 |
|
|
|
|
ID-FRONTIERS for January 16-22, 2005
[ Prev Week
| Next Week
| Calendar Month
| ID-FRONTIERS Info
]
|
Messages are displayed in the order they were received.
|
| Subject | From | Date | Time |
| Thayer's Gull Taxonomy | John Idzikowski | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 | 8:18pm |
| Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy | Alvaro Jaramillo | Sun, 16 Jan 2005 | 9:18pm |
| Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy | Dick Newell | Mon, 17 Jan 2005 | 7:03am |
| Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy | Norman D.van Swelm | Mon, 17 Jan 2005 | 9:24am |
| Abaco Gull ID | Paul Cozza | Mon, 17 Jan 2005 | 9:36am |
| Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy | Daniela.Detlef.Grube | Mon, 17 Jan 2005 | 10:02am |
| Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy | Joel Weintraub | Mon, 17 Jan 2005 | 10:05am |
| Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy | Mike Patterson | Mon, 17 Jan 2005 | 1:11pm |
| Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy | Ron LeValley | Tue, 18 Jan 2005 | 12:41am |
| Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy | Norman D.van Swelm | Tue, 18 Jan 2005 | 1:46am |
| ID Help request | John Idzikowski | Tue, 18 Jan 2005 | 10:12am |
| Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy and more Glaucous
Gulls. | Alvaro Jaramillo | Tue, 18 Jan 2005 | 10:30am |
| Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy and more Glaucous
Gulls. | Norman D.van Swelm | Tue, 18 Jan 2005 | 11:32am |
| Re: ID Help request | Julian Hough | Tue, 18 Jan 2005 | 4:18pm |
| Re: ID Help request | Jim Pike | Tue, 18 Jan 2005 | 5:36pm |
| herring-winged/vega | Phillip Pickering | Tue, 18 Jan 2005 | 8:07pm |
| ID Help: Nightjar | Blake Maybank | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 7:42am |
| Re: ID Help request | John Idzikowski | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 8:26am |
| Re: ID Help: Nightjar | GreatGrayOwl(AT)AOL.COM | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 9:13am |
| Re: ID Help: Nightjar | Bruce Deuel | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 10:12am |
| Re: ID Help: Nightjar | jbouton2(AT)EARTHLINK.N | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 10:38am |
| Mexico Nightjar | Alvaro Jaramillo | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 11:10am |
| Re : ID Help: Nightjar | Michel Bertrand | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 11:25am |
| Re: ID Help: Nightjar | GWPOTT(AT)AOL.COM | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 11:31am |
| Re: ID Help: Nightjar | Bruce Deuel | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 11:37am |
| Re: Mexico Nightjar | Eric Preston | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 11:39am |
| Re: ID Help: Nightjar | Joseph Morlan | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 11:55am |
| Nighthawk | Michel Bertrand | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 12:18pm |
| Re: ID Help: Nightjar | Steve Sosensky | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 1:03pm |
| Re: Mexico Nightjar | Mark Stackhouse | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 1:19pm |
| Re: ID Help: Nightjar | Mark Stackhouse | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 1:34pm |
| Re: ID Help request | Jim Pike | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 1:55pm |
| Re: ID Help request | John Idzikowski | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 2:23pm |
| Mexico nightjar | Ian Mclaren | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 3:11pm |
| Italy: new photos of the mystery Gull | Menotti Passarella | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 4:42pm |
| A second California Slaty-backed Gull! | Alvaro Jaramillo | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 | 11:55pm |
| Summary of Comments - Mystery Mexican nightjar
[Lesser Nighthawk} | Blake Maybank | Fri, 21 Jan 2005 | 6:45am |
| Re: A second California Slaty-backed Gull! | Lethaby, Nick | Fri, 21 Jan 2005 | 9:14am |
| Re: Slaty-backed Gull | John Idzikowski | Fri, 21 Jan 2005 | 9:56am |
| RFI: 1st Winter LBBG covert moult timing | Martin Reid | Fri, 21 Jan 2005 | 7:02pm |
| Re: RFI: 1st Winter LBBG covert moult timing | Phillip Pickering | Fri, 21 Jan 2005 | 8:01pm |
| New pervipes vs. taverneri resource article | J. Harry Krueger | Fri, 21 Jan 2005 | 8:53pm |
| A Common (Gull) ID challenge | Greg Gillson | Fri, 21 Jan 2005 | 9:10pm |
| Re: A Common (Gull) ID challenge | Phillip Pickering | Fri, 21 Jan 2005 | 10:40pm |
| Re: A second California Slaty-backed Gull! | Wayne C. Weber | Fri, 21 Jan 2005 | 10:55pm |
| Re: RFI: 1st Winter LBBG covert moult timing | Norman D.van Swelm | Sat, 22 Jan 2005 | 7:05am |
| Re: A second California Slaty-backed Gull! | John Idzikowski | Sat, 22 Jan 2005 | 9:41am |
| Re: A second California Slaty-backed Gull! | Allen Chartier | Sat, 22 Jan 2005 | 10:26am |
| Re: A Common (Gull) ID challenge | Nick Komar | Sat, 22 Jan 2005 | 8:12pm |
|
To use email addresses replace '(AT)' with '@'.
This is done to confuse the spam 'bots.
|
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy
From: John Idzikowski <idzikoj(AT)UWM.EDU>
Date: 16 Jan 2005 8:18pm
Several years ago I ran across an on-line paper by Ron Pittaway of Minden,
Ontario from 1999 summarizing the taxonomic history of Thayer's Gull; it
concluded that Thayer's should be lumped with Iceland. Subsequesnt analysis
by Weir, Kitchener and McGowan since 1999 infers the possibility of Thayer's
as a "good" species and Kumlien's as a highly variable "stable hybrid
population". We have discussed this extensively on this forum as this work
may provide a basis for the geographical distribution of Kumlien and
Thayer's forms we see in winter as well as future classification of the
complex. Ron has summarized the Weir paper previously (link below). I
recently looked for the 1999 paper again and could not locate it so I urged
Ron to repost it as it has an excellent summary of the work and subsequent
controversy created by Neal Smith in the Arctic which resulted in part in
the splitting of Thayer's in the early 70's. It is now back on-line and this
review should be considered along with the Weir paper.
http://www.ofo.ca/ThayersOFO.htm
http://www.aves.net/birdnews/litreview-xthgulls.htm
I think that it has been lost on many that the concept of "visual isolation
in gulls" and the report of assortative pairing between Thayer's and
Kumlien's forms by Smith was really hot stuff 30 years ago. In animal
behavior (now it's all "behavioral ecology" of course) and animal "optical
signalling" circles back then, Smith's work provided evidence of the
importance of very subtle clues (color of orbital rings) used by similar
appearing gull species and forms to select mates of the same species, also
resulting in the taxonomy we struggle with today. You can read the rest for
yourself.
John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao(AT)COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: 16 Jan 2005 9:18pm
Birders
In Ron Pittaway's summary he wrote
"30. Snell (1989, 1991) found non-assortative breeding between Kumlien's and
Thayer's Gulls at Home Bay, Baffin Island. He refuted the assortative mating
of thayeri and kumlieni reported by Smith (1966). Snell assessed the
logistical difficulties of Smith setting up experiments, collecting data and
traveling long distances between study sites in the Arctic, concluding that
it was impossible for Smith to have completed all the work reported. He
stated that Smith's methodology and conclusions should be viewed
cautiously."
Now I think Ron was being gentle and giving the benefit of the doubt (noble
Canadian qualities) here to Smith's work. But if you read Snell's papers,
you get no doubt that he is really saying that Smith made it all up, the
results are based on little or none of the field work that Smith reported in
his papers. If you read Smith's work it does seem super human, all that
painting of orbital rings. It really seems impossible. You also need to add
to that available satellite photos of the area when Smith was there that
suggests the ice was in a state where it would have been impossible to
travel between colonies using a boat or a snowmobile. Snell also worked with
the same Inuit guides as Smith and got the low down from them on what work
was done, I don't recall if that is published. Going through the details is
really not the point, although it makes for fascinating reading, but the
point is that Snell clearly suggests the Smith work should be entirely
discarded. Our understanding of what Thayer's and Kumlien's are doing in
Home Bay is clearer if we don't consider Smith's work, some, part or much of
it may be myth! If Snell is correct here, and I think he is based on reading
Smith and Snell, we just need to accept that Kumlien's and Thayer's Gulls
hybridize, probably in a huge portion of the Arctic. Then if you read the
Snell & Godfrey abstract from the Montreal AOU conference, then the
available data is pretty clear that there is a good cline here between
Thayer's and Iceland. I was present at the Montreal AOU and saw this talk
live, and there was really good and compelling evidence that a cline was
involved. There is hard and concrete data that is saying that is a reality.
Now this is where I find it odd that we get reports of Kumlien's x Thayer's
birds, it implies some level of clear definition of what Kumlien's is. I
don't think you can do this, the available data suggests that Kumlien's is
kind of like a "Puget Sound" = "Olympic" gull, a population from a hybrid
zone. It seems like a perfectly reasonable way to look at this bird. I don't
get the sense that there is much buy-in to this concept by birders, although
the published data from the breeding grounds seems to be clear on this.
Perhaps it is a belief in Smith's work that has caused this confusion, but
how about if it didn't exist? How does one view these gulls then?
I think I have been pretty much convinced by this hybridization and
cline evidence all along, but one aspect that has changed in my mind is
whether this has much bearing on if you should lump the lot or not. I would
have jumped up and said yes, yes, yes, lump the lot a few years ago. Now, I
think the jury is still out on this, large scale hybridization does not
necessarily mean that Thayer's and Iceland are the same thing, just in the
same way that I think that it's fine that Western and Glaucous-wings are not
the same thing although they hybridize extensively. The issue is that we
know a lot more about the dynamics of the hybrid zone in the Pacific
Northwest, and we know little about the Arctic hybrid zone. In addition, the
Arctic has an odd geography. First of all, ecologically east and west means
less up there than down here, while changes in latitude have a much greater
ecological effect there than down here. So your clines can go in multiple
directions, while the fact that you are dealing with islands rather than a
solid land mass, or a simple coastline, makes it all the more confusing. The
dynamics of a hybrid zone up there are almost surely going to be different
and more complex than a pacific coast hybrid zone. There could be gene
exchange in some areas, and assortative mating in others perhaps? The only
way we are going to get some new data that will give us some answers is for
more molecular work to be done on these gulls. I think only then will we be
able to get at the answer of the degree of gene exchange, and if Thayer's
and Iceland are sister taxa, closely related taxa, or just different gulls
that happen to hybridize. Thus far the data suggests that we should not lump
the lot, but should wait for more studies.
Just wanted to add dos centavos to John's posting.
No sign of the California Slaty-backed Gull thus far, unfortunately.
Cheers
Alvaro Jaramillo
chucao(AT)coastside.net
Half Moon Bay, CA
Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide
http://www.fieldguides.com/home.htm
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
> [mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of John Idzikowski
> Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2005 7:14 PM
> To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Thayer's Gull Taxonomy
>
> Several years ago I ran across an on-line paper by Ron Pittaway of Minden,
> Ontario from 1999 summarizing the taxonomic history of Thayer's Gull; it
> concluded that Thayer's should be lumped with Iceland. Subsequesnt
> analysis
> by Weir, Kitchener and McGowan since 1999 infers the possibility of
> Thayer's
> as a "good" species and Kumlien's as a highly variable "stable hybrid
> population". We have discussed this extensively on this forum as this work
> may provide a basis for the geographical distribution of Kumlien and
> Thayer's forms we see in winter as well as future classification of the
> complex. Ron has summarized the Weir paper previously (link below). I
> recently looked for the 1999 paper again and could not locate it so I
> urged
> Ron to repost it as it has an excellent summary of the work and subsequent
> controversy created by Neal Smith in the Arctic which resulted in part in
> the splitting of Thayer's in the early 70's. It is now back on-line and
> this
> review should be considered along with the Weir paper.
>
> http://www.ofo.ca/ThayersOFO.htm
>
> http://www.aves.net/birdnews/litreview-xthgulls.htm
>
> I think that it has been lost on many that the concept of "visual
> isolation
> in gulls" and the report of assortative pairing between Thayer's and
> Kumlien's forms by Smith was really hot stuff 30 years ago. In animal
> behavior (now it's all "behavioral ecology" of course) and animal "optical
> signalling" circles back then, Smith's work provided evidence of the
> importance of very subtle clues (color of orbital rings) used by similar
> appearing gull species and forms to select mates of the same species, also
> resulting in the taxonomy we struggle with today. You can read the rest
> for
> yourself.
>
>
> John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy
From: Dick Newell <dick.newell(AT)ZEN.CO.UK>
Date: 17 Jan 2005 7:03am
Alvaro uses Olympic Gull as an example of a hybrid population between 2 good
species and then (reasonably in my opinion) extends this to justify
maintaining Thayer's and Iceland Gull as good species. A really good read is
Lieber's et al's paper: The Herring Gull Complex is not a Ring Species
(c2004 Royal Society), that demonstrates that many modern forms of large
white-headed gull, now considered good species, enjoyed, at least, extensive
introgression in their history. Unless we are to go in for major lumping of
these gulls, then demanding such "niceties" as monophyly in gull species
definitions will have to go by the board.
Dick Newell
Cambridge, UK
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy
From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)wxs.nl>
Date: 17 Jan 2005 9:24am
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--Boundary_(ID_W39cD2nw7cL9fr9iHMKlrg)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
> In Ron Pittaway's summary he wrote
>
> "30. Snell (1989, 1991) found non-assortative breeding between Kumlien's and
> Thayer's Gulls at Home Bay, Baffin Island. He refuted the assortative mating
> of thayeri and kumlieni reported by Smith (1966). Snell assessed the
> logistical difficulties of Smith setting up experiments, collecting data and
> traveling long distances between study sites in the Arctic, concluding that
> it was impossible for Smith to have completed all the work reported. He
> stated that Smith's methodology and conclusions should be viewed
> cautiously."<
Alvaro Jaramillo wrote:
> Now I think Ron was being gentle and giving the benefit of the doubt (noble
> Canadian qualities) here to Smith's work. But if you read Snell's papers,
> you get no doubt that he is really saying that Smith made it all up, the
> results are based on little or none of the field work that Smith reported in
> his papers. If you read Smith's work it does seem super human, all that
> painting of orbital rings. It really seems impossible. You also need to add
> to that available satellite photos of the area when Smith was there that
> suggests the ice was in a state where it would have been impossible to
> travel between colonies using a boat or a snowmobile.<
Smith travelled by dogsledge. I don't think satellite photo's exist of the area
at the time Smith was there! To you (and to me) Smith's work seems super human
but we are not all the same. I remember a night at Cape Churchill in the Hudson
Bay area where I shared the Polar Bear watchtower cabin with an American writer.
I woke up in the middle of the night by the sound of my clappering teeth, it
was minus 32 degrees Celsius! I spend the rest of the night watching Aurora
boreallis while my friend slept like a baby! As far as I know Smith deposited
all the birds he collected in the Royal Canadian Museum. Snell certainly
suggested that Smith made it all up but as he wasn't man enough to say so in no
uncertain terms I think his article isn't worth the paper it's printed on!
Smith published all his methods and techniques, they can be repeated at any time
and not neccessarily out there in the cold.
Norman
--Boundary_(ID_W39cD2nw7cL9fr9iHMKlrg)
Content-type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
----DELETED HTML-ENCODED SECTION----
--Boundary_(ID_W39cD2nw7cL9fr9iHMKlrg)--
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Abaco Gull ID
From: Paul Cozza <pcozza(AT)ALUM.MIT.EDU>
Date: 17 Jan 2005 9:36am
I was recently birding in Abaco and came across a gull which I ID'd as a
Lesser Black-backed Gull (not uncommon for Abaco at this time of year).
After I posted a message to Massbird and a picture of it, Rick Heil and Mike
Resch pointed out that the large bill and hefty/bulky body size of the bird
seemed to indicate otherwise. Rick thought the gull may be a 1W Kelp Gull.
Mike thought it could be that or perhaps some hybrid. Here is a link to a
couple of video frames of the bird:
http://home.comcast.net/~pcozza/Abaco_Gull.html
The bird was substantially larger than Laughing and Ring-billed Gulls which
were nearby, yet noticeably smaller than a Great Black-backed Gull by which
it later perched.
Any thoughts or opinions?
Paul Cozza
Concord, MA
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy
From: "Daniela.Detlef.Gruber(AT)t-online.de" <Daniela.Detlef.Gruber@T-ONLINE.DE>
Date: 17 Jan 2005 10:02am
>A really good read is Lieber's et al's paper: The Herring Gull Complex
is not a Ring Species
(c2004 Royal Society), that demonstrates that many modern forms of large
white-headed gull, now considered good species, enjoyed, at least,
extensive
introgression in their history.
Correct, but they treated (lumped) Thayers/Kumliens/Iceland into a
single species, and this in contrast to many other e.g. smithsonianus
vs. argentatus/argenteus?
In any way, well worth to read (I refer to their German paper in
Limicola)!!!
Regards
Detlef Gruber
-----Original Message-----
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:02:31 +0100
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Thayer's Gull Taxonomy
From: Dick Newell <dick.newell(AT)ZEN.CO.UK>
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Alvaro uses Olympic Gull as an example of a hybrid population between 2
good
species and then (reasonably in my opinion) extends this to justify
maintaining Thayer's and Iceland Gull as good species. A really good
read is
Lieber's et al's paper: The Herring Gull Complex is not a Ring Species
(c2004 Royal Society), that demonstrates that many modern forms of large
white-headed gull, now considered good species, enjoyed, at least,
extensive
introgression in their history. Unless we are to go in for major lumping
of
these gulls, then demanding such "niceties" as monophyly in gull species
definitions will have to go by the board.
Dick Newell
Cambridge, UK
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy
From: Joel Weintraub <jweintraub(AT)fullerton.edu>
Date: 17 Jan 2005 10:05am
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Swelm wrote: I don't think satellite photo's exist of the area at the =
time Smith was there!=20
Just a side note about photos....not to support one interpretation or =
another. In the summer of 1966, I was a graduate student at the =
University of California, Riverside. Don Chant and 3 of us went on an =
NSF sponsored expedition, up the Dubawnt River in Canada (west of Hudson =
Bay, in the Northwest Territories)....and canoed for 2 months until we =
were close to the arctic circle, where we were picked up by bush pilot. =
(I must have been crazy... I can't swim!!) The trip was for the =
taxonomy of mites. We had with us high resolution aerial photographs of =
the entire route. They may not have been satellite photos, but aerial =
photos of good quality. I think that, at least in the United States and =
possibly Canada, that such photos have been available since the 1920s or =
1930s, and are used to generate topographic maps of areas. It's not a =
question of whether such aerials could exist in 1966...they must have. =
It's a question of the date of the flyovers. My memory is that on a few =
occasions, the actual topography differed from the view on the aerial =
photographs, and we either had to backtrack or portage over a land dam =
that we did not expect. Ice in river systems can change topography =
quickly.
Joel Weintraub
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy
From: Mike Patterson <celata(AT)pacifier.com>
Date: 17 Jan 2005 1:11pm
Smith's _Scientific American_ article is reprinted in
"Readings from Scientific American: Birds" (1980) available
really cheap from Amazon (used).
I don't suppose someone could point me to any online reprints
or places where some of these references can be purchased?
Those of us who live in the sticks have limited access to many
of the citation, which sem worth reading.
--
Mike Patterson
Astoria, OR
celata(AT)pacifier.com
If you want to end war and stuff, you've got to sing loud
- Arlo Guthrie
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy
From: Ron LeValley <ron(AT)MADRIVERBIO.COM>
Date: 18 Jan 2005 12:41am
Norman D.van Swelm wrote:
> Smith published all his methods and techniques, they can be repeated at
any time
> and not neccessarily out there in the cold.
I was a young graduate student studying gulls in the 1970's when a group of
us gull researchers began to discuss Smith's work. It became clear that he
had measured more gulls per day (after capturing, drugging, and sometimes
painting their faces) than it was possible for me to do in a museum with the
gulls lined up in a tray. I think it is worth taking his work with a huge
grain of salt. We concluded that it would be nearly impossible to repeat his
work. There were many of us that came to that conclusion, including a few
years later, Snell.
The problem was that many of his methods and techniques, especially those
linked to logistics, just were not repeatable. I don't know how you would do
it in the Arctic and not get cold!
Ron LeValley, Senior Biologist
ron(AT)madriverbio.com
707/839-0900
Cell 707/496-3326
Fax 839-0867
www.madriverbio.com
Mad River Biologists
1497 Central Avenue
McKinleyville, CA 95519
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy
From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)wxs.nl>
Date: 18 Jan 2005 1:46am
Ron LeValley wrote:
>We concluded that it would be nearly impossible to repeat his
> work. There were many of us that came to that conclusion, including a few
> years later, Snell.
>
> The problem was that many of his methods and techniques, especially those
> linked to logistics, just were not repeatable. I don't know how you would
> do
> it in the Arctic and not get cold!<
Considering the amount of work done by Smith I'd say he faced overheating
rather than cooling off!
Cheers, Norman
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: ID Help request
From: John Idzikowski <idzikoj(AT)UWM.EDU>
Date: 18 Jan 2005 10:12am
This bird was found on Dec. 21 in NW Wisconsin. Resisting for a moment the
"Western Tanager" appearance note the extensive below the
neck "hood"of pinkish red, the orangish tail color in all three shots and the
rough, seemingly moult in progress, look of the wing
coverts. These fair to poor video grabs may be a bit oversaturated as well.
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/passerines/cbc.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/passerines/cbc2.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/passerines/cbc3.jpg
John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy and more Glaucous
Gulls.
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao(AT)COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: 18 Jan 2005 10:30am
Birders
I just pulled out the Snell paper (hidden away in a dusty cabinet) and I
encourage you all who are interested in this subject to read it. Ever the
technophile I was incorrect in asserting that a satellite photo was taken of
Home Bay, of course in the early 60s all the high tech equipment was focused
on Cuba ;-) The photos published of the ice breakup in 1961 were aerial
photos, not satellite photos. Snell writes "At that time, travel by foot,
dogsled and/or open boat between the heads of fjords and the larger icesheet
would have been exceedingly difficult, and concurrent work on gull cliff
colonies (Remember all of this was done on cliffs, not flat colonies - AJ)
...would seemingly have been precluded." The photos available are by chance
from the very same days that Smith was working up there, it is pretty
damming, you need to read it to get the full scope of problems in the
original work. I should add that while Smith was climbing up cliffs,
measuring birds, colouring orbital rings and cross fostering gull chicks he
also had time to work on Ringed Plovers (Smith 1969. Polymorphism in Ringed
Plovers. Ibis 111: 177-188). Guys like Ron had ample reason to be suspicious
of the findings.
Back to Glaucous Gulls - I had a quick look at the Banks paper on geographic
variation in these gulls. He looked at adults and based his conclusions on
those, which is perfectly reasonable. After that he looked at a few
specimens from the Pacific Coast and identified them to subspecies using
measurements as the birds wintering here tend to be immatures. He concluded
that most were barrovianus, however it is unclear how many he looked at, my
guess is that the sample was very small. One bird from the Salton Sea was
large, and overlapped with other forms but he called it barrovianus. In this
case, I don't know that you could safely say that. So we have barrovianus
here, but we probably also have birds from elsewhere. That is my guess, and
Bank's paper does not resolve this.
Cheers
Al
Alvaro Jaramillo
chucao(AT)coastside.net
Half Moon Bay, CA
Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide
http://www.fieldguides.com/home.htm
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
> [mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Ron LeValley
> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 11:42 PM
> To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Thayer's Gull Taxonomy
>
> Norman D.van Swelm wrote:
>
> > Smith published all his methods and techniques, they can be repeated at
> any time
> > and not neccessarily out there in the cold.
>
> I was a young graduate student studying gulls in the 1970's when a group
> of
> us gull researchers began to discuss Smith's work. It became clear that he
> had measured more gulls per day (after capturing, drugging, and sometimes
> painting their faces) than it was possible for me to do in a museum with
> the
> gulls lined up in a tray. I think it is worth taking his work with a huge
> grain of salt. We concluded that it would be nearly impossible to repeat
> his
> work. There were many of us that came to that conclusion, including a few
> years later, Snell.
>
> The problem was that many of his methods and techniques, especially those
> linked to logistics, just were not repeatable. I don't know how you would
> do
> it in the Arctic and not get cold!
>
>
> Ron LeValley, Senior Biologist
> ron(AT)madriverbio.com
> 707/839-0900
> Cell 707/496-3326
> Fax 839-0867
> www.madriverbio.com
> Mad River Biologists
> 1497 Central Avenue
> McKinleyville, CA 95519
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Thayer's Gull Taxonomy and more Glaucous
Gulls.
From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)wxs.nl>
Date: 18 Jan 2005 11:32am
Alvaro Jaramillo wrote:
>, and concurrent work on gull cliff
> colonies (Remember all of this was done on cliffs, not flat colonies - AJ)
> ...would seemingly have been precluded." The photos available are by
> chance
> from the very same days that Smith was working up there, it is pretty
> damming, you need to read it to get the full scope of problems in the
> original work. I should add that while Smith was climbing up cliffs,
> measuring birds, colouring orbital rings and cross fostering gull chicks
> he
> also had time to work on Ringed Plovers (Smith 1969. Polymorphism in
> Ringed
> Plovers. Ibis 111: 177-188). Guys like Ron had ample reason to be
> suspicious
> of the findings.<
My impression is that a lot of Smith's work was done at the foot of the
cliffs. Perhaps Snell is so sceptical as he shot all his birds and did not
move much himself? Still I have yet to see sound proof that Smith cheated!
Norman
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ID Help request
From: Julian Hough <jrhough1(AT)SNET.NET>
Date: 18 Jan 2005 4:18pm
John,
Looks like a first-winter (?) male Baltimore Oriole...
Julian Hough,
CT, USA
jrhough1(AT)snet.net
www.naturescapeimages.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Idzikowski" <idzikoj(AT)UWM.EDU>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 12:12 PM
Subject: [BIRDWG01] ID Help request
> This bird was found on Dec. 21 in NW Wisconsin. Resisting for a moment the
> "Western Tanager" appearance note the extensive below the
> neck "hood"of pinkish red, the orangish tail color in all three shots and
> the rough, seemingly moult in progress, look of the wing
> coverts. These fair to poor video grabs may be a bit oversaturated as
> well.
>
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/passerines/cbc.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/passerines/cbc2.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/passerines/cbc3.jpg
>
> John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ID Help request
From: Jim Pike <jpike44(AT)EARTHLINK.NET>
Date: 18 Jan 2005 5:36pm
I agree that it is most likely an SY Baltimore Oriole, as the orangy
coloration and clearcut wingbars (especially, across the greater coverts)
point to it not being a Bullock's. However, I would think that the fairly
colorless midsection of the bird is more indicative of it being a young
female. That yellowy frame to the orange breast does look odd, though. How
much of this, if any, is due to the poor quality of the photo?
Jim Pike
Huntington Beach, CA
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: herring-winged/vega
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 18 Jan 2005 8:07pm
For those interested here's another study of a (probably) smithsonianus
x Glaucous-winged from the central Oregon coast today. This one is
a near mature bird superficially resembling vegae in eye-color range and
primary pattern, but with suspicious combination of close to smith-shade
mantle and slight lack of full black pigment saturation in the primaries.
Otherwise I'm not sure what else to look at in differentiating hybrids from
pale-end vegae.
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gull51.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gull52.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gull53.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gull54.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gull55.jpg
Cheers,
Phil Pickering
Lincoln City, Oregon
philliplc(AT)harborside.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: ID Help: Nightjar
From: Blake Maybank <maybank(AT)NS.SYMPATICO.CA>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 7:42am
Subject: nightjar ID assistance
While on a family vacation in western Mexico, we took a mangrove boat tour
to see crocodiles (the things one does for one's family), but I managed to
convince the boat's driver to stop periodically for birds. I photographed
a nightjar roosting on a mangrove limb overhanging the channel, and while I
suspect it may be a Common Poorwill (though the tail seems too long), I'd
appreciate other opinions, as I have little experience with visual
identification of nightjars.
We were on a river near San Blas, Nayarit state, on 30 December 2004.
I realise this might represent a fairly straight-forward ID problem, but I
suspect some need a break from gulls and geese.
Photos of the bird may be found at:
http://maybank.tripod.com/images/nightjar.htm
Cheers,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blake Maybank
mailto:maybank(AT)ns.sympatico.ca
144 Bayview Drive,
White's Lake, Nova Scotia
B3T 1Z1 CANADA
Birding the Americas - Trip Report & Planning Repository
http://www.birdingtheamericas.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ID Help request
From: John Idzikowski <idzikoj(AT)UWM.EDU>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 8:26am
The overwhelming response on this bird was for a first winter male Baltimore; a
few suggested Bullock's due to the hooded effect
because of distortion of the originals. Here are the same video stills just
received; I think that the majority was correct. Another
state listserv group that saw the originals without the Western Tanager comment
was at 14 for Oriole and 13 for W. Tan.
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/passerines/cbc4.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/passerines/cbc5.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/passerines/cbc6.jpg
John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
__________
original message-
> This bird was found on Dec. 21 in NW Wisconsin. Resisting for a moment the
"Western Tanager" appearance note the extensive below
> the neck "hood"of pinkish red, the orangish tail color in all three shots and
the rough, seemingly moult in progress, look of the
> wing coverts. These fair to poor video grabs may be a bit oversaturated as
well.
>
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/passerines/cbc.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/passerines/cbc2.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/passerines/cbc3.jpg
>
> John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
>
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ID Help: Nightjar
From: GreatGrayOwl(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 20 Jan 2005 9:13am
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Hi all:
While I have seen none of the Mexican nightjars that do not also occur in the
US, Blake's bird exhibits the pale gray scapular panel typical of two
US-breeding nightjars, Chuck and Whip. Additionally, the row of whitish spots
below
the scapular panel are typical of Whip-poor-will and rule out
Chuck-will's-widow.
In a quick perusal through Handbook of the Birds of the World, no other
nightjars popped out to my eyes as having the gray scapular panel, but my Howell
&
Webb seems to be MIA so I couldn't check that better source to be sure that no
non-US, Mexican nightjar would show such a feature. Also due to the missing
H&W, I could not check to see how unusual (or not) Whip-poor-will would be in
mangroves in west Mexico, but then I remembered reading a recent paper by
Steve Howell in Cotinga that mentioned a low-elevation record in west Mexico; I
managed to dig out journal out of the clutter in my "office." From Cotinga no.
21 on pg 40 in a paper entitled "Further observations of birds from Colima and
adjacent Jalisco, Mexico" is the following sentence in the Whip-poor-will
account (about a low-elevation record in Jalisco) :
"There are few records of this species from the lowlands of western Mexico,
where it may be a regular elevational migrant."
Of course, if my ID of the bird is incorrect, most all of the above is for
naught.
Enjoy,
Tony Leukering
Brighton, CO
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ID Help: Nightjar
From: Bruce Deuel <BDEUEL(AT)DFG.CA.GOV>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 10:12am
Hi all,
First off, let me say I know nothing about nightjar i.d. But I have to
ask, why isn't this bird a Common Poorwill? The very short tail, black
areas in the face (assuming that isn't just a shadow, which it may very
well be), and even the spotting in the scapular area look very much like
Sibley's illustration of a "light adult" in his Western guide.
Since I don't have any thing to compare with in California, whatever
discussion comes from my question will be most illuminating.
Cheers,
Bruce Deuel
Red Bluff/Redding
bdeuel(AT)dfg.ca.gov
>>> <GreatGrayOwl(AT)AOL.COM> 01/20/05 8:12 AM >>>
Hi all:
While I have seen none of the Mexican nightjars that do not also occur
in the
US, Blake's bird exhibits the pale gray scapular panel typical of two
US-breeding nightjars, Chuck and Whip. Additionally, the row of
whitish spots below
the scapular panel are typical of Whip-poor-will and rule out
Chuck-will's-widow.
In a quick perusal through Handbook of the Birds of the World, no
other
nightjars popped out to my eyes as having the gray scapular panel, but
my Howell &
Webb seems to be MIA so I couldn't check that better source to be sure
that no
non-US, Mexican nightjar would show such a feature. Also due to the
missing
H&W, I could not check to see how unusual (or not) Whip-poor-will would
be in
mangroves in west Mexico, but then I remembered reading a recent paper
by
Steve Howell in Cotinga that mentioned a low-elevation record in west
Mexico; I
managed to dig out journal out of the clutter in my "office." From
Cotinga no.
21 on pg 40 in a paper entitled "Further observations of birds from
Colima and
adjacent Jalisco, Mexico" is the following sentence in the
Whip-poor-will
account (about a low-elevation record in Jalisco) :
"There are few records of this species from the lowlands of western
Mexico,
where it may be a regular elevational migrant."
Of course, if my ID of the bird is incorrect, most all of the above is
for
naught.
Enjoy,
Tony Leukering
Brighton, CO
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ID Help: Nightjar
From: jbouton2(AT)EARTHLINK.NET
Date: 20 Jan 2005 10:38am
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Good news Tony I found my Howell & Webb (or is it your's?!?... NO I =
didn't borrow that! ;),
At any rate, in response to your query Howell/Webb show the range of =
Eastern Whip-poor-will as a very narrow strip along the Gulf coast and =
not approaching the west coast until the narrowest point at of the =
country near Oaxaca state well below Nayarit. I will throw out some =
other options here though. The plate of a typical Mexican Whip-poor-will =
shows a very rich, reddish bird, but in the text Howell does suggest =
that while this species averages darker, that they overlap in every =
regard. Of course, having no prior experience with this species I don't =
know if a Mexican Whip could ever reach this extremity in lightness, but =
the range map shows these birds occurring in a thin band just inland of =
the west coast and through the eastern half of Narayit. Another species =
shown in Howell/Webb that superficially resembles the photos is =
Buff-collared Nightjar which is shown as occurring throughout Narayit. =
Of course there is the one glaring problem in that there is no hint of a =
rufous collar on the photos, but I wonder if due to the angle (below and =
slightly behind) this mark could be obscured by the mantle on a sleeping =
bird. I'm a bit troubled by the apparent wing to tail ratio here as well =
though...=20
Now that I've further muddied the situation, I'll let those of you with =
actual experience with these other species chime in. I just thought I =
could add a bit to Tony's post.
Good Birding,
Jeff Bouton
Leica Sports Optics
Port Charlotte, FL
jbouton2(AT)earthlink.net
PS - for the benefit of any travelling to sunny FL in the near future, =
the male "green-backed" Spindalis that appears to be the first occurence =
of the Cuban subspecies (S.z.pretrei) persists in Key West, while a =
female more typical of the Bahamian (S.z.zena) is in the central keys, =
and the Bananquit found in a hotel courtyard in Ft. Lauderdale last =
weekend is still being seen as well.=20
----- Original Message -----=20
From: GreatGrayOwl(AT)AOL.COM=20
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU=20
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] ID Help: Nightjar
Hi all:
While I have seen none of the Mexican nightjars that do not also occur =
in the US, Blake's bird exhibits the pale gray scapular panel typical of =
two US-breeding nightjars, Chuck and Whip. Additionally, the row of =
whitish spots below the scapular panel are typical of Whip-poor-will and =
rule out Chuck-will's-widow.
In a quick perusal through Handbook of the Birds of the World, no =
other nightjars popped out to my eyes as having the gray scapular panel, =
but my Howell & Webb seems to be MIA so I couldn't check that better =
source to be sure that no non-US, Mexican nightjar would show such a =
feature. Also due to the missing H&W, I could not check to see how =
unusual (or not) Whip-poor-will would be in mangroves in west Mexico, =
but then I remembered reading a recent paper by Steve Howell in Cotinga =
that mentioned a low-elevation record in west Mexico; I managed to dig =
out journal out of the clutter in my "office." From Cotinga no. 21 on =
pg 40 in a paper entitled "Further observations of birds from Colima and =
adjacent Jalisco, Mexico" is the following sentence in the =
Whip-poor-will account (about a low-elevation record in Jalisco) :
"There are few records of this species from the lowlands of western =
Mexico, where it may be a regular elevational migrant."
Of course, if my ID of the bird is incorrect, most all of the above is =
for naught.
Enjoy,
Tony Leukering
Brighton, CO
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Mexico Nightjar
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao(AT)COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 11:10am
Birders
My apologies if this comes in twice, it doesn't seem to have gone to the
list somehow so I am sending again.
I was going to send a private note to Blake (hi there Blake!) but Tony's
note suggests that more discussion is needed on this bird. I came to an
entirely different identification on this bird, Lesser Nighthawk, a female.
Structurally this bird is good for a nighthawk, with a relatively small head
and very long wings. Not only is the primary extension really long, the
wings stick out past the tail it seems. The upperpart plumage features are
right on for a Lesser Nighthawk, and note that apart from the structural
features you can rule out Whip-poor-will and several congeners by the lack
of a pale collar on this bird. Buff-collared Nightjar is not the only one
with a buff collar, most of its relatives have one as well! A shot of the
underside, if you have one Blake, would clarify things. Finally, I think it
is pretty rare (or even extremely rare?) for one of the Caprimulgus in
Mexico to roost on a branch, they roost pretty exclusively on the ground.
Roosting on branches is of course entirely typical of the nighthawks.
Cheers
Al
Alvaro Jaramillo
chucao(AT)coastside.net
Half Moon Bay, CA
Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide
http://www.fieldguides.com/home.htm
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re : ID Help: Nightjar
From: Michel Bertrand <bertrmi(AT)colba.net>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 11:25am
Blake Maybank wrote :
> (...) We were on a river near San Blas, Nayarit state,
> on 30 December 2004. (...)
> Photos of the bird may be found at:
> http://maybank.tripod.com/images/nightjar.htm
____________
I have no field experience with the southern nightjars and nighthawks, but
here are my two pesos.
My guess on Blake's bird would be the Lesser Nighthawk for the following
points. The head looks small. The bristles around the bill are somewhat
fuzzy on the photo, but they look relatively short what would rule out the
genus Caprimulgus. The white large dots over the pale band, in the scapular
area, don't fit for a Whip-Poor-Will but are okay for a Lesser Nighthawk.
The pale gray color, the long tail, the marks on the edges of primaries,
the large black mark on the posterior coverts just over the primaries and
some other plumage details are fitting the Lesser Nighthawk photos I'm
looking at.
I could be wrong.
Be happy...
MICHEL BERTRAND
Sainte-Julie, Qc
bertrmi(AT)colba.net
L'autour, pour se perpétuer, peut
airer comme un diable en pennes.
-- Moa
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ID Help: Nightjar
From: GWPOTT(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 20 Jan 2005 11:31am
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Being a life long Californian, I have no experience with Mexican Nightjars,
and very little with Chuck-will's-widow (In Alabama, Florida and Georgia) and
Whip-poor-will (only heard that one in Arizona). So I'm not sure what this
bird is! So here's my (un)expert opinion: The gray scapular pannel does seem
to indicate that it is either Chuck-will's-widow or Whip-poor-will. However,
the upper photo seems to show that the wing tip extends slightly past the tail
tip, which is wrong for both species. A tail that short seems to indicate
only Common Poorwill. On the other hand the head seem proportionally small,
which seems to eliminate the Poorwill, Whip-poor-will, and Chuck-will's-widow!
Could this be a Nighthawk? I doubt it, because there is no hint of the white
wing bar which usually is visible on a perched bird. Just a few more features
to consider, because I'm stumped!
--Gary
Gary W. Potter
Sanger, Fresno Co., CA
GWPOTT(AT)aol.com
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ID Help: Nightjar
From: Bruce Deuel <BDEUEL(AT)DFG.CA.GOV>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 11:37am
As soon as Alvaro suggested it was a Lesser Nighthawk I said "Of
course!". I had initially thought nighthawk (SURE you did!), but,
forgetting about females, dismissed that because I couldn't see any
white in the primaries. Every thing else looks good, and Alvaro has
convinced me.
Cheers,
Bruce Deuel
Red Bluff/Redding
bdeuel(AT)dfg.ca.gov
>>> <GWPOTT(AT)AOL.COM> 01/20/05 10:28 AM >>>
Being a life long Californian, I have no experience with Mexican
Nightjars,
and very little with Chuck-will's-widow (In Alabama, Florida and
Georgia) and
Whip-poor-will (only heard that one in Arizona). So I'm not sure what
this
bird is! So here's my (un)expert opinion: The gray scapular pannel
does seem
to indicate that it is either Chuck-will's-widow or Whip-poor-will.
However,
the upper photo seems to show that the wing tip extends slightly past
the tail
tip, which is wrong for both species. A tail that short seems to
indicate
only Common Poorwill. On the other hand the head seem proportionally
small,
which seems to eliminate the Poorwill, Whip-poor-will, and
Chuck-will's-widow!
Could this be a Nighthawk? I doubt it, because there is no hint of the
white
wing bar which usually is visible on a perched bird. Just a few more
features
to consider, because I'm stumped!
--Gary
Gary W. Potter
Sanger, Fresno Co., CA
GWPOTT(AT)aol.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Mexico Nightjar
From: Eric Preston <eric(AT)ERICWPRESTON.COM>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 11:39am
For what it's worth, I've had Lesser Nighthawks roosting on mangroves in
Nayarit. I'll scan a post a photo shortly.
Best,
Eric Preston
San Francisco, CA
-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Alvaro Jaramillo
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 10:10 AM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Mexico Nightjar
Birders
My apologies if this comes in twice, it doesn't seem to have gone to the
list somehow so I am sending again.
I was going to send a private note to Blake (hi there Blake!) but Tony's
note suggests that more discussion is needed on this bird. I came to an
entirely different identification on this bird, Lesser Nighthawk, a female.
Structurally this bird is good for a nighthawk, with a relatively small head
and very long wings. Not only is the primary extension really long, the
wings stick out past the tail it seems. The upperpart plumage features are
right on for a Lesser Nighthawk, and note that apart from the structural
features you can rule out Whip-poor-will and several congeners by the lack
of a pale collar on this bird. Buff-collared Nightjar is not the only one
with a buff collar, most of its relatives have one as well! A shot of the
underside, if you have one Blake, would clarify things. Finally, I think it
is pretty rare (or even extremely rare?) for one of the Caprimulgus in
Mexico to roost on a branch, they roost pretty exclusively on the ground.
Roosting on branches is of course entirely typical of the nighthawks.
Cheers
Al
Alvaro Jaramillo
chucao(AT)coastside.net
Half Moon Bay, CA
Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide
http://www.fieldguides.com/home.htm
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ID Help: Nightjar
From: Joseph Morlan <jmorlan(AT)CCSF.ORG>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 11:55am
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 09:12:24 -0800, Bruce Deuel <BDEUEL(AT)DFG.CA.GOV> wrote:
>But I have to
>ask, why isn't this bird a Common Poorwill?
Picking up this tangent, I wonder how often Common Poorwills sit on tree
branches? Do they ever?
Just curious. I recall that a "poorwill" reported sitting in a cypress
tree at Point Reyes turned out, on closer inspection, to be a
Whip-poor-will.
--
Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA 94044 jmorlan (at) ccsf.org
Birding Classes in SF start Feb.8 http://fog.ccsf.edu/~jmorlan/
California Bird Records Committee http://www.wfo-cbrc.org/cbrc/
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Nighthawk
From: Michel Bertrand <bertrmi(AT)colba.net>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 12:18pm
I was quite uncomfortable about posting my opinion on the ID of the Mexico
nighthawk. It has been very comforting to see, after posting it, than an
expert like Alvaro Jamarillo did come with the same ID while I was looking
at photos and writing my message.
In 2004, I have worked on the ID of the 2nd Chuck-will's-widow seen in
Québec province and have prepared a PowerPoint presentation about it for a
birding conference, dealing especially on 10 visual differences between
Chuck-will's-willow and Whip-poor-will. It is surprising how the details in
the images of the nighthawks and nightjars can differ, in the bird guides,
for a same species.
MICHEL BERTRAND
Sainte-Julie, Qc
bertrmi(AT)colba.net
L'autour, pour se perpétuer, peut
airer comme un diable en pennes.
-- Moa
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ID Help: Nightjar
From: Steve Sosensky <Steve(AT)SOSENSKY.COM>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 1:03pm
Joe,
I've seen a Common Poorwill on a branch in Banning Park in Los Angeles Co.
At 10:56 AM 2005-01-20 -0800, Joseph Morlan wrote:
>Picking up this tangent, I wonder how often Common Poorwills sit on tree
>branches? Do they ever?
Good birding,
Steve Sosensky, SoCA Bird Guides www.sosensky.com/guides/
<mailto:steve(AT)sosensky.com> for general use
<mailto:mobile(AT)sosensky.com> rare birds and emergencies only
Toluca Lake, CA 91602 818-508-4946 34.15645 N, 118.36715 W
www.SoCalAudubon.org/socal/ www.SanFernandoValleyAudubon.org/sfvas/
SoCal FRS: use channel 11 code 22
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Mexico Nightjar
From: Mark Stackhouse <westwings(AT)SISNA.COM>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 1:19pm
Given the comments so far, I thought I'd share wit the group the
message I sent personally to Blake this morning. Structurally, this
bird is not right for a anything other than a nighthawk, as Al
Jaramillo notes.
Hi Blake,
I believe that the bird in your photo is a Lesser Nighthawk. They roost
commonly in the mangroves along the route of the boat trip you took,
and the boatmen are pretty good at finding them. I have some photos
very similar to this one. The bird is too long and low, the tail and
wings too long and the head too small for a Common Poorwill. Common
Poorwill generally shows more brownish tones as well, and the
covert-tips aren't normally as prominent. The wing tips look to be the
same length as the tail - they should be shorter than the tail for
Common Poorwill. I think this may be an immature bird. For what it's
worth, in ten years of trips to San Blas, I've never seen a Common
Poorwill in the area, and the only nightjars I've seen on that boat
trip are Lesser Nighthawk, Pauraque, and Northern Potoo.
Sorry we missed each other - I was in San Blas on the 30th, but I think
we were out on the ocean that day (looking at whales - another "thing
one does for one's family"). Too bad wse couldn't hook up for some
birding. I'm on may way back down there this weekend.
Good birding!
Mark
Mark Stackhouse
Westwings, Inc.
westwings(AT)sisna.com
801-487-9453 (Salt Lake City, Utah, USA)
011-52-323-285-1243 (San Blas, Nayarit, Mexico)
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ID Help: Nightjar
From: Mark Stackhouse <westwings(AT)SISNA.COM>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 1:34pm
For what it's worth, I've also seen Common Poorwill in trees at
Deseret Ranch, Utah; I've also seen the following nightjars in trees or
shrubs in Mexico:
Whip-poor-will (Mexican) in Nayarit and Oaxaca
Buff-collared Nightjar in Chiapas
Eared Poorwill in Nayarit and Jalisco
I will note that all of these were in mountains - the only
tree-roosting nightjars I've ever seen in mangroves in Mexico are
Lesser Nighthawk and Northern Potoo.
Mark Stackhouse
Westwings, Inc.
westwings(AT)sisna.com
801-487-9453 (Salt Lake City, Utah, USA)
011-52-323-285-1243 (San Blas, Nayarit, Mexico)
On Jan 20, 2005, at 1:03 PM, Steve Sosensky wrote:
> Joe,
>
> I've seen a Common Poorwill on a branch in Banning Park in Los Angeles
> Co.
>
> At 10:56 AM 2005-01-20 -0800, Joseph Morlan wrote:
>> Picking up this tangent, I wonder how often Common Poorwills sit on
>> tree
>> branches? Do they ever?
>
> Good birding,
>
> Steve Sosensky, SoCA Bird Guides www.sosensky.com/guides/
> <mailto:steve(AT)sosensky.com> for general use
> <mailto:mobile(AT)sosensky.com> rare birds and emergencies only
> Toluca Lake, CA 91602 818-508-4946 34.15645 N, 118.36715 W
> www.SoCalAudubon.org/socal/ www.SanFernandoValleyAudubon.org/sfvas/
> SoCal FRS: use channel 11 code 22
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ID Help request
From: Jim Pike <jpike44(AT)EARTHLINK.NET>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 1:55pm
Hi, I'm curious as to why the majority feel that the bird is more likely
an SY male than SY female Baltimore. Given that Jaramillo and Burke (1999)
suggest that first basic birds are "only separable through measurements
while in North America", no definitive assessment can likely be made.
Heedlessly plunging ahead (what the heck!), the orange on the breast isn't
very intense, and has strong yellow tones to it. Also, the belly is drab
and colorless, more typical of a young female. Finally, Pyle (1997) notes
that young males "probably" begin aquiring black in the throat in
November, and I can't see any black there in the newer, clearer photos
(although noting that they were taken on 21 December and not in January).
So, what am I missing here?
Jim Pike
Huntington Beach, CA
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ID Help request
From: John Idzikowski <idzikoj(AT)UWM.EDU>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 2:23pm
I wrote-
"The..response on this bird was for a first winter male Baltimore"
I had just answered another message that if the bird was to be considered a
Bullock's it would be a first winter male; this thought
was perhaps transferred to the ID-F message that should read *first winter
Baltimore*- although there were responses of first
winter male, perhaps because of the plate on p. 519 in Sibley.
John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Pike" <jpike44(AT)EARTHLINK.NET>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] ID Help request
> Hi, I'm curious as to why the majority feel that the bird is more likely
> an SY male than SY female Baltimore. Given that Jaramillo and Burke (1999)
> suggest that first basic birds are "only separable through measurements
> while in North America", no definitive assessment can likely be made.
> Heedlessly plunging ahead (what the heck!), the orange on the breast isn't
> very intense, and has strong yellow tones to it. Also, the belly is drab
> and colorless, more typical of a young female. Finally, Pyle (1997) notes
> that young males "probably" begin aquiring black in the throat in
> November, and I can't see any black there in the newer, clearer photos
> (although noting that they were taken on 21 December and not in January).
> So, what am I missing here?
>
> Jim Pike
> Huntington Beach, CA
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Mexico nightjar
From: Ian Mclaren <iamclar(AT)DAL.CA>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 3:11pm
All:
I sent a similar photo of a Lesser Nighthawk on a branch that I took eons
ago in S. California. California dreamin' is a lot bettter than
toiday's 8" of snow and fearsome windchill.
Blake's seems readily resolved from guides like Sibley's and Howell and
Webb's. The whitish scapular and coverts spots are just right. If you
brighten the photo a good deal you can see the the buffy bars on the basal
areas, but unpatterned tips, on the primaries. This would exclude
non-nighthawk nightjars and also Common Nighthawk (not a serious contender
in other ways, either).
Cheers, Ian
Ian A. McLaren
Biology Department
Dalhousie University
Halifax, NS B3H 4J1
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Italy: new photos of the mystery Gull
From: Menotti Passarella <menotti.passarella(AT)LIBERO.IT>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 4:42pm
Now this Gull seems to have Caspian ancestors and probably Herring too:
http://www.extracon.org/Gabbiani?page=6
Cheers
Menotti Passarella
info(AT)birdingitaly.com
www.birdingitaly.net
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: A second California Slaty-backed Gull!
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao(AT)COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: 20 Jan 2005 11:55pm
Gull aficionados:
David VanderPluym was in town and pulled me away from the desk today to
do some afternoon gull watching, hoping for last week's Slaty-backed. We
struck gold with a second individual, this time a third winter bird! You can
imagine we were superbly excited as there is no accepted record for this
species in California yet (watch out Texas!). Photos of this individual and
the first are at:
http://www.coastside.net/chucao/gulls/Slatyback.htm
I would appreciate any comments, on the identification of these birds. The
more we can learn the better.
I must say, I am on cloud 9 with these gulls. You go out to the flock week
after week just hoping to document variation in common gulls (not really
sure why, but I find it to be fun) and then these things come along. Wow!
The joy of birding.
Regards
Al
Alvaro Jaramillo
chucao(AT)coastside.net
Half Moon Bay, CA
Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide
http://www.fieldguides.com/home.htm
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Summary of Comments - Mystery Mexican nightjar
[Lesser Nighthawk}
From: Blake Maybank <maybank(AT)NS.SYMPATICO.CA>
Date: 21 Jan 2005 6:45am
Re: Comments on the mystery Mexican nightjar.
My thanks to the significant and varied response that was posted (and/or
sent directly to me) regarding the nightjar I photographed in San Blas. I
believe I may now safely assume I photographed a Lesser Nighthawk.
Here is a summary of the comments. I've only attributed those that were
publically posted.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"To me the bird's shape (and color) look better for nighthawk than
nightjar. Careful study of the primaries does seem to indicate a white bar
located at about the tips of the tertials, well removed from the coverts,
with buffy barring proximal to that. This would seem to indicate Lesser
Nighthawk, which does fit the date/location."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"While I have seen none of the Mexican nightjars that do not also occur in
the US, Blake's bird exhibits the pale gray scapular panel typical of two
US-breeding nightjars, Chuck and Whip. Additionally, the row of whitish
spots below the scapular panel are typical of Whip-poor-will and rule out
Chuck-will's-widow.
In a quick perusal through Handbook of the Birds of the World, no other
nightjars popped out to my eyes as having the gray scapular panel, but my
Howell & Webb seems to be MIA so I couldn't check that better source to be
sure that no non-US, Mexican nightjar would show such a feature. Also due
to the missing H&W, I could not check to see how unusual (or not)
Whip-poor-will would be in mangroves in west Mexico, but then I remembered
reading a recent paper by Steve Howell in Cotinga that mentioned a
low-elevation record in west Mexico; I managed to dig out journal out of
the clutter in my "office." From Cotinga no. 21 on pg 40 in a paper
entitled "Further observations of birds from Colima and adjacent Jalisco,
Mexico" is the following sentence in the Whip-poor-will account (about a
low-elevation record in Jalisco) :
""There are few records of this species from the lowlands of western
Mexico, where it may be a regular elevational migrant.""
Of course, if my ID of the bird is incorrect, most all of the above is for
naught."
Tony Leukering
Brighton, CO
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Thanks, indeed, for the break from gulls and geese -- most welcome!
I can emphatically state that the bird is not a Common Poorwill -- that
species has a huge, puffy head and very short tail and could hardly be less
similar to your bird in proportions.
As to what it is -- I don't see anything inconsistent with Lesser
Nighthawk, which I assume would be one of the "expected" nightjars in the
San Blas area in winter. The very small head imparts a Chordeiles
appearance, and the tan bars on the primaries are good for Lesser. A HY
female wouldn't have an obvious bar on the primaries. But I agree with you
-- perched nightjars without voice and tail pattern characters are a pain!"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"First off, let me say I know nothing about nightjar i.d. But I have to
ask, why isn't this bird a Common Poorwill? The very short tail, black
areas in the face (assuming that isn't just a shadow, which it may very
well be), and even the spotting in the scapular area look very much like
Sibley's illustration of a "light adult" in his Western guide.
Since I don't have any thing to compare with in California, whatever
discussion comes from my question will be most illuminating."
Bruce Deuel
Red Bluff/Redding
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Howell/Webb show the range of Eastern Whip-poor-will as a very narrow
strip along the Gulf coast and not approaching the west coast until the
narrowest point at of the country near Oaxaca state well below Nayarit. I
will throw out some other options here though. The plate of a typical
Mexican Whip-poor-will shows a very rich, reddish bird, but in the text
Howell does suggest that while this species averages darker, that they
overlap in every regard. Of course, having no prior experience with this
species I don't know if a Mexican Whip could ever reach this extremity in
lightness, but the range map shows these birds occurring in a thin band
just inland of the west coast and through the eastern half of Narayit.
Another species shown in Howell/Webb that superficially resembles the
photos is Buff-collared Nightjar which is shown as occurring throughout
Narayit. Of course there is the one glaring problem in that there is no
hint of a rufous collar on the photos, but I wonder if due to the angle
(below and slightly behind) this mark could be obscured by the mantle on a
sleeping bird. I'm a bit troubled by the apparent wing to tail ratio here
as well though...
Now that I've further muddied the situation, I'll let those of you with
actual experience with these other species chime in. I just thought I could
add a bit to Tony's post."
Jeff Bouton
Leica Sports Optics
Port Charlotte, FL
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I came to an entirely different identification on this bird, Lesser
Nighthawk, a female. Structurally this bird is good for a nighthawk, with
a relatively small head and very long wings. Not only is the primary
extension really long, the wings stick out past the tail it seems. The
upperpart plumage features are right on for a Lesser Nighthawk, and note
that apart from the structural features you can rule out Whip-poor-will and
several congeners by the lack of a pale collar on this bird. Buff-collared
Nightjar is not the only one with a buff collar, most of its relatives have
one as well! A shot of the underside, if you have one Blake, would clarify
things. Finally, I think it is pretty rare (or even extremely rare?) for
one of the Caprimulgus in Mexico to roost on a branch, they roost pretty
exclusively on the ground. Roosting on branches is of course entirely
typical of the nighthawks."
Alvaro Jaramillo
Half Moon Bay, CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"My guess would be the Lesser Nighthawk for the following points. The head
looks small. The bristles around the bill are somewhat fuzzy on the photo,
but they look relatively short what would rule out the genus Caprimulgus.
The white large dots over the pale band, in the scapular area, don't fit
for a Whip-Poor-Will but are okay for a Lesser Nighthawk. The pale gray
color, the long tail, the marks on the edges of primaries, the large black
mark on the posterior coverts just over the primaries and some other
plumage details are fitting the Lesser Nighthawk photos I'm looking at."
MICHEL BERTRAND
Sainte-Julie, Qc
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"For what it's worth, I've had Lesser Nighthawks roosting on mangroves in
Nayarit."
Eric Preston
San Francisco, CA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I believe that the bird in your photo is a Lesser Nighthawk. They roost
commonly in the mangroves along the route of the boat trip you took, and
the boatmen are pretty good at finding them. I have some photos very
similar to this one. The bird is too long and low, the tail and wings too
long and the head too small for a Common Poorwill. Common Poorwill
generally shows more brownish tones as well, and the covert-tips aren't
normally as prominent. The wing tips look to be the same length as the tail
- they should be shorter than the tail for Common Poorwill. I think this
may be an immature bird. For what it's worth, in ten years of trips to San
Blas, I've never seen a Common Poorwill in the area, and the only nightjars
I've seen on that boat trip are Lesser Nighthawk, Pauraque, and Northern
Potoo."
Mark Stackhouse
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I believe this is a Lesser Nighawk. It's clearly a nighthawk given the
shape and behavior, and shows buff-spotted primaries typical of Lesser."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Blake's nightjar seems readily resolved from guides like Sibley's and
Howell and Webb's. The whitish scapular and coverts spots are just right.
If you brighten the photo a good deal you can see the the buffy bars on the
basal areas, but unpatterned tips, on the primaries. This would exclude
non-nighthawk nightjars and also Common Nighthawk (not a serious contender
in other ways, either)."
Ian A. McLaren
Biology Department
Dalhousie University
Halifax, NS B3H 4J1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"At first glance it looks like a Mexican Whip-poor-will to me. I have seen
them close to sealevel in W Mexico (Sinaloa), and it really surprised me."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And so, once again, my thanks to all. A learning experience for me,
accentuated by it being a bird I observed and puzzled over for some
time. Now back to shovelling snow.
Cheers,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blake Maybank
Editor, "Nova Scotia Birds"
144 Bayview Drive
White's Lake, Nova Scotia,
B3T 1Z1, Canada
maybank(AT)ns.sympatico.ca
(902) 852-2077
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: A second California Slaty-backed Gull!
From: "Lethaby, Nick" <nlethaby(AT)TI.COM>
Date: 21 Jan 2005 9:14am
Al:
There is surely no doubt about this being a SB Gull. Nice bright pink
legs and all. Great find.
Nick
Nick Lethaby
DSP/BIOS Product Manager
Software Development Systems
Texas Instruments
805 562 5106
nlethaby(AT)ti.com
-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Alvaro Jaramillo
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 10:56 PM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] A second California Slaty-backed Gull!
Gull aficionados:
David VanderPluym was in town and pulled me away from the desk today
to
do some afternoon gull watching, hoping for last week's Slaty-backed. We
struck gold with a second individual, this time a third winter bird! You
can
imagine we were superbly excited as there is no accepted record for this
species in California yet (watch out Texas!). Photos of this individual
and
the first are at:
http://www.coastside.net/chucao/gulls/Slatyback.htm
I would appreciate any comments, on the identification of these birds.
The
more we can learn the better.
I must say, I am on cloud 9 with these gulls. You go out to the flock
week
after week just hoping to document variation in common gulls (not really
sure why, but I find it to be fun) and then these things come along.
Wow!
The joy of birding.
Regards
Al
Alvaro Jaramillo
chucao(AT)coastside.net
Half Moon Bay, CA
Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide
http://www.fieldguides.com/home.htm
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Slaty-backed Gull
From: John Idzikowski <idzikoj(AT)UWM.EDU>
Date: 21 Jan 2005 9:56am
Here's one from Wisconsin that I believe has not yet made it through the BRC;
can anyone give reason why it should not be accepted?
http://www.surfbirds.com/Rarities/usstoppress-dec0101.html
John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: RFI: 1st Winter LBBG covert moult timing
From: Martin Reid <upupa(AT)AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: 21 Jan 2005 7:02pm
Dear Gullers,
I'd really appreciate some feedback concerning the above topic, as I am
seeing a minor influx of such birds, along with a couple that might not be
LBBGs:
http://www.martinreid.com/gullnews.html
I know that a few individuals seem to acquire some 2nd-generation coverts
very early - while still on the breeding sites - but what percentage of
them molt in 2nd- gen. coverts in the Oct - Jan period, and which actual
feathers tend to be involved?
For such birds, is there any indication of how migratory that population
is? I would have thought that early replacement would be found in
less-migratory populations, based upon other gull taxa - yes/no?
Links to online images of such birds would be great - I could not find any....
Regards,
Martin
Martin Reid
San Antonio, Texas
mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
http://www.martinreid.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: RFI: 1st Winter LBBG covert moult timing
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 21 Jan 2005 8:01pm
>Links to online images of such birds would be great - I could not find
any....
Not sure what help this is, but except for being a little more filled-in
on the inner greater coverts, bird A seems similar to the Dec 24
Ontario mystery gull, including a similar partial scap molt.
http://tasmania.globat.com/~peregrineprints.com/BinbrookGullpgtwo.htm
Cheers,
Phil
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: New pervipes vs. taverneri resource article
From: "J. Harry Krueger" <hkrueger(AT)cableone.net>
Date: 21 Jan 2005 8:53pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
During the past year (and before) there have been a number of intriguing and
informative discussions on "white-cheeked goose" subspecies identification
on this list serv, at first prompted by just natural "observation curiosity"
and lately spurred on by list splitting. As an incurable "brantaphile" I've
tried to resist jumping in as much as possible while continuing to learn
from so many talented observers. For some time now I've been planning what
I hope will be a "helpfully definitive" id piece that might help us gather
together much that has been learned and move on to another level in this id
challenge that possibly the AOU isn't done with assisting pushing the
frontiers on.
Far from a last word, this is rather a contribution from someone who has
been fascinated by this issue for many years. I believe the use of "primary
identification indicators" as I use them in this article is something we
have all been doing for quite some time but just haven't put into a
systematized perspective. If nothing else, I trust this will add that
perspective to what many of us do all the time and perhaps make us more
conscious of the fact.
I've just posted the latest installment of what, when completed, will
hopefully be a helpful and comprehensive article, with photos, on "Cackling
Goose - Canada Goose Subspecies Identification Indicators: The White-cheeked
Goose' Challenge with Pictures" dealing with all the currently recognized
eleven subspecies.
http://www.idahobirds.net/identification/identification.html
This new portion deals with the difficult parvipes vs. taverneri id problems
(that Bruce Deuel has done some good work on in his upcoming article in
Western Birds, Vol. 35, #3). I also have a previously completed portion on
B. h. hutchinsii as well as a now complete section on B. h. minima already
posted on the site. Eventually all 11 subspecies will be covered with photo
illustrations of "id indicators". (I think you will find the close-up
picture of B.h. minima, B. h. hutchinsii, and B. c. parvipes together in the
wild at Moses Lake, WA especially instructive.)
This is a work in progress, and I do invite comments (and photos) as you may
see fit to help us all better sort out this often thorny id challenge that
has "magically" risen to the forefront since this summer's AOU "split
decision"...while we continue to make everyone more aware of the wonderful
world of the subspecies. I can definitely always use more close-up pictures
of B. h. taverneri, B. h. leucopareia, and the larger Canada's, B. c.
canadensis, B. c. interior, B. c. maxima, B. c. occidentalis, and B. c.
fulva.
Harry Krueger
Boise, ID
Secretary, Idaho Bird Records Committee
Regional Editor, Idaho-Western Montana Region, North American Birds
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: A Common (Gull) ID challenge
From: Greg Gillson <greg(AT)THEBIRDGUIDE.COM>
Date: 21 Jan 2005 9:10pm
Greetings,
On January 2, 2005 on a pelagic trip out of Newport, Oregon, we spotted an
apparent 1st-basic Mew-type gull. It differed from the expected L.c.
brachyrhynchus in a spotlessly white rump and tail with a thin black tail
band. The back was very dark, eliminating a small Ring-billed Gull.
While I believe all marks point to L.c. heinei of central Asia (which
might be a first N.A record?), I'm wondering how "delayed" the molt of
brachyrhynchus can be.
A blurry photo and written description appears at:
http://thebirdguide.com/temp_images/gull.htm
where the bird in flight appears next to a 1st year Herring Gull (as best
as I can tell).
My question: can a 2nd basic Mew Gull (L.c. brachyrhynchus) be eliminated?
Can a delayed plumage 2nd basic Mew have a complete black tail band? Could
such a bird have no white mirrors?
Greg Gillson
greg(AT)thebirdguide.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: A Common (Gull) ID challenge
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 21 Jan 2005 10:40pm
>My question: can a 2nd basic Mew Gull (L.c. brachyrhynchus) be eliminated?
>Can a delayed plumage 2nd basic Mew have a complete black tail band? Could
>such a bird have no white mirrors?
Perhaps it is the lighting, but the apparent solidly white inner
secondaries do at least suggest the possibility of a (delayed-
maturity?) 2nd-basic bird to me.
I haven't studied 2nd-basic Mew much, although based
on photos at the Japanese site this type of tail band does seem
typical of 2B Kamchatka at least. For example see top shot at -
http://www23.tok2.com/home/jgull/020225/ka2wF.html
Cheers,
Phil
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: A second California Slaty-backed Gull!
From: "Wayne C. Weber" <contopus(AT)TELUS.NET>
Date: 21 Jan 2005 10:55pm
Alvaro,
Congratulations on finding two SLATY-BACKED GULLS in a week! It looks
like California is finally catching up to British Columbia, which
recorded its first Slaty-backed at Victoria in 1974.
It is noteworthy that many Asiatic/Alaskan vagrant species have been
recorded in California prior to being first recorded in B.C.,
Washington, or Oregon, despite the fact that most such birds probably
passed through these jurisdictions on the way to California. I
attribute this to the much larger numbers of trained and enthusiastic
field observers in California, many of whom are at or near coastal
locations. (There are few large cities, or concentrations of birders,
on the outer coast of BC, Washington, and Oregon, where many such
vagrants are most likely to appear).
However, the Slaty-backed Gull is an exception to the general rule.
I know the thrill of discovery. In November 1986, Michael Force and I
were lucky enough to find the second-ever Slaty-backed Gull for BC at
Port Hardy on Vancouver Island. Michael was able to get some pretty
good photos of this adult bird (one of which was published in Volume 2
of "The Birds of British Columbia") without a telephoto lens, by
stalking the bird and getting as close as he could.
In recent years, from one to several Slaty-backed Gulls have turned up
nearly every winter in the Pacific Northwest. The Burns Bog Landfill,
near Vancouver, BC, which supports at least 30,000 to 40,000 large
gulls over the winter, has had 1 or 2 adult Slaty-backs present nearly
every winter. At Sauvie I., near Portland, OR, I believe there were 3
different Slaty-backs present one winter. As most of us know, there
are also records from quite a few inland locations as far east as the
Great Lakes. So it is quite appropriate that California should finally
be recording this species.
One thing that puzzles me about Slaty-backed Gulls is that, in looking
at photos and descriptions of adult birds, there seems to be quite a
bit of variation in mantle color-- an exception to the usual rule
that mantle color in adult gulls is usually quite constant within a
species. (If anyone has any comments on this statement, I'd be
interested in hearing them.) For most large gulls, mantle color in
third-winter birds is pretty close to that seen in adults. The
third-winter Slaty-backed that you photographed on Thursday has a
mantle color seemingly toward the dark end of the spectrum, but it
certainly isn't a Great Black-backed.
Keep up the good work, Alvaro. Will the California bird list never
stop growing? It looks like the famous prediction of Joseph
Grinnell-- that the California list would, given enough time, become
one and the same as the North American list-- is coming true.
Wayne C. Weber
Delta, BC, Canada
contopus(AT)telus.net
----- Original Message -----
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao(AT)COASTSIDE.NET>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 10:55 PM
Subject: [BIRDWG01] A second California Slaty-backed Gull!
Gull aficionados:
David VanderPluym was in town and pulled me away from the desk
today to do some afternoon gull watching, hoping for last week's
Slaty-backed. We struck gold with a second individual, this time
a third winter bird! You can imagine we were superbly excited as
there is no accepted record for this species in California yet (watch
out Texas!). Photos of this individual and the first are at:
http://www.coastside.net/chucao/gulls/Slatyback.htm
I would appreciate any comments, on the identification of these
birds. The
more we can learn the better.
I must say, I am on cloud 9 with these gulls. You go out to the flock
week
after week just hoping to document variation in common gulls (not
really
sure why, but I find it to be fun) and then these things come along.
Wow!
The joy of birding.
Regards
Al
Alvaro Jaramillo
chucao(AT)coastside.net
Half Moon Bay, CA
Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide
http://www.fieldguides.com/home.htm
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: RFI: 1st Winter LBBG covert moult timing
From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm(AT)wxs.nl>
Date: 22 Jan 2005 7:05am
To answer your question one would need pictures taken south of the breeding
range say from the Iberian peninsula and further south well into West
Africa. Here in The Netherlands f.i. 1st winter LBBG's are as rare in winter
as Iceland Gulls are. The number of wintering adult LBBG's has increased
over the last twenty years but still as frost sets in December they quickly
leave the country! I don't think there is any correlation between the number
of renewed coverts and migration pattern as all young birds migrate.
May I take this opportunity to comment on the gull labelled Cal x Ringbill
you found on 21st January? I have seen such a bird at least once here but
not knowing better and lacking imagination I threw it in the Herring Gull
bin.
Cheers, Norman
Martin Reid wrote:> I'd really appreciate some feedback concerning the above
topic, as I am
> seeing a minor influx of such birds, along with a couple that might not be
> LBBGs:
> http://www.martinreid.com/gullnews.html
> I know that a few individuals seem to acquire some 2nd-generation coverts
> very early - while still on the breeding sites - but what percentage of
> them molt in 2nd- gen. coverts in the Oct - Jan period, and which actual
> feathers tend to be involved?
> For such birds, is there any indication of how migratory that population
> is? I would have thought that early replacement would be found in
> less-migratory populations, based upon other gull taxa - yes/no?
>
> Links to online images of such birds would be great - I could not find
> any....
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: A second California Slaty-backed Gull!
From: John Idzikowski <idzikoj(AT)UWM.EDU>
Date: 22 Jan 2005 9:41am
The darkness of Alvaro's bird initially sent me looking at marinus as well,
but note the relative darkness of the Westerns nearby; it seems we have a
darkening based on lighting and shadow. Here in the Midwest we note the
mantle variation in adult graellsii LBBG. Kodak Grey Scale 8-11 in Olsen
(the printed scale is missing from the book) is reported for LBBG while for
SBGU 10-14 is indicated and generally it is LBBG that we consider so
variable, but SB in 3rd and 4th winter on is perhaps more so. It is
probably this fact, plus some variation in the extent of the length of the
whitish fingers on p6-9 forming the "string of pearls" pattern that makes
acceptance of even adults difficult, as there arises the question of a
possible hybrid because of this variation, especially away from the West
Coast as this species moves S and E where it is far less familiar. A trip to
the
Japanese Gull site would help.
Koday Gray Scale- (you can make this into your desktop pic!)
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/kgs.jpg
I think there is a difficulty at a certain point for many observers to
distinguish dark grays from KGS 11-12 up to19; they all look black
in the field.
John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
> One thing that puzzles me about Slaty-backed Gulls is that, in looking
> at photos and descriptions of adult birds, there seems to be quite a
> bit of variation in mantle color-- an exception to the usual rule
> that mantle color in adult gulls is usually quite constant within a
> species. (If anyone has any comments on this statement, I'd be
> interested in hearing them.) For most large gulls, mantle color in
> third-winter birds is pretty close to that seen in adults. The
> third-winter Slaty-backed that you photographed on Thursday has a
> mantle color seemingly toward the dark end of the spectrum, but it
> certainly isn't a Great Black-backed.
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: A second California Slaty-backed Gull!
From: Allen Chartier <amazilia1(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 22 Jan 2005 10:26am
Alvaro,
I have limited experience with Slaty-backed Gull, largely on a single
November 1998 trip to Japan (though I saw thousands). I can comment that
the mantle color of adult Slaty-backed Gulls there seemed to not only vary
some between individuals in actual shade, but seem to show quite
considerable variation in appearance based on sun angle. Some sort of
iridescence, sheen, or bloom??? Anyway, a couple of times in Japan I found
myself looking at some birds a moderate distance away that appeared the same
shade as American Herring Gull, but upon closer approach, and different
angle, showed mantle color similar to graellsii Lesser Black-backed. Other
times, birds looked nearly as black as Great Black-backed, becoming lighter
with better views. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to capture this range of
variable appearance in my photos (posted on my website), as gulling was only
part of why I was in Japan birding!
Richard Millington was on that Japan trip with me, and I'd be interested to
hear if his observations matched mine, or not...
Allen Chartier
amazilia1(AT)comcast.net
1442 West River Park Drive
Inkster, MI 48141
Website: http://www.amazilia.net
Michigan HummerNet: http://www.amazilia.net/MIHummerNet/index.htm
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: A Common (Gull) ID challenge
From: Nick Komar <quetzal65(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 22 Jan 2005 8:12pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
About a month ago I studied a second basic brachyrhynchos Mew Gull in =
Colorado. It had no brown on the wing coverts. It did have a thin black, =
well-formed tail band. From my reading of kamtschatschensis in the =
revised Olsen and Larsson book, this form does show extensive brown in =
the wings of 2nd basic birds (like the photos from Japan referred to in =
Phil Pickering's post). The black tail band is not typical of either =
canus or heini forms (although it would be more likely in heini), and =
neither of these would be expected in the Pacific Ocean. The desription =
of the bird being slightly bigger and darker-mantled than the other =
brachyrhynchos Mew Gulls present would also be consistent with =
kamschatschensis, which is the largest and darkest of the "Common Gull" =
forms described in Olsen and Larsson. Olsen and Larsson treat Mew Gull =
as a separate species (Larus brachyrhynchos) from Common Gull (Larus =
canus), and suggests that Larus canus kamschatschensis is its own =
species, Kamchatka Gull.
Nick Komar
Fort Collins
----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Phillip Pickering" <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 10:20 PM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] A Common (Gull) ID challenge
> >My question: can a 2nd basic Mew Gull (L.c. brachyrhynchus) be =
eliminated?
> >Can a delayed plumage 2nd basic Mew have a complete black tail band? =
Could
> >such a bird have no white mirrors?
>=20
> Perhaps it is the lighting, but the apparent solidly white inner
> secondaries do at least suggest the possibility of a (delayed-
> maturity?) 2nd-basic bird to me.
>=20
> I haven't studied 2nd-basic Mew much, although based
> on photos at the Japanese site this type of tail band does seem
> typical of 2B Kamchatka at least. For example see top shot at -
> http://www23.tok2.com/home/jgull/020225/ka2wF.html
>=20
> Cheers,
>=20
> Phil
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
|
|
|
|
BIRDxxxx
BIRDCHAT
ID-FRONTIERS
US:NewEngland