
and hiaticula as well as anything in between. Here is a juvenile that I
photographed on 31st August which I am fairly sure is tundrae with a
SemiP-like white intrusion above the gape line as well as quite black facial
markings and breast-band:
http://www.cambridgebirdclub.org.uk/photos/2003/RGNDSCN5184A.jpg
[you can find some other pix of RP's if you scroll through this lot:
http://www.cambridgebirdclub.org.uk/photos.htm ]
[I have pix of quite a few Ringed Plovers (of 3 races) which you can find
with this link:
http://www.magikcircle.com/birds/dosearch.asp?keywords=hiaticula&andor=AND ]
Dick, Cambridge, UK
On 26/10/03 2:23 pm, "Colin Bradshaw" <drcolin.bradshaw(AT)BTINTERNET.COM>
wrote:
> Having been involved in the first in the first of the 2 Irish Semi-p
> plovers, I've spent a long tome looking at small plovers recently.
>
> I have no doubt that martin's bird is NOT a Ringed Plover. Secondly I remain
> to be convinced that it is an adult!
>
> There are staggering variation in breast and facial markings of 1st year
> small plovers in September. I guess this is a function of age. If they are
> 3-4 months old they often have much darker breast bands and better defined
> facial pattern. This bird looks like an adult on the 1st side on photo but
> am I alone in thinking that in the others the dark facial markings are brown
> rather than black. The breast band seems very broad for 1st basiv so I'm
> unconvinced either way
>
> There are two features that stand out as SPP features to me. The first is
> that thin dark almost parallel-sided loral line. I checked maybe 150 CRPL
> over a 1 week period and NONE showed this feature. Most have a blurred broad
> dark area over the lores. A small number about 3 out of 150 had a pale area
> separarting the dark mask from the base of the bill. This was most apparent
> when looking at the bird straight on so that the bill looked isolated in a
> pale surround.
>
> The second feature is the shape of the cheek patch. CRPl shows a relatively
> smooth edge with the broadest part usually behind the eye. SPPL shows a
> distinct angle on the outline. This bird shows it quite well - though the
> position varies in different photos. The first photo shows what I woulkd
> consider a classic SPPL face pattern [without the eye-ring]
>
> All in all you really need them to call or see their feet!
>
> Cheers
>
> Colin
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
> [mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]On Behalf Of Martin Reid
> Sent: 26 October 2003 12:38
> To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] IDing Semip and Ringed Plovers
>
>
> Dear All,
> Given the recent Semip Plover from Ireland I'd like to encourage more
> discussion of this ID challenge, using this unusual presumed Semip. Plover:
> http://www.martinreid.com/charadrius.html
> - I'd be pleased to get any additional data on observed variation in the
> forms, and comments on the ID of the bird at this URL (and the Californian
> individual linked therein.)
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
>
> Martin Reid
> Fort Worth, Texas
> mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
> http://www.martinreid.com
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 09/10/2003
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 09/10/2003
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
From: Rich Hoyer <calliope(AT)THERIVER.COM>
Date: 27 Oct 2003 7:05pm
Hi All,
The following links lead to video captures of a Catharus thrush originally
thought to be of one of the eastern Olive-backed subspecies. The bird had
hit a window but recovered and was released. It was described by Phil
Pickering (taken from his post to OBOL, Oregon Birders On-Line):
"Upperparts were more olive-gray than earthy gray-brown.
I remember noting that the scaps in particular were a
dark rich olive, almost warbler-ish color. Breast was bright
buffy, eyering was same color buff. Spots were same
color as upperparts, avg a touch paler. Basil 1/2 of
lower mandible was pale. Flanks were also olive-gray.
There was a diffuse mixed buffy/olive spectacle."
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/swainsons01.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/swainsons02.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/swainsons03.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/swainsons04.jpg
An argument was made that the bird was simply one of the duller western
subspecies that don't have as much contrast in the rump and back, and a
comparison was made with diagrams from Pyle's ID guide. From Mike Patterson
is the following URL:
http://home.pacifier.com/~neawanna/temp/catharus.html
In Phil's images I'm actually seeing zero contrast between the back and
rump/tail and no rufous present. And in Mike Patterson's numbered primaries,
I'm seeing something that looks most like Gray-cheeked Thrush. But I realize
this is hard to judge given that the wing in the video capture isn't nicely
spread and is not so sharp.
Good Birding,
Rich
---
Rich Hoyer
Tucson, Arizona
Senior Field Leader
WINGS, Inc.
http://www.wingsbirds.com
---
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
From: Matt Sharp <sharp(AT)ACNATSCI.ORG>
Date: 28 Oct 2003 8:37am
At VIREO we recently received several superb
photos of Catharus thrushes from Joe Fuhrman
taken in spring in CA (Joshua Tree or LA Co.)
At the time I puzzled over the species/subspecies
since they were fairly different looking than the
eastern birds I am familiar with. Mostly I gave up
on trying to ID them to subspecies since they were
migrants and geography was little help.
A couple of these birds are posted on surfbirds.com
http://www.surfbirds.com/VIREO/vireo.html
The Oregon bird looks similar to the bird I called a
Swainson's. The overall color, and buffy tones in
the face and especially the flanks would seem to
argue against Hermit. Note the cold gray flanks
on the bird I called a Hermit on the surfbirds page.
Flank color seems to be a good character for distinguishing
catharus thrushes. Also I have to question how useful wing
morphology is on anything other than a properly spread
wing. Since it is only a matter of mms, displaced feathers
seems as though they may be misleading. Though p9 does
appear longer than p6. Can this be considered diagnostic?
I think on the east coast this bird if seen in the field would
likely be called a Swainson's.
Thoughts on the ID (specific and subspecific) are welcome
concerning the birds on surfbirds.
Best to all
Matt
---
Matt Sharp
Collection Manager
VIREO/ANS
1900 Benjamin Franklin Pkwy.
Philadelphia PA 19103
www.acnatsci.org/vireo
(tel.) 215-299-1069
(fax) 215-299-1182
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
From: Mike Patterson <celata(AT)pacifier.com>
Date: 28 Oct 2003 9:25am
Both Swainson's and Gray-cheeked would have a p9 great than
p6, so the arguement here is really about Gray-cheeked vs
Hermit. I think the shape of p7-p9 eliminate Swainson's,
but as always I'm willing to be talked out of it.
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/SWTHwing22369.jpg
I'm not sure whether color cues taken from this photo series
should trump the information that can be extracted from the
structural details of the primaries. So, for me, I would
like to know whether I have interpretted the wing formula
correctly, and whether one can use the wing formula reliably
on a photgraph like this.
Try as I might, I can't seem to find a dead Hermit Thrush
(maybe if I go driving around I'll get lucky), but here's
a Gray-cheeked wing:
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/GCTHwing21552.jpg
Matt Sharp wrote:
> Since it is only a matter of mms, displaced feathers
> seems as though they may be misleading. Though p9 does
> appear longer than p6. Can this be considered diagnostic?
> I think on the east coast this bird if seen in the field would
> likely be called a Swainson's.
>
--
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: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
From: Bill Elrick <belrick(AT)OPTONLINE.NET>
Date: 28 Oct 2003 9:38am
Hi,
This is an email I have been sending to some folks about a thrush I am
having trouble id'ing. These are full flattened wing photos and well
worth checking out. Sorry I don't have any web space to show them on if
someone can post them for me I would be grateful.
>>
I caught a strange thrush that I felt at the time was a GCTH but after
showing the photos around everyone has a different idea {3 other
species}.
Unfortunately the only place on the web I have to store them is a
backyard birders group I started years ago.
If you join it you can access the photos in the photos section and the
album is mystery thrush.
The web link is
http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/Oldearth/lst?.dir=/Mystery+Thrush&.
src=gr&.order=&.view=t&.done=http%3a//briefcase.yahoo.com/
This link may not work and you should go to the Oldearth yahoo group
the photos section and then the mystery thrush album.
But you may need a password to get in.
I would really appreciate if you could take a quick look at it for me.
Bill Elrick
NJ
-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Mike Patterson
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 11:28 AM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
Both Swainson's and Gray-cheeked would have a p9 great than
p6, so the arguement here is really about Gray-cheeked vs
Hermit. I think the shape of p7-p9 eliminate Swainson's,
but as always I'm willing to be talked out of it.
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/SWTHwing22369.jpg
I'm not sure whether color cues taken from this photo series
should trump the information that can be extracted from the
structural details of the primaries. So, for me, I would
like to know whether I have interpretted the wing formula
correctly, and whether one can use the wing formula reliably
on a photgraph like this.
Try as I might, I can't seem to find a dead Hermit Thrush
(maybe if I go driving around I'll get lucky), but here's
a Gray-cheeked wing:
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/GCTHwing21552.jpg
Matt Sharp wrote:
> Since it is only a matter of mms, displaced feathers
> seems as though they may be misleading. Though p9 does
> appear longer than p6. Can this be considered diagnostic?
> I think on the east coast this bird if seen in the field would
> likely be called a Swainson's.
>
--
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
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/2003
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/2003
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
From: John Idzikowski <idzikoj(AT)UWM.EDU>
Date: 28 Oct 2003 11:44am
The shots of Bill's HYU thrush are posted at-
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush1.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush3.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush5.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush6.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush7.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush8.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush9.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush11.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush12.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush14.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush18.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush19.jpg
John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Elrick" <belrick(AT)OPTONLINE.NET>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 10:36 AM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
> Hi,
> This is an email I have been sending to some folks about a thrush I am
> having trouble id'ing. These are full flattened wing photos and well
> worth checking out. Sorry I don't have any web space to show them on if
> someone can post them for me I would be grateful.
>
> >>
> I caught a strange thrush that I felt at the time was a GCTH but after
> showing the photos around everyone has a different idea {3 other
> species}.
>
> Unfortunately the only place on the web I have to store them is a
> backyard birders group I started years ago.
>
> If you join it you can access the photos in the photos section and the
> album is mystery thrush.
>
> The web link is
>
> http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/Oldearth/lst?.dir=/Mystery+Thrush&.
> src=gr&.order=&.view=t&.done=http%3a//briefcase.yahoo.com/
>
> This link may not work and you should go to the Oldearth yahoo group
> the photos section and then the mystery thrush album.
>
> But you may need a password to get in.
>
> I would really appreciate if you could take a quick look at it for me.
>
> Bill Elrick
> NJ
>
10/27/2003
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Bill Elrick's Thrush
From: Mike Patterson <celata(AT)pacifier.com>
Date: 28 Oct 2003 12:03pm
I have no in-hand experience with Gray-cheeked Thrush,
but this looks like one to me.
Wing formula seems right, good emargination on p7 and p8,
reduced (almost unnoticable emargination p6). Very small
p10. Indistinct, grayish eyering.
But as always, I'm willing to be talked out of it.
John Idzikowski wrote:
>
> The shots of Bill's HYU thrush are posted at-
>
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush1.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush3.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush5.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush6.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush7.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush8.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush9.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush11.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush12.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush14.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush18.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush19.jpg
>
> John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
>
--
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: Well I am clearly confused regarding this bird.
From: Matt Sharp <sharp(AT)ACNATSCI.ORG>
Date: 28 Oct 2003 1:51pm
Well I am clearly confused regarding this bird.
I guess I did not read the post carefully enough
but in part because nothing I saw made me think
GCTH. I quite agree with Mike that using the color
as it appears on the computer is unreliable, but
to me the face of GCTH is cold and gray - not
warm ochraceous/buff as the OR bird appears.
Are the colors that off? Of course, while this bird
seems too warm toned for GCTH (aliciae) it may
not be for BITH or a nominate GCTH from eastern
Canada. Someone with more experience could
perhaps shed more light on that.
Regarding primary shape. I have little experience
with these bird in the hand. But Pyle describes
HY/SY SWTH as tapered and AHY/ASY as truncate.
Are the primary tips too blunt for ASY SWTH. Also
are Pyle's diagrams appropriate for all ages w/in all
populations. Comparing fig 237 to fig 140 in Pyle it
appears that fig 237 shows a HY/SY bird. Is this
appropriate for Pacific coast population of SWTH?
I note that the OR does not show any pale tip on the
wing coverts though am not sure this 100% make the
bird AHY/ASY.
The pointed, emarginated primaries of SWTH seem like the
shape of a highly migratory species such as the east
coast birds. I don't know the wintering ranges of the Pacific
populations though if they are shorter distance migrants as
seems plausible given the milder west coast climate than
theoretically the primary shape of those populations may
tend more toward HETH and be more rounded.
Hope I don't sound as if I am trying to build a more
elaborate argument for SWTH, just to cover my ***
I may be reading what I am seeing on my screen completely
wrong and this bird may fit GCTH. Like I said the Fuhrman
photos we got made me realize how little I understand variation
in these birds (Catharus). Just trying to clear my confusion
Matt
P.S. for what it is worth I agree that Bill Elrick's
bird looks like GCTH, and that wing and primary
shape are quite useful here. Is the lack of obvious
emargination on p6 enough to rule out Bicknells?
Matt Sharp
Collection Manager
VIREO/ANS
1900 Benjamin Franklin Pkwy.
Philadelphia PA 19103
www.acnatsci.org/vireo
(tel.) 215-299-1069
(fax) 215-299-1182
>>> Mike Patterson <celata(AT)PACIFIER.COM> 10/28/03 11:28AM >>>
Both Swainson's and Gray-cheeked would have a p9 great than
p6, so the arguement here is really about Gray-cheeked vs
Hermit. I think the shape of p7-p9 eliminate Swainson's,
but as always I'm willing to be talked out of it.
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/SWTHwing22369.jpg
I'm not sure whether color cues taken from this photo series
should trump the information that can be extracted from the
structural details of the primaries. So, for me, I would
like to know whether I have interpretted the wing formula
correctly, and whether one can use the wing formula reliably
on a photgraph like this.
Try as I might, I can't seem to find a dead Hermit Thrush
(maybe if I go driving around I'll get lucky), but here's
a Gray-cheeked wing:
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/GCTHwing21552.jpg
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Bill Elrick's Thrush
From: Bill Elrick <belrick(AT)OPTONLINE.NET>
Date: 28 Oct 2003 2:56pm
Hi,
I sorry to be taking the focus away from the original thrush but I have
been sending this out to folks for some weeks now and had no reply,
basically because I could not get them posted to an open site.
I forgot IO changed the rules on the Oldearth yahoo group as I had a few
hit and run spammers.
Sorry
OK Data
Caught on the 13th of October 2003 Postville West Milford
Passaic NJ.
Wc cord 100mm
flattened 106mm
tail 70mm.
6th emarginated
Fat 2
Longest prim = 8TH
cov minus 10th 8.2mm
9th-6th 4.5mm
9th-5th 12.0mm
long P 8th-9th = 3.6mm
8th -6th =6.5mm
8th-5th = 15.00mm
8th-1st=28.8mm
8th-longest tert=29.5mm
8th-shortest prim{1st} = 33.4mm
I never took the Bill length or depth {forgot} but I have a photo and
could make an estimate from that. I am annoyed at not doing that but
taking photos and these data and working on my own I sometimes miss
stuff. I started taking these other sizes because of just this problem a
few years back and I was trying to minimize this ever happening again.
I also have the length of each primary feather measured from the base as
you would a tail.
Just to let you guys know the passage times and that I have banded this
year GCTh on the dates below and to show I am used to dealing with this
species.
I also have photos of almost all of them.
Gray-cheeked Thrush May 31, 2003
/b 1
Gray-cheeked Thrush Sep 17, 2003
1 /b
Gray-cheeked Thrush Sep 22, 2003
1 /b
Gray-cheeked Thrush Sep 24, 2003
2 /b
Gray-cheeked Thrush Sep 25, 2003
2 /b
Gray-cheeked Thrush Sep 26, 2003
1 /b
Gray-cheeked Thrush Sep 30, 2003
1 banded + 1 /re 9-24-2003
Gray-cheeked Thrush Oct 2, 2003
4 banded
Gray-cheeked Thrush Oct 3, 2003
10 banded
Gray-cheeked Thrush Oct 5, 2003
6 banded
Gray-cheeked Thrush Oct 7, 2003
12 banded {some possible Bith have to work them out}
Gray-cheeked Thrush Oct 8, 2003
6 banded + 1 /re
Gray-cheeked Thrush Oct 11, 2003
1 banded
Gray-cheeked Thrush Oct 13, 2003
2 banded
This bird was banded as a HYu GCTH but it looked so odd I asked around
for more opinions and then I started getting all sorts of odd answers.
It did look a little warm around the head though it had obvious grey on
the cheeks.
I had one person suggest a western Veery as he said this.
>>Bill,
Without having them in front of me it looks like a dark race of veery
one of the salicicolus, subpallidus, or fuliginosus complex.<<
Now that did confuse me.
I did not give him the benefit of the data so he may have changed his
mind on that after he saw the data. This is why I have been trying to
contact folk who know these subspecies a little better than I do.
Veery has a totally different passage time here as these captures show.
Veery May 27, 2003 /b 1
Veery May 29, 2003 /re 1
Veery Jun 6, 2003 1 /b + 1 /re
Veery Jun 16, 2003 /b 1
Veery Jun 24, 2003 /b 2 + /re 2
Veery Jun 27, 2003 1/b +2 /re
Veery Jul 10, 2003 /b 2 + 1 /re
Veery Jul 12, 2003 1 /b
Veery Jul 14, 2003 1 /b
Veery Jul 17, 2003 1 /b
Veery Jul 18, 2003 2 /b
Veery Jul 20, 2003 1 /b
Veery Jul 26, 2003 1 /b
Veery Aug 9, 2003 3 /b
Veery Aug 13, 2003 3 /b
Veery Aug 15, 2003 2 /b
Veery Aug 16, 2003 3 /b
Veery Aug 19, 2003 1 /b
Veery Aug 22, 2003 9 /b
Veery Aug 23, 2003 6 /b + 2 /re
Veery Aug 24, 2003 7 /b + 1 /re
Veery Aug 26, 2003 3 /b + 1 /re
Veery Aug 28, 2003 12 /b + 3 /re
Veery Aug 31, 2003 7 /b
Veery Sep 5, 2003 10 /b
Veery Sep 6, 2003 3 /b
Veery Sep 8, 2003 1 /b
Veery Sep 9, 2003 3 /b + 1 /re
Veery Sep 11, 2003 3 /b
Veery Sep 17, 2003 1 /b
Veery Sep 20, 2003 4 /b
Veery Sep 25, 2003 4 /b
Veery Sep 26, 2003 1 /b
Veery Oct 7, 2003 + 1 /re
Hermit thrush I never thought for a moment it could possably be one of
those.
Hermit Thrush Aug 9, 2003 1 /b
Hermit Thrush Oct 7, 2003 1 /b
Hermit Thrush Oct 8, 2003 2 /b
Hermit Thrush Oct 11, 2003 15 /b
Hermit Thrush Oct 13, 2003 19 /b
Hermit Thrush Oct 14, 2003 33 /b + 1 /re
Hermit Thrush Oct 17, 2003 10 /b + 3 /re
Hermit Thrush Oct 20, 2003 24 /b + 2 /re
Hermit Thrush Oct 24, 2003 9 /b + 1 /re
Hermit Thrush Oct 25, 2003 25 /b
So if anyone has any insight into the western species I would be glad
to listen to your viewpoint.
Bill Elrick
NJ
-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Mike Patterson
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 2:07 PM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Bill Elrick's Thrush
I have no in-hand experience with Gray-cheeked Thrush,
but this looks like one to me.
Wing formula seems right, good emargination on p7 and p8,
reduced (almost unnoticable emargination p6). Very small
p10. Indistinct, grayish eyering.
But as always, I'm willing to be talked out of it.
John Idzikowski wrote:
>
> The shots of Bill's HYU thrush are posted at-
>
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush1.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush3.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush5.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush6.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush7.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush8.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush9.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush11.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush12.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush14.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush18.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/thrush19.jpg
>
> John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
>
--
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
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/2003
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/2003
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Well I am clearly confused regarding this
bird.
From: Bill Elrick <belrick(AT)OPTONLINE.NET>
Date: 28 Oct 2003 3:13pm
Hi all,
The Or bird though the photo is not that great seems to show a molt
limit on the Gr covert. There is also an interesting little feather on
the nape that could be a juv feather. I have noticed that most will only
molt the inner Gr cov and there seems to be a slight step there though
as I say the photos are not the best. The photo of the wing in the skin
collection SWTH 22369 looks to be a HU/SY also with at least the inner
two being a little longer and different colour. The same I would say as
the GCTH {grey cheeked} wing 21552 again the inner grt coverts are
darker and longer. The wing photo look slightly over exposed on my
screen but they give me that impression. So all the skin primaries would
therefore be HY/SY shape?
The primary shape is very difficult to see and varies between species
for instance the difference between Rcki {Ruby-crowned kinglet} and Gcki
{Golden-crowned kinglet} is such that you would tend to call all Gcki an
AHY if you were only used to Rcki shape. You really have to get your eye
in with each species alone as they tend not to be transferable as much
as you would suppose.
Bill Elrick
-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Matt Sharp
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 3:24 PM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Well I am clearly confused regarding this bird.
Well I am clearly confused regarding this bird.
I guess I did not read the post carefully enough
but in part because nothing I saw made me think
GCTH. I quite agree with Mike that using the color
as it appears on the computer is unreliable, but
to me the face of GCTH is cold and gray - not
warm ochraceous/buff as the OR bird appears.
Are the colors that off? Of course, while this bird
seems too warm toned for GCTH (aliciae) it may
not be for BITH or a nominate GCTH from eastern
Canada. Someone with more experience could
perhaps shed more light on that.
Regarding primary shape. I have little experience
with these bird in the hand. But Pyle describes
HY/SY SWTH as tapered and AHY/ASY as truncate.
Are the primary tips too blunt for ASY SWTH. Also
are Pyle's diagrams appropriate for all ages w/in all
populations. Comparing fig 237 to fig 140 in Pyle it
appears that fig 237 shows a HY/SY bird. Is this
appropriate for Pacific coast population of SWTH?
I note that the OR does not show any pale tip on the
wing coverts though am not sure this 100% make the
bird AHY/ASY.
The pointed, emarginated primaries of SWTH seem like the
shape of a highly migratory species such as the east
coast birds. I don't know the wintering ranges of the Pacific
populations though if they are shorter distance migrants as
seems plausible given the milder west coast climate than
theoretically the primary shape of those populations may
tend more toward HETH and be more rounded.
Hope I don't sound as if I am trying to build a more
elaborate argument for SWTH, just to cover my ***
I may be reading what I am seeing on my screen completely
wrong and this bird may fit GCTH. Like I said the Fuhrman
photos we got made me realize how little I understand variation
in these birds (Catharus). Just trying to clear my confusion
Matt
P.S. for what it is worth I agree that Bill Elrick's
bird looks like GCTH, and that wing and primary
shape are quite useful here. Is the lack of obvious
emargination on p6 enough to rule out Bicknells?
Matt Sharp
Collection Manager
VIREO/ANS
1900 Benjamin Franklin Pkwy.
Philadelphia PA 19103
www.acnatsci.org/vireo
(tel.) 215-299-1069
(fax) 215-299-1182
>>> Mike Patterson <celata(AT)PACIFIER.COM> 10/28/03 11:28AM >>>
Both Swainson's and Gray-cheeked would have a p9 great than
p6, so the arguement here is really about Gray-cheeked vs
Hermit. I think the shape of p7-p9 eliminate Swainson's,
but as always I'm willing to be talked out of it.
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/SWTHwing22369.jpg
I'm not sure whether color cues taken from this photo series
should trump the information that can be extracted from the
structural details of the primaries. So, for me, I would
like to know whether I have interpretted the wing formula
correctly, and whether one can use the wing formula reliably
on a photgraph like this.
Try as I might, I can't seem to find a dead Hermit Thrush
(maybe if I go driving around I'll get lucky), but here's
a Gray-cheeked wing:
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/GCTHwing21552.jpg
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/2003
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/2003
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Well I am clearly confused regarding this
bird.
From: Mike Patterson <celata(AT)pacifier.com>
Date: 28 Oct 2003 3:23pm
The wing mounts are from the University of Puget Sound
collection at:
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/wingphotos.html
I should have included the details
Gray-cheeked Thrush - female imm September Michigan
Swainson's Thrush - male imm September Washington
Bill Elrick wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> The Or bird though the photo is not that great seems to show a molt
> limit on the Gr covert. There is also an interesting little feather on
> the nape that could be a juv feather. I have noticed that most will only
> molt the inner Gr cov and there seems to be a slight step there though
> as I say the photos are not the best. The photo of the wing in the skin
> collection SWTH 22369 looks to be a HU/SY also with at least the inner
> two being a little longer and different colour. The same I would say as
> the GCTH {grey cheeked} wing 21552 again the inner grt coverts are
> darker and longer. The wing photo look slightly over exposed on my
> screen but they give me that impression. So all the skin primaries would
> therefore be HY/SY shape?
>
--
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: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
From: Bill Elrick <belrick(AT)OPTONLINE.NET>
Date: 28 Oct 2003 4:18pm
Mike and everyone,
Here are a few photos of a Hermit thrush.
Wing open, wing closed so you can compare the closed wing with the OR
bird and also a breast/eye ring shot and the back colour.
Don't want anyone having to go out and collect a bird.
Bill
Thanks to John again for hosting these.
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/heth1.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/heth2.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/heth3.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/~idzikoj/heth4.jpg
-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Mike Patterson
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 11:28 AM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
Both Swainson's and Gray-cheeked would have a p9 great than
p6, so the arguement here is really about Gray-cheeked vs
Hermit. I think the shape of p7-p9 eliminate Swainson's,
but as always I'm willing to be talked out of it.
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/SWTHwing22369.jpg
I'm not sure whether color cues taken from this photo series
should trump the information that can be extracted from the
structural details of the primaries. So, for me, I would
like to know whether I have interpretted the wing formula
correctly, and whether one can use the wing formula reliably
on a photgraph like this.
Try as I might, I can't seem to find a dead Hermit Thrush
(maybe if I go driving around I'll get lucky), but here's
a Gray-cheeked wing:
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/GCTHwing21552.jpg
Matt Sharp wrote:
> Since it is only a matter of mms, displaced feathers
> seems as though they may be misleading. Though p9 does
> appear longer than p6. Can this be considered diagnostic?
> I think on the east coast this bird if seen in the field would
> likely be called a Swainson's.
>
--
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
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/2003
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/2003
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: FW: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
From: Rich Hoyer <calliope(AT)THERIVER.COM>
Date: 28 Oct 2003 6:31pm
Bill apparently meant to send this to the group.
---
----------
From: Bill Elrick <belrick(AT)optonline.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 06:53:40 -0500
To: 'Rich Hoyer' <calliope(AT)THERIVER.COM>
Subject: RE: [BIRDWG01] Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
Hi all.
This to me is a Swainson's thrush as prim 9 and prim 6 do not look to be
anywhere near equal. It is a pity we don't have a spread wing or a
chest/ belly shot. Was the bird emarginated on the 6th?
I am much more comfortable with eastern Catharus thrush and so do not
know this race of Hermit that shows no reddish in the tail or would have
no demarcation of back/rump and tail.
Bill Elrick
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
From: Bill Elrick <belrick(AT)OPTONLINE.NET>
Date: 29 Oct 2003 7:50am
Mike,
Not sure I follow you here.
I think the statement got a little confused.
>> Both Swainson's and Gray-cheeked would have a p9 great than
p6, so the arguement here is really about Gray-cheeked vs
Hermit.<<
Should it not be it is either a Gray-cheeked vs
Swainson's?
http://home.pacifier.com/~neawanna/temp/catharus.html
The birds head is to buff for it to be even a buffy type Gcth such as
the one I have, so I am content the OR bird is a Swth. I am not sure if
that is the 10th primary almost the same length as the grt coverts? If
it is then that would make it almost sure to be a Swth.
Maybe some of the other video can show this?
Bill Elrick
NJ
-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Mike Patterson
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 11:28 AM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
Both Swainson's and Gray-cheeked would have a p9 great than
p6, so the arguement here is really about Gray-cheeked vs
Hermit. I think the shape of p7-p9 eliminate Swainson's,
but as always I'm willing to be talked out of it.
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/SWTHwing22369.jpg
I'm not sure whether color cues taken from this photo series
should trump the information that can be extracted from the
structural details of the primaries. So, for me, I would
like to know whether I have interpretted the wing formula
correctly, and whether one can use the wing formula reliably
on a photgraph like this.
Try as I might, I can't seem to find a dead Hermit Thrush
(maybe if I go driving around I'll get lucky), but here's
a Gray-cheeked wing:
http://www.ups.edu/biology/museum/GCTHwing21552.jpg
Matt Sharp wrote:
> Since it is only a matter of mms, displaced feathers
> seems as though they may be misleading. Though p9 does
> appear longer than p6. Can this be considered diagnostic?
> I think on the east coast this bird if seen in the field would
> likely be called a Swainson's.
>
--
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
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/2003
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/2003
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Puzzling Oregon Catharus Thrush
From: Mike Patterson <celata(AT)pacifier.com>
Date: 29 Oct 2003 8:32am
Thanks, in part, to Bill and his many Hermit Thrush
photos I have moved into the Swainson's Thrush camp.
It seems to me that p6 is much too short for Hermit.
I had based most of my objections to Swainson's on
feather shape. These issues were solved by looking
at photo03 instead of photo04.
We do not get very many dark backed Swainson's Thrushes
in Oregon. Most of them look like this:
http://home.pacifier.com/~neawanna/neotrops/swth001.jpg
I let my provincialism get in the way.....
Bill Elrick wrote:
>
> Mike,
> Not sure I follow you here.
> I think the statement got a little confused.
>
> >> Both Swainson's and Gray-cheeked would have a p9 great than
> p6, so the arguement here is really about Gray-cheeked vs
> Hermit.<<
>
> Should it not be it is either a Gray-cheeked vs
> Swainson's?
> http://home.pacifier.com/~neawanna/temp/catharus.html
> The birds head is to buff for it to be even a buffy type Gcth such as
> the one I have, so I am content the OR bird is a Swth. I am not sure if
> that is the 10th primary almost the same length as the grt coverts? If
> it is then that would make it almost sure to be a Swth.
> Maybe some of the other video can show this?
> Bill Elrick
> NJ
>
--
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: OR mystery thrush
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 29 Oct 2003 9:40am
Folks,
Looking at the wing features this bird looks like a Swainson's Thrush to
me, P9 is clearly longer than P6. As well the difference between P8 and P6
is quite long, this difference is relatively short on Hermit Thrush. One
real good feature is the emargination of P6, at least in most cases. I have
banded some Hermit Thrushes out here in California where it was tricky to
see if any emargination was present on that feather. The photos of the
Oregon bird are not good for looking at this feature, however on that side
view you can clearly see the emargination on P8, P7 is bent medially
somewhat and is thus out of the way, the next feather edge on the stack is
P6 and I think you can see enough of the edge to see that there is no
emargination here. I may be reaching on this point, but I do think that
this feather edge is visible and it is not emarginate. Finally, these
photos look like video grabs, which can be notoriously poor on colour
(depending on the setup one used to get the photos). Thus, it is difficult
to assess the look of the bird without having reservations as to how it
really looked like in real life. The fact that the flanks do not look nice
and grey is bad for Hermit, and good for Swainson's. It is even difficult
to assess if this is a dull 'russet-back' or an 'olive-back'. The two are
different, but sometimes in the hand it is surprising how dull and olive
some 'russet-backs' can look. Perhaps this individual Swainson's Thrush is
from the interior populations (central BC) where they are olive-backed,
lacking a lot of buff on face and breast?
regards
Alvaro
Alvaro Jaramillo
Biologist
San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory
P.O. Box 247
Alviso, CA 95002
(408)-946-6548
http://www.sfbbo.org/
chucao(AT)comcast.net
***** NOTE NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS****
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Frigatebird id help needed
From: Trevor Hardaker <trevor(AT)ZESTFORBIRDS.CO.ZA>
Date: 29 Oct 2003 1:51pm
Hi there,
Currently, there is a Frigatebird which is visiting an inland dam north of
Pretoria in South Africa. I am in a terrible position sitting in Cape Town
some 1500km away from it, so have not been able to see the bird myself, nor
have I seen any photos of it yet.
The natural choice for a vagrant Frigatebird visiting South Africa is either
Greater or Lesser as they both occur in the Mozambique Channel not too far
away. From what I have heard, Lesser has been easily eliminated and so this
bird has been assumed to be a Greater. Other information I have received is
that it is a subadult male. However, not one person that has been to see
this bird has noted any indication of a lighter alar bar on the upperwing.
So, now one starts to consider the other possibilities, particularly
Magnificent and Ascension Frigatebirds. Unfortunately, all the literature
that I have consulted so far seems to have conflicting evidence as to how to
definitely separate these birds, especially Greater and Magnificent as
subadult or adult males.
Then, to top it all and confuse me even more, a couple of observers today
reported a hint of blue around the eye. From what I have read, this would
point towards female Magnificent or Ascension. And it would appear that
Ascension is the only female with all dark plumage?
But, forgetting about this "blue eye" issue, essentially we have an all dark
frigatebird which needs to be identified.
Is there anybody out there who has some pearls of wisdom as to the specific
separation of these species or who can point me in the direction of some
decent photos on the web to have a look at?
On the minuscule chance that it is either a Magnificent or Ascension
Frigatebird, this would be a first for South Africa and may see many
Capetonians making the pilgrimage north in order to chase it!!
Thanks in anticipation for any help offered.
Kind Regards
Trevor
---------------------------------------------------------
Trevor Hardaker and John Graham
Cape Town, South Africa
ZEST for BIRDS
Website: http://www.zestforbirds.co.za
---------------------------------------------------------
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: NJ Mystery Thrush
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 29 Oct 2003 2:17pm
Folks
This one looks like a Grey-cheeked/Bicknell's to me, rather than a
Western Veery. The latter has a greyer face, nice grey flanks, tendency
towards pink at bill base, usually warmer colour to breast and less
contrasting spotting on breast. The warm colour of the NJ bird suggested
Bicknell's, but the wing morphology measurements look good for
Grey-cheeked. One potential pitfall is that the Newfoundland population of
Grey-cheeked (minimus) is warmer coloured than the mainland population,
also it does seem like the NJ bird was photographed in the early morning
when there was a nice warm tone to the light. So part of the warm tone is
due to the light, Catharus look very different depending on the lighting in
my experience, more so than other groups. But to return to the point about
minimus, perhaps the warmth of the plumage is because this is a minimus
rather than aliciae?
cheers
Alvaro
Alvaro Jaramillo
Biologist
San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory
P.O. Box 247
Alviso, CA 95002
(408)-946-6548
http://www.sfbbo.org/
chucao(AT)comcast.net
***** NOTE NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS****
|
|
|
|
BIRDxxxx
BIRDCHAT
ID-FRONTIERS
US:NewEngland