 |
|
|
|
|
ID-FRONTIERS for March 6-12, 2005
[ Prev Week
| Next Week
| Calendar Month
| ID-FRONTIERS Info
]
|
Messages are displayed in the order they were received.
|
| Subject | From | Date | Time |
| Cackling Goose | Ian Mclaren | Sun, 6 Mar 2005 | 9:08am |
| Re: Cackling Goose | SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM | Sun, 6 Mar 2005 | 9:48am |
| Re: Cackling Goose | SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM | Sun, 6 Mar 2005 | 9:52am |
| plumage/age/sex of Mountian Plovers: photos | Martin Reid | Sun, 6 Mar 2005 | 1:30pm |
| Re: Cackling Goose | J. Harry Krueger | Sun, 6 Mar 2005 | 5:39pm |
| Re: Cackling Goose | Peter Pyle | Mon, 7 Mar 2005 | 4:02pm |
| Re: Cackling Goose | J. Harry Krueger | Mon, 7 Mar 2005 | 5:06pm |
| Cozumel Thrasher? | Gerald White | Mon, 7 Mar 2005 | 7:56pm |
| Great Black-backed x Herring Gull Photos | John Pogacnik | Tue, 8 Mar 2005 | 4:15am |
| Re: Great Black-backed x Herring Gull Photos | Emmanuel Cappe | Tue, 8 Mar 2005 | 5:17am |
| Re: Cackling Goose | Mark Stackhouse | Tue, 8 Mar 2005 | 8:18am |
| Re: Cackling Goose | Mike Patterson | Tue, 8 Mar 2005 | 9:00am |
| Re: Cackling Goose | Kevin McGowan | Tue, 8 Mar 2005 | 9:03am |
| Re: Cackling Goose | J.Harry Krueger | Tue, 8 Mar 2005 | 9:47am |
| Re: Cackling Goose | Peter Pyle | Tue, 8 Mar 2005 | 11:19am |
| Re: Great Black-backed x Herring Gull Photos | John Pogacnik | Wed, 9 Mar 2005 | 4:33am |
| Wood Thrush ID | Gerald White | Wed, 9 Mar 2005 | 10:50am |
| Re: Hybrid Goldeneyes | Steve Sosensky | Wed, 9 Mar 2005 | 6:51pm |
| Hybrid Goldeneyes | Jean Iron | Wed, 9 Mar 2005 | 4:31pm |
| Re: Hybrid Goldeneyes | Julian Hough | Wed, 9 Mar 2005 | 4:46pm |
| European Herring Gull in Ontario? | The Holdens | Wed, 9 Mar 2005 | 3:18pm |
| Re: European Herring Gull in Ontario? | Daniela.Detlef.Grube | Thu, 10 Mar 2005 | 3:07am |
| Re: European Herring Gull in Ontario? | Peter Adriaens | Thu, 10 Mar 2005 | 5:21am |
| Re: Cackling Goose | =?iso-8859-1?Q?=FE?= | Thu, 10 Mar 2005 | 6:55am |
| Re: European Herring Gull in Ontario? | Matt Sharp | Thu, 10 Mar 2005 | 8:10am |
| Another "Thayer's" | John Idzikowski | Thu, 10 Mar 2005 | 8:47am |
| Re: Another "Thayer's" | Phillip Pickering | Thu, 10 Mar 2005 | 9:32am |
| BIRDING waterfowl articles | Ian Paulsen | Thu, 10 Mar 2005 | 11:21am |
| Binbrook Ontario Herring Gull | Kevin McLaughlin | Thu, 10 Mar 2005 | 3:40pm |
| Re: Binbrook Ontario Herring Gull | Phillip Pickering | Thu, 10 Mar 2005 | 6:03pm |
| Re: Binbrook Ontario Herring Gull | Julian Hough | Thu, 10 Mar 2005 | 6:50pm |
| Eastern Thayer's Gull | Jean Iron | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 7:58am |
| Re: Binbrook Ontario Herring Gull - age | Matt Sharp | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 8:40am |
| Re: Binbrook Ontario Herring Gull - age | Dick Newell | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 9:07am |
| Re: Binbrook Ontario Herring Gull - age | Peter Adriaens | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 9:30am |
| Re: Eastern Thayer's Gull | Bruce Deuel | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 9:31am |
| 'European' Thayer's Gull in Ireland | Michael O'Keeffe | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 10:16am |
| Re: ''European' Thayer's Gull in Ireland | Phillip Pickering | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 12:28pm |
| Re: Eastern Thayer's Gull | Phillip Pickering | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 2:30pm |
| Re: ''European' Thayer's Gull in Ireland | Dick Newell | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 4:06pm |
| winter distribution of kumlieni | Michael L. P. Retter | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 4:20pm |
| Re: winter distribution of kumlieni | Dick Newell | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 4:45pm |
| Re: winter distribution of kumlieni | Alvaro Jaramillo | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 5:54pm |
| Re: ''European' Thayer's Gull in Ireland +
kumlieni' biometrics | =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8 | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 5:56pm |
| Re: ''European' Thayer's Gull in Ireland +
kumlieni' biometrics | GreatGrayOwl(AT)AOL.COM | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 6:32pm |
| Re: winter distribution of kumlieni | Phillip Pickering | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 7:13pm |
| Red-breasted Sapsucker pics | Martin Reid | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 8:13pm |
| Re: winter distribution of kumlieni | John Idzikowski | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 11:34pm |
| lotsa Glaucous-winged | Phillip Pickering | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 | 11:37pm |
| Re: winter distribution of kumlieni | Phillip Pickering | Sat, 12 Mar 2005 | 1:07am |
| Red-breasted Sapsucker pics - oops | Martin Reid | Sat, 12 Mar 2005 | 6:04am |
| Re: Red-breasted Sapsucker pics - oops | Paul E. Lehman | Sat, 12 Mar 2005 | 6:39am |
| Re: winter distribution of kumlieni | Phillip Pickering | Sat, 12 Mar 2005 | 7:42am |
| Re: winter distribution of kumlieni | John Idzikowski | Sat, 12 Mar 2005 | 8:35am |
| Re: winter distribution of kumlieni | Phillip Pickering | Sat, 12 Mar 2005 | 10:42am |
| Re: ''European' Thayer's Gull in Ireland +
kumlieni' biometrics | Michael L. P. Retter | Sat, 12 Mar 2005 | 11:28am |
| Binbrook gull again | Matt Sharp | Sat, 12 Mar 2005 | 11:44am |
| Re: Binbrook gull again | David Vander Pluym | Sat, 12 Mar 2005 | 4:57pm |
| Whooper Swan variation | David Vander Pluym | Sat, 12 Mar 2005 | 5:38pm |
|
To use email addresses replace '(AT)' with '@'.
This is done to confuse the spam 'bots.
|
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Cackling Goose
From: Ian Mclaren <iamclar(AT)dal.ca>
Date: 6 Mar 2005 9:08am
All:
The article by Jim Abraham posted by Jean Iron and Ron Pittaway is indeed
an excellent contribution to this vexed issue. I have a few comments.
1. Jim adds substance to the conclusion, hitherto largely a matter of
assertion, that the long-held (and even recently claimed) belief in a
hutchinsii-parvipes cline on the NW coast of Hudson bay is incorrect -
they're all hutchinsii. His demonstration that that Baffin Island (and the
less known population in NW Quebec?) are the most likely source of eastern
hutchinsii is based on brand-new information, and very useful. Are the
these likely to differ in average in any way from the birds from the
different flyway out of NW Hudson Bay/Southampton Island, eg. in incidence
of duskiness, gular stripes, neck rings, etc.? Maybe some insights are
available from field studies.
2. Jim's attribution of the statement that "there is some evidence of
genetic intergradation of parvipes and with two of the Cackling Goose
(taverneri and hutchinsii) based on analysis of nuclear genes contributed
by both parents (Mowbray et al. 2002)" is somewhat oversimplified. Mowbray
et al. do repeat Baker and Marshall's (1997) caveat that a single case of
a winter-range taverneri with a parvipes mtDNA of could have been from
misidentification of the (then) subspecies. Also, the exchange of nuclear
alleles among Canada and Cacklings, as noted by Mowbray et al. (from Van
Wagner and Baker 1990), was claimed between taverneri and occidentalis as
between hutchinsii and atlantica. There is no firm evidence of current
exchange of nuclear DNA between parvipes and hutchinsii/taverneri. As Jim
stresses elsewhere, we simply do not know the extent of current
interbreeding between them.
3. Although Jim reiterates the average differences in body coloration
among the Cackling Goose subspecies, recent postings of photos on
Frontiers show how variable hutchinsii is - some as dark as depictions of
leucopareia or taverneri. Look again at Jean Iron's pic of one (juv/basic
I?) in the last pic in her series, in front of a Snow Goose - it's very
dusky and with a dark gular stripe:
http://www.jeaniron.ca/Geese/cackling2.htm
Or look again at Pierre Bannon's daunting display of specimens:
http://www.pbase.com/pbannon/image/35938236
et. seq.
Then, look at a claimed "minima" in New York State at:
http://www.nybirds.org/NYSARC/RareGallery/smallCanada.htm
One can only agree with Jim that minima records in the East, when not
escapees, are very shaky indeed. I also agree with Steven Mlodinow,
though, that with vagrants, nothing is impossible.
4. Finally, some faith in neck length as a discriminating feature of
parvipes vs. cacklers was expressed by several (including me) in Frontiers
comments about the Waltham, Massachusetts, goose at:
http://www.pbase.com/ptepke/image/36269923
Some of us felt it was a parvipes. But, look at the quite long-necked and
long-billed bird in the third photo of Southampton Island hutchinsii in
Jim Abraham's article. Or, at the hutchinsii from extreme NW Quebec in
Pierre Bannon's photos:
http://www.pbase.com/pbannon/image/35938752
Can we be sure that the Waltham, MA, goose wasn't a hutchinsii? And, of
course, if you go to the European birding journals and web postings,
you'll find lots of overconfident assignments. So, one has to agree with
Jim that more hunter-kills and mtDNA may be required before we can settle
the "problem of Branta canadensis parvipes."
Cheers, Ian
Ian A. McLaren
Professor Emeritus
Biology Department
Dalhousie University
Halifax, NS B3H 4J1
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cackling Goose
From: SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 6 Mar 2005 9:48am
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Greetings
I'll probably comment on each set of photos separately
http://www.jeaniron.ca/Geese/cackling2.htm
The birds at this website provide some nice shots of typical Richardson's
Geese. And then there's the dark bird. Why assume it's a Richardson's. If I saw
that bird out here, I'd seriously consider Taverner's, though the bill looks a
bit large and longish for that race. Indeed, if the bill was stubbier and the
head less sloped, I'd argue it WAS a Taverner's. My point being is that some
need to be left unidentified, and unless you've got genes on that bird, I'd
not assume it was a Richardson's, and leave that particular bird as "?."
Also, Gosselin's website nicely shows variation among Richardson's, but I'm
not sure any are as dark as this bird and none approach minima.
Cheers
Steven Mlodinow
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cackling Goose
From: SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 6 Mar 2005 9:52am
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Greetings Again
http://www.nybirds.org/NYSARC/RareGallery/smallCanada.htm
The darker bird here does not look like minima. Some can be that pale, but
most are even darker. Also, when looking at these beasts, there is a fair bit
of
jizz used in the ID, for lack of a better term. Relative neck length, head
shape, bill size... all of these are effected by posture, angle, etc and it is
difficult to be certain or get a feel from one photo, particularly (with my
apologies to the photographer) mediocre ones. Now there may be other photos in
which this bird looks like a classic minima, but I think it fairly unlikely
Again, on this bird I'd lean towards the dark end of Richardson's, or less
likely, Taverner's. .
Cheers
Steven Mlodinow
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: plumage/age/sex of Mountian Plovers: photos
From: Martin Reid <upupa(AT)AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: 6 Mar 2005 1:30pm
Dear all,
Recently I was lucky enough to get some close photos of Mountain Plovers
wintering in south Texas. I'd be very keen to get feedback on these
individuals - thanks:
http://www.martinreid.com/mtnplovers2.html
Martin
Martin Reid
San Antonio, Texas
mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
http://www.martinreid.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cackling Goose
From: "J. Harry Krueger" <hkrueger(AT)cableone.net>
Date: 6 Mar 2005 5:39pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
I too wish to express my appreciation for the great OFO article and to Jean
for sharing it with the list.
If there is anything that we are learning it is that when it comes to Branta
hutchinsii identification (or any other subspecies of the white-cheeked
geese), especially away from the breeding grounds (as cautioned by K.
Abraham), the "one size (or plumage) fits all" approach is fraught with
exceptions and potential pitfalls. Although I do believe that there are
characteristics of each subspecies that should be known and looked for by
knowledgeable field observers that hopefully will point to a correct
identification of race on the wintering grounds and in migration (where most
of us see them and a good case of us not "throwing out the baby with the
bathwater"), at this point in our understanding, the uncertainty of "the
exception" is still limiting and therefore all to frustratingly often leads
to individual birds that defy identification of subspecies and in some cases
even species. What Abraham calls the "overlapping variation" is truly a
viable force with which we need to reckon. What Abraham says of the
white-cheeked geese in Ontario ("there is a tremendous amount of variation")
is most probably a conservative truism adoptable across the board.
I agree with Steve Mlodinow re: the "dark" bird at
http://www.jeaniron.ca/Geese/cackling2.htm. B. h. taverneri would be an
immediate possibility if seen here in the West (recently at least one bird
of this race was seen and photographed in western Montana), although the
head slope and bill size actually fit within the range of a geobiologically
distinct group of "dark parvipes" breeding in the Anchorage area and
wintering primarily along the northwest Pacific coast...and is just another
example of the variability of possibility that must be considered with
"out-of-range birds." Is taverneri or a "dark parvipes" possible in
Ontario (or Massachusetts for that matter)? The probability is low, but the
possibility is definitely there...and the same (as stated by Steve in his
post of 3-5-05) is also true of B. h. minima.
Ian makes a very good point in this drawing our attention to the issue of
neck length in #4 of his post of 3-6-05. Depending on "attitude" of the
bird in question, it is good to remember that B. h. hutchinsii can seem
comparatively long-necked and B. c. parvipes quite short-necked - perhaps a
dubious id character in races that can be so similar in overall size.
Pierre Bannon's enlightening series of specimen photos (though obviously
numerically weighed to the "odd" hutchinsii for purposes of variability
illustration), give pause to almost any generalization re: this race (and is
a cautionary principal that we may well find is applicable to any other
subspecies also).
Although "we" as a community of field observers hopefully have progressed
beyond the "if it's small, it must be a Cackler" mentality, there is value
in presenting some more generalized characteristics of "field recognizable
distinctiveness" (as Abraham calls it), albeit potentially couched in
tentative language (see the excellent article by Bruce Deuel,Featured photo:
Preliminary notes on the identification of Cackling and Canada Geese.
Western Birds 35:181-184 and my "in progress" and due for update piece
http://www.idahobirds.net/identification/white-cheeked.html) I too have
fallen into the "trap" of looking at one photo, making a "id value judgment"
based on the "norm" for the potential race in question, and moving
on...without fully considering the mounting evidence for perhaps a less
common variability. But with that said, there must be a base of
understanding for the majority within a subspecies ("field recognizable
distinctiveness") to measure against otherwise using the term "overlapping
variability" and "exception" would have no meaning and the only viable
option left to us is a laboratory DNA analysis (and which would be probably
be welcome in some situations!)
Harry Krueger
Boise, ID
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cackling Goose
From: Peter Pyle <ppyle(AT)BIRDPOP.ORG>
Date: 7 Mar 2005 4:02pm
I wanted to see if neck length could be quantified in any way so I measured
134 specimens at California Academy of Sciences and Museum of Vertebrate
Zoology. These represented 75 birds identified as Cackling Geese and 59 as
Canada and represented at least 4 of each subspecies. I measured the
distance from the base of the lower mandible to the ventral end of the
black on the neck, along the ventral mid line. I avoided specimens with
necks that seemed overly stretched or scrunched but I otherwise did not
worry about variation in preparation. So the following ranges represent
variation in both the bird's size and (excluding extreme cases) variation
in preparation regarding the position of the neck/head. Interestingly, all
of the Cackling Geese were prepared with straight necks whereas about half
of the Canadas were prepared with crooked necks, necessitating use of a
string to get the straight-line distance. The following ranges represent
mean +- SD or about 96% of the variation within each sample:
Cackling 61-112 mm
Canada 109-229 mm
Among these, birds identified as taverneri (n11) were the largest of the
Cacklings and had a range of ~84-112 and parvipes (n9) were the smallest of
the Canadas with~109-144.
So it appears that neck length may, tentatively, separate the two species
with a fair degree of reliability, although neck posture/specimen
preparation has to be considered, and the above assumes that all of the
specimens were identified correctly.
Peter Pyle
>Ian makes a very good point in this drawing our attention to the issue of
>neck length in #4 of his post of 3-6-05. Depending on "attitude" of the
>bird in question, it is good to remember that B. h. hutchinsii can seem
>comparatively long-necked and B. c. parvipes quite short-necked - perhaps
>a dubious id character in races that can be so similar in overall
>size. Pierre Bannon's enlightening series of specimen photos (though
>obviously numerically weighed to the "odd" hutchinsii for purposes of
>variability illustration), give pause to almost any generalization re:
>this race (and is a cautionary principal that we may well find is
>applicable to any other subspecies also).
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cackling Goose
From: "J. Harry Krueger" <hkrueger(AT)cableone.net>
Date: 7 Mar 2005 5:06pm
Peter,
Your "measuring exercise" is greatly appreciated and potentially adds
another block to our understanding of these geese. It would be interesting
to see how a large sampling of neck lengths compares to culmen lengths as
stated by Mowbray (2002) and Leafloor (1998) and summarized by Sibley.
Also, when you refer to "4 of each subspecies," is that inclusive of all
currently recognized 11 subspecies of white-cheeked geese?
Finally, the only "method" question I have relates to the "ventral end of
the black on the neck." A thought to consider is that in certain races the
proportion of the "black stocking" of the total of neck length may be
shorter or longer and perhaps therefore a more accurate indicator within
that subspecies as opposed to a comparison between races, which may have
varying proportionate lengths of "stocking?"
It is museum/specimen work like this that will be able to fill in some of
the pieces of the puzzle that field work alone could never supply.
Harry Krueger
Boise, ID
-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Peter Pyle
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 3:56 PM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Cackling Goose
I wanted to see if neck length could be quantified in any way so I measured
134 specimens at California Academy of Sciences and Museum of Vertebrate
Zoology. These represented 75 birds identified as Cackling Geese and 59 as
Canada and represented at least 4 of each subspecies. I measured the
distance from the base of the lower mandible to the ventral end of the black
on the neck, along the ventral mid line. I avoided specimens with necks that
seemed overly stretched or scrunched but I otherwise did not worry about
variation in preparation. So the following ranges represent variation in
both the bird's size and (excluding extreme cases) variation in preparation
regarding the position of the neck/head. Interestingly, all of the Cackling
Geese were prepared with straight necks whereas about half of the Canadas
were prepared with crooked necks, necessitating use of a string to get the
straight-line distance. The following ranges represent mean +- SD or about
96% of the variation within each sample:
Cackling 61-112 mm
Canada 109-229 mm
Among these, birds identified as taverneri (n11) were the largest of the
Cacklings and had a range of ~84-112 and parvipes (n9) were the smallest of
the Canadas with~109-144.
So it appears that neck length may, tentatively, separate the two species
with a fair degree of reliability, although neck posture/specimen
preparation has to be considered, and the above assumes that all of the
specimens were identified correctly.
Peter Pyle
>Ian makes a very good point in this drawing our attention to the issue
>of neck length in #4 of his post of 3-6-05. Depending on "attitude" of
>the bird in question, it is good to remember that B. h. hutchinsii can
>seem comparatively long-necked and B. c. parvipes quite short-necked -
>perhaps a dubious id character in races that can be so similar in
>overall size. Pierre Bannon's enlightening series of specimen photos
>(though obviously numerically weighed to the "odd" hutchinsii for
>purposes of variability illustration), give pause to almost any
generalization re:
>this race (and is a cautionary principal that we may well find is
>applicable to any other subspecies also).
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Cozumel Thrasher?
From: Gerald White <gdwhite(AT)MACHLINK.COM>
Date: 7 Mar 2005 7:56pm
I had sightings on Cozumel Island during the first week of Feb. 2005 of what I
think was a Cozumel Thrasher but two of the field
marks from Howells "A Guide To The Birds Of Mexico and Northern Central America"
1995 does not match my sighting. My first question
address the lack of wing bars on my bird. I was not looking specifically for
wing bars but I had a close side view and none were
evident. Howells illustration shows strong wing bars, is it possible that the
feather wear could account for the lack of bars? The
other feature that does not match is the bill, my bird had a bill that did not
cause me to note its curvature. Is the bill
illustration very accurate in Howells guide?
My sighting could have been a Wood Thrush except the bright Rufous color was
strongest on the back and it had no eye-ring or
streaking on the side of the head. Are there exceptions to the Wood Thrush
plumage regarding the eye-ring and streaking on the side
of the head during this time period?
Gerald White
Muscatine, IA
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Great Black-backed x Herring Gull Photos
From: John Pogacnik <jpogacnik(AT)ADELPHIA.NET>
Date: 8 Mar 2005 4:15am
For those interested in such things, a probable great black-backed x herring
gull was photographed at Cleveland this past weekend. There are a couple of
photos of the bird on the Ohio Ornithological Society website
http://www.ohiobirds.org/news.php?News_ID=178. The photos show some nice
close-up views of the wing tips, bill, and head.
Vic Fazio's web site has photos of a different bird that was present this
past January http://www.aves.net/birdnews/past_Jan05.htm. These photos
should be useful as a reference. I know this hybrid gets mentioned quite a
bit and there are not a lot of photos on the web.
John Pogacnik
4765 Lockwood Road
Perry, OH 44081
440-259-2751
jpogacnik(AT)adelphia.net
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Great Black-backed x Herring Gull Photos
From: Emmanuel Cappe <cappe.em(AT)CEGETEL.NET>
Date: 8 Mar 2005 5:17am
hi John,
what lead you to this conclusion ? I don't see any sign of Great Black-baked
Gull in this bird. The primaries pattern could match an european argentatus
Herring Gull as the colour. The size ?
Emmanuel Cappe
-----Message d'origine-----
De : NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]De la part de John Pogacnik
Envoyé : mardi 8 mars 2005 12:15
À : birdwg01(AT)listserv.arizona.edu
Objet : [BIRDWG01] Great Black-backed x Herring Gull Photos
For those interested in such things, a probable great black-backed x herring
gull was photographed at Cleveland this past weekend. There are a couple of
photos of the bird on the Ohio Ornithological Society website
http://www.ohiobirds.org/news.php?News_ID=178. The photos show some nice
close-up views of the wing tips, bill, and head.
Vic Fazio's web site has photos of a different bird that was present this
past January http://www.aves.net/birdnews/past_Jan05.htm. These photos
should be useful as a reference. I know this hybrid gets mentioned quite a
bit and there are not a lot of photos on the web.
John Pogacnik
4765 Lockwood Road
Perry, OH 44081
440-259-2751
jpogacnik(AT)adelphia.net
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cackling Goose
From: Mark Stackhouse <westwings(AT)SISNA.COM>
Date: 8 Mar 2005 8:18am
Peter,
This is a great piece of information - interesting that in your sample
they separated out so neatly according to neck length. I wonder if it
would be possible to compare the neck length with the over length of
the bird, to see if relative neck length also split neatly between
these species. Since we can't judge the absolute neck length in the
field with any degree of accuracy, it would be difficult to use this
information for field identification purposes. I suspect that most of
the Cackling Geese in your sample were also smaller overall than the
Canada Geese, so that perhaps there isn't as much difference in the
relative neck length, and thus this character may have limited
usefulness for identification in the field.
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 Mar 7, 2005, at 5:05 PM, J. Harry Krueger wrote:
> Peter,
>
> Your "measuring exercise" is greatly appreciated and potentially adds
> another block to our understanding of these geese. It would be
> interesting
> to see how a large sampling of neck lengths compares to culmen lengths
> as
> stated by Mowbray (2002) and Leafloor (1998) and summarized by Sibley.
>
> Also, when you refer to "4 of each subspecies," is that inclusive of
> all
> currently recognized 11 subspecies of white-cheeked geese?
>
> Finally, the only "method" question I have relates to the "ventral end
> of
> the black on the neck." A thought to consider is that in certain
> races the
> proportion of the "black stocking" of the total of neck length may be
> shorter or longer and perhaps therefore a more accurate indicator
> within
> that subspecies as opposed to a comparison between races, which may
> have
> varying proportionate lengths of "stocking?"
>
> It is museum/specimen work like this that will be able to fill in some
> of
> the pieces of the puzzle that field work alone could never supply.
>
> Harry Krueger
> Boise, ID
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
> [mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Peter Pyle
> Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 3:56 PM
> To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Cackling Goose
>
> I wanted to see if neck length could be quantified in any way so I
> measured
> 134 specimens at California Academy of Sciences and Museum of
> Vertebrate
> Zoology. These represented 75 birds identified as Cackling Geese and
> 59 as
> Canada and represented at least 4 of each subspecies. I measured the
> distance from the base of the lower mandible to the ventral end of the
> black
> on the neck, along the ventral mid line. I avoided specimens with
> necks that
> seemed overly stretched or scrunched but I otherwise did not worry
> about
> variation in preparation. So the following ranges represent variation
> in
> both the bird's size and (excluding extreme cases) variation in
> preparation
> regarding the position of the neck/head. Interestingly, all of the
> Cackling
> Geese were prepared with straight necks whereas about half of the
> Canadas
> were prepared with crooked necks, necessitating use of a string to get
> the
> straight-line distance. The following ranges represent mean +- SD or
> about
> 96% of the variation within each sample:
>
> Cackling 61-112 mm
> Canada 109-229 mm
>
> Among these, birds identified as taverneri (n11) were the largest of
> the
> Cacklings and had a range of ~84-112 and parvipes (n9) were the
> smallest of
> the Canadas with~109-144.
>
> So it appears that neck length may, tentatively, separate the two
> species
> with a fair degree of reliability, although neck posture/specimen
> preparation has to be considered, and the above assumes that all of the
> specimens were identified correctly.
>
> Peter Pyle
>
>> Ian makes a very good point in this drawing our attention to the issue
>> of neck length in #4 of his post of 3-6-05. Depending on "attitude"
>> of
>> the bird in question, it is good to remember that B. h. hutchinsii can
>> seem comparatively long-necked and B. c. parvipes quite short-necked -
>> perhaps a dubious id character in races that can be so similar in
>> overall size. Pierre Bannon's enlightening series of specimen photos
>> (though obviously numerically weighed to the "odd" hutchinsii for
>> purposes of variability illustration), give pause to almost any
> generalization re:
>> this race (and is a cautionary principal that we may well find is
>> applicable to any other subspecies also).
>>
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cackling Goose
From: Mike Patterson <celata(AT)pacifier.com>
Date: 8 Mar 2005 9:00am
Well, here's my contribution to the discussion....
http://home.pacifier.com/~mpatters/bird/goose_page.html
Running with the longer/short neck observation. On minima
at least the height of the length of the neck is roughly
2x height of head and in Westerns it's about 4x.
This head size to neck size jizz thing is something I've
been using for years with cacklers, Aleutians, lessers and
Westerns, but I can't say with confidence whether it works
for Taverner's. Aleutians are a bit bigger than cacklers,
but the proportions are about the same. Lessers are always
smaller than Western, but the proportions are generally
the same.
Of course, with all things jizzish, one has to have experience
with lots of correctly identified geese. If the geese weren't
ID'd correctly in the first place.....
Mark Stackhouse wrote:
>
> Peter,
>
> This is a great piece of information - interesting that in your sample
> they separated out so neatly according to neck length. I wonder if it
> would be possible to compare the neck length with the over length of
> the bird, to see if relative neck length also split neatly between
> these species. Since we can't judge the absolute neck length in the
> field with any degree of accuracy, it would be difficult to use this
> information for field identification purposes. I suspect that most of
> the Cackling Geese in your sample were also smaller overall than the
> Canada Geese, so that perhaps there isn't as much difference in the
> relative neck length, and thus this character may have limited
> usefulness for identification in the field.
>
> 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)
>
--
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: Cackling Goose
From: Kevin McGowan <kjm2(AT)CORNELL.EDU>
Date: 8 Mar 2005 9:03am
At 02:55 PM 3/7/2005 -0800, Peter Pyle wrote:
>I wanted to see if neck length could be quantified in any way so I measured
>134 specimens ...
This was a nice effort, but I don't see how the results can be of any
use. As a preparator, I know that neck length on a finished specimen has
little relationship to the actual, real-life neck length (if such a thing
would actually be measurable on a real bird). The finished length is
primarily a result of the aesthetic or practical goals of the
preparator. It doesn't have to be bunched to be significantly shortened,
and stretching of the skin during preparation can make for increased length
as well. Gross differences might be useful, but certainly differences on
the order of 10 cm or less mean nothing. Certainly such a measurement of
any specimen can be made, but the results are misleading at best. (GIGO)
Other things on bird skins that are not useful to measure include total
length, girth, and how far the wingtips extend out the tail. All are
variable depending on the preparation.
If you've never stuffed a bird, you just can't appreciate how variable the
end result can be. That is why classical ornithological work use only
tarsus, wing, tail, and bill measurements.
Kevin
*****************************************************
Kevin J. McGowan
Co-editor, New York State Breeding Bird Atlas
Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology
159 Sapsucker Woods Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
607/254-2432
fax 607/254-2111
kjm2(AT)cornell.edu
http://birds.cornell.edu/crows/
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cackling Goose
From: "J.Harry Krueger" <hkrueger(AT)cableone.net>
Date: 8 Mar 2005 9:47am
Kevin,<BR>
<BR>
Adding your conclusion re: this process to the fact that even "true"
comparitive neck length in the field is VERY difficult to accurately
judge on a goose because of variability of posture, function, "attitude,"
etc., are we then left with the conclusion that neck length in the field and by
specimen is of no, or at best little, value whatsoever except as a
comparative sidebar in extreme cases?<BR>
<BR>
Harry Krueger<BR>
Boise, ID<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<B>On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 11:03 , Kevin McGowan <kjm2(AT)CORNELL.EDU> sent:<BR>
<BR>
</B>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px;
BORDER-LEFT: #5167c6 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">At 02:55 PM 3/7/2005 -0800,
Peter Pyle wrote: <BR>
<FONT color=red>>I wanted to see if neck length could be quantified in any
way so I measured </FONT><BR>
<FONT color=red>>134 specimens ... </FONT><BR>
<BR>
This was a nice effort, but I don't see how the results can be of any <BR>
use. As a preparator, I know that neck length on a finished specimen has <BR>
little relationship to the actual, real-life neck length (if such a thing <BR>
would actually be measurable on a real bird). The finished length is <BR>
primarily a result of the aesthetic or practical goals of the <BR>
preparator. It doesn't have to be bunched to be significantly shortened, <BR>
and stretching of the skin during preparation can make for increased length
<BR>
as well. Gross differences might be useful, but certainly differences on <BR>
the order of 10 cm or less mean nothing. Certainly such a measurement of <BR>
any specimen can be made, but the results are misleading at best. (GIGO) <BR>
<BR>
Other things on bird skins that are not useful to measure include total <BR>
length, girth, and how far the wingtips extend out the tail. All are <BR>
variable depending on the preparation. <BR>
<BR>
If you've never stuffed a bird, you just can't appreciate how variable the <BR>
end result can be. That is why classical ornithological work use only <BR>
tarsus, wing, tail, and bill measurements. <BR>
<BR>
Kevin <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Kevin J. McGowan <BR>
Co-editor, New York State Breeding Bird Atlas <BR>
Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology <BR>
159 Sapsucker Woods Road <BR>
Ithaca, NY 14850 <BR>
607/254-2432 <BR>
fax 607/254-2111 <BR>
<A
href="javascript:parent.opencompose('kjm2(AT)cornell.edu','','','')">kjm2(AT)cornell.edu</A><BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cackling Goose
From: Peter Pyle <ppyle(AT)BIRDPOP.ORG>
Date: 8 Mar 2005 11:19am
The response to the neck-length analysis is appreciated. I want to echo the
sentiments of several responders that we should proceed with caution.
Regarding variation in the length of the black neck "sock", I neglected to
mention that I excluded two specimens in which the black bled down onto the
breast, trying to be as standardized as possible about the ventral
end-point for the measurement.
I have prepared many specimens and am aware of the pitfalls regarding
variation in preparation technique. For this reason I was expecting not to
find useful differences in this measure. The results surprised me, and I am
interpreting them to mean that there are real differences between the
species, despite the considerable noise contributed to the measure by
variation in specimen preparation. The numbers themselves may have little
value but I hope that the species-specific differences can be developed
into other ways to use this character in field identification; e.g., neck
length in proportion to other measures such as head width, as has been noted.
As far as other measures go, I am pasting in a table (sans fonts) I put
together summarizing these data by subspecies. It is based primarily on the
literature but includes specimen measurements of at least 5 of each
subspecies/age/sex. Of these more reliable measures, it appears that those
of the bill allow the most discrimination to species. Hope this helps.
Peter Pyle
Table 17. Measurements (mm) in Cackling and Canada geese to assist in
subspecific identification, ageing, and sexing. See Table 14 for measurements
of other N.Am geese. Species summaries are in bold and subspecies sumaries in
italics. Values were derived from 95% confidence intervals (see p. __) as
based (for wing, exposed culmen, and tarsus) approximately on the indicated
sample sizes; sample sizes for tail length and bill depth were often smaller
but included at least 10 of each sex. Thus, midpoints of ranges approximate
means, and S.D. is approximated by one-quarter of the range.
wing chord tail exp bill
Taxon/Sex n AHY/ASY (HY/SY)1 length culmen depth2 tarsus
Cackling Goose 348-436 (337-422) 93-139 23-43 14.8-22.9 60-83
B.c. leucopareia 362-416 (351-405) 101-131 30-41 16.5-22.8 68-81
F 100 362-405 (351-394) 101-125 30-38 16.5-21.4 68-77
M 100 373-416 (362-405) 107-131 32-41 18.0-22.8 72-81
B.c. minima 345-400 (335-389) 93-127 23-34 14.8-20.6 60-76
F 100 345-384 (335-373) 93-121 23-32 14.8-19.0 60-72
M 100 359-400 (351-389) 99-127 25-34 16.3-20.6 64-76
B.c. taverneri 380-436 (365-413) 112-133 32-42 17.7-21.8 67-81
F 100 380-429 (365-389) 112-128 32-40 17.7-20.4 67-75
M 100 401-436 (381-413) 116-133 34-42 18.9-21.8 72-81
B.c. hutchinsii 369-436 (357-422) 103-139 31-43 17.3-22.9 64-83
F 100 369-420 (357-407) 103-131 31-41 17.3-21.9 64-78
M 100 383-436 (370-422) 110-139 34-43 18.4-22.9 69-83
Canada Goose 413-548 (400-533) 108-188 39-62 20.2-34.0 69-103
B.c. occidentalis 413-497 (400-482) 118-164 39-57 21.4-29.5 77-100
F 100 413-479 (400-459) 118-156 39-54 21.4-27.8 77-93
M 100 440-497 (422-482) 125-164 41-57 24.0-29.5 84-100
B.c. parvipes 424-476 (408-453) 125-148 37-47 20.2-24.8 71-85
F 100 424-449 (408-429) 125-143 37-44 20.2-23.4 71-81
M 100 445-476 (424-453) 130-148 39-47 21.4-24.8 76-85
B.c. moffitti 466-548 (451-533) 130-188 46-66 23.1-34.0 80-103
F 100 466-525 (451-510) 130-177 46-62 23.1-31.9 80-99
M 100 492-548 (478-533) 141-188 50-66 24.9-34.0 85-103
B.c. interior 444-524 (427-509) 108-165 44-60 21.7-31.1 69-87
F 100 444-501 (427-484) 108-157 44-55 21.7-28.5 69-83
M 100 469-524 (452-509) 119-165 48-60 23.9-31.1 74-87
B.c. canadensis 435-506 (418-488) 130-172 49-60 23.4-32.1 82-98
F 100 435-483 (418-467) 130-166 49-56 23.4-29.7 82-93
M 100 448-506 (430-488) 136-172 51-60 25.9-32.1 87-98
1 Wing chord differs substantially by age; other measurments less age-
specific and given values refer to all age groups.
2 Bill depth measured at the distal end of forehead feathering (Fig. __).
At 09:53 AM 3/8/05 -0700, J.Harry Krueger wrote:
>Kevin,
>
>Adding your conclusion re: this process to the fact that even "true"
>comparitive neck length in the field is VERY difficult to accurately judge
>on a goose because of variability of posture, function, "attitude," etc.,
>are we then left with the conclusion that neck length in the field and by
>specimen is of no, or at best little, value whatsoever except as a
>comparative sidebar in extreme cases?
>
>Harry Krueger
>Boise, ID
>
>
>
>On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 11:03 , Kevin McGowan <kjm2(AT)CORNELL.EDU> sent:
>At 02:55 PM 3/7/2005 -0800, Peter Pyle wrote:
> >I wanted to see if neck length could be quantified in any way so I
> measured
> >134 specimens ...
>
>This was a nice effort, but I don't see how the results can be of any
>use. As a preparator, I know that neck length on a finished specimen has
>little relationship to the actual, real-life neck length (if such a thing
>would actually be measurable on a real bird). The finished length is
>primarily a result of the aesthetic or practical goals of the
>preparator. It doesn't have to be bunched to be significantly shortened,
>and stretching of the skin during preparation can make for increased length
>as well. Gross differences might be useful, but certainly differences on
>the order of 10 cm or less mean nothing. Certainly such a measurement of
>any specimen can be made, but the results are misleading at best. (GIGO)
>
>Other things on bird skins that are not useful to measure include total
>length, girth, and how far the wingtips extend out the tail. All are
>variable depending on the preparation.
>
>If you've never stuffed a bird, you just can't appreciate how variable the
>end result can be. That is why classical ornithological work use only
>tarsus, wing, tail, and bill measurements.
>
>Kevin
>
>
>
>Kevin J. McGowan
>Co-editor, New York State Breeding Bird Atlas
>Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology
>159 Sapsucker Woods Road
>Ithaca, NY 14850
>607/254-2432
>fax 607/254-2111
><javascript:parent.opencompose('kjm2(AT)cornell.edu','','','')>kjm2(AT)cornell.edu
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Great Black-backed x Herring Gull Photos
From: John Pogacnik <jpogacnik(AT)ADELPHIA.NET>
Date: 9 Mar 2005 4:33am
Emmanuel and others,
Although I am not familiar with the argentatutus of the European herring
gull, there are a number of factors that seem to rule out this species. The
most significant field marks are size and darkness of mantle. We have had a
number of sightings of these possible great black-backed x herring gulls in
Ohio over the last couple years. Similar birds have also been found in
Michigan, Ontario, and Indiana. Most of the birds have been adults although
a second year bird found at Cleveland in March 2003 that originally was
reported as a western gull may also be a great black-backed x herring hybrid
(see http://www.aves.net/birdnews/pastwinter02-03.htm ).
Basically the adult birds have been fairly similar in appearance and
structure. They are usually intermediate in size between GBBG and HEGU.
They have strong broad necks and a sloping forehead more similar to GBBG.
The bill is intermediate between GBBG and HEGU and appears a bit too heavy
for HEGU. The mantle is intermediate between GBBG and HEGU and is at least
a shade or possibly two paler than the graellsii race of LBBG. The wingtips
on the birds that I have seen there is a large mirror on P10 that either
extends to the tip or has a very narrow incomplete black band separating it
from the white tip. The mirror on P9 is smaller but covers the width of P9.
Leg color is a very pale pink. Eye color is pale and the orbital ring
yellowish-orange. Head streaking is mainly on the back of head and lower
neck is more than typical for GBBG but less than typical for HEGU.
Here are links to similar birds that have been photographed on the Great
Lakes. Note that many of these sightings have been fairly recent and may
possibly be of the same bird(s). I have seen at least two distinct
individuals.
http://www.aves.net/birdnews/pastDec-Jan04.htm
Ohio 1/2/2004
http://www.indianaaudubon.org/guide/photopages/McCoyGBBG_HEGU.htm
Indiana 12/12/2004
http://www.ofo.ca/photos/gullhybriddw/
Ontario 10/16/2004
http://www.amazilia.net/images/Birds/Gulls/HerringXGreatblackbackedGull.htm
Michigan 12/16/2004
A similar bird was found in Newfoundland by Bruce Mactavish and was reported
on ID Frontiers last year. Here is a link to that message. There are also
some links to photos of that bird.
http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0401A&L=birdwg01&P=R1282&I=-3
John Pogacnik
4765 Lockwood Road
Perry, OH 44081
440-259-2751
jpogacnik(AT)adelphia.net
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Wood Thrush ID
From: Gerald White <gdwhite(AT)MACHLINK.COM>
Date: 9 Mar 2005 10:50am
I did not receive any feedback for the question in my Cozumel Thrasher post,
"Are there exceptions to the Wood Thrush plumage
regarding the eye-ring and streaking on the side of the head during this time
period?" This period referring to the first week of
Feb. Is this a tough question because of the migration pattern and lack of
documentation during that period?
Gerald White
Muscatine, IA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gerald White" <gdwhite(AT)machlink.com>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 8:56 PM
Subject: Cozumel Thrasher?
> I had sightings on Cozumel Island during the first week of Feb. 2005 of what I
think was a Cozumel Thrasher but two of the field
> marks from Howells "A Guide To The Birds Of Mexico and Northern Central
America" 1995 does not match my sighting. My first
question
> address the lack of wing bars on my bird. I was not looking specifically for
wing bars but I had a close side view and none were
> evident. Howells illustration shows strong wing bars, is it possible that the
feather wear could account for the lack of bars?
The
> other feature that does not match is the bill, my bird had a bill that did not
cause me to note its curvature. Is the bill
> illustration very accurate in Howells guide?
> My sighting could have been a Wood Thrush except the bright Rufous color was
strongest on the back and it had no eye-ring or
> streaking on the side of the head. Are there exceptions to the Wood Thrush
plumage regarding the eye-ring and streaking on the
side
> of the head during this time period?
> Gerald White
> Muscatine, IA
>
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Hybrid Goldeneyes
From: Steve Sosensky <Steve(AT)SOSENSKY.COM>
Date: 9 Mar 2005 6:51pm
Hi Chatters,
Does head sheen color have any validity as a field mark? I really doubt it
when both colors are seen on the same bird in different orientations. See
my photos of a hybrid Hooded Merganser X ?? Goldeneye at
http://www.sosensky.com/bird-photos/Hybrid_Merganser_X_Goldeneye.htm.
Either this bird has different colors on each side of its head, or the
color is strictly attributed to the direction and refraction of the light.
At 06:30 PM 2005-03-09 -0500, Jean Iron wrote:
>Hybrid Common x Barrow's Goldeneyes are more frequent than most birders
>realize. The large Sibley (2000) is the only guide to illustrate an example
>of this hybrid. ... This post deals only with males in definitive
>alternate (adult breeding) plumage.
>
>3. Seven photos of hybrid and a Barrow's Goldeneye with Common Goldeneyes.
>http://www.ofo.ca/photos/goldeneyehybrid/ I saw this hybrid. It displayed
>like a Barrow's and had a greenish head sheen similar to the nearby Common
>Goldeneyes.
>
>8. Finally, I've often wondered about the photo of a male Barrow's in the
>February 1986 issue of Birding, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 18 (Tobish 1986). ...
>However, I wonder if it's a
>backcross that is mostly Barrow's for the following reasons: (1) greenish
>head sheen suggests Common Goldeneye ancestry;
>
>Ron Pittaway
>Ontario Field Ornithologists
>Minden and Toronto ON
>E-mail: jeaniron(AT)sympatico.ca
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: Hybrid Goldeneyes
From: Jean Iron <jeaniron(AT)SYMPATICO.CA>
Date: 9 Mar 2005 4:31pm
Hybrid Common x Barrow's Goldeneyes are more frequent than most birders
realize. The large Sibley (2000) is the only guide to illustrate an example
of this hybrid. Martin and Di Labio (1994) cautioned that goldeneye hybrids
are being misidentified as Barrow's. Record Committees reviewing
extralimital Barrow's in some cases may want photo documentation to exclude
the possibility of first generation hybrids and backcrosses. This post
deals only with males in definitive alternate (adult breeding) plumage.
1. Hybrid misidentified as a Barrow's
Goldeneye. http://www.spflrc.org/~walker/photodetail.php?id=10510
2. Comparison of hybrid and
Barrow's. http://www.birdphotography.com/species/bago.html
3. Seven photos of hybrid and a Barrow's Goldeneye with Common Goldeneyes.
http://www.ofo.ca/photos/goldeneyehybrid/ I saw this hybrid. It displayed
like a Barrow's and had a greenish head sheen similar to the nearby Common
Goldeneyes.
4. Probable hybrid. http://www.suttoncenter.org/okbirdspix24.html This
bird may be the offspring of a first generation hybrid backcrossed with a
Barrow's.
5. Probable hybrid. http://www.peninsulasportsman.com/images/BGE1.jpg
These birds may be offspring of a first generation hybrid backcrossed with
a Common. Note black edges on scapulars are wider than in Common Goldeneye.
6. Hybrid. http://www.notason.com/oiseaux/id362.htm Would this bird be
identified as a Barrow's without a photo?
7. Photo of hybrid and Barrow's and a short note in the Wilson
Bulletin. http://elibrary.unm.edu/sora/Wilson/v088n02/p0348-p0349.pdf
8. Finally, I've often wondered about the photo of a male Barrow's in the
February 1986 issue of Birding, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 18 (Tobish 1986). This
photo was taken at the Washington Zoo by Claudia Wilds (fide Bruce Di
Labio) of probable birds of Icelandic origin. Photos can be misleading, but
this male looks odd to me having seen hundreds of Barrow's in North
America. It may be an Icelandic Barrow's as Palmer (1976) says in adult
males "there are differences (hard to describe) in contour of head between
birds of Iceland, e. N. Am., and w. N. Am." However, I wonder if it's a
backcross that is mostly Barrow's for the following reasons: (1) greenish
head sheen suggests Common Goldeneye ancestry; (2) head shape is somewhat
like a Barrow's, but not quite typical of that species; (3) white facial
crescent is intermediate in shape and barely extents above top of bill; (4)
the facial crescent on typical Barrow's is more pointed at top and usually
reaches well above top of bill and eyes; (5) the white spots on the
scapulars are larger than typical Barrow's and the three forward spots form
one large spot, usually separated by black on Barrow's; (6) width of
diagonal black line dividing white wing coverts is narrower than on most
Barrow's; and (7) black spur on side of breast is smaller than on most
Barrow's. I conclude that these 7 points cast doubt about this bird being a
pure Barrow's.
Note: Statements about these hybrids are "educated guesses". None are
proven by independent evidence such as known parents and genetics.
Acknowledgements: I thank Michel Gosselin of the Canadian Museum of Nature
for discussions and web links to hybrid goldeneyes. Thanks to Bruce Di
Labio, Chris Escott and Bruce Mactavish for sending me photos of hybrid
goldeneyes from Ontario, British Columbia and Newfoundland.
References: (A) Martin, Paul R. and Bruce M. Di Labio. 1994. Identification
of Common x Barrow's Goldeneye Hybrids in the Field. Birding 26(2):104-105.
(B) Palmer, Ralph S. (editor). 1976. Volume 3, Waterfowl. Handbook of North
American Birds. Yale University Press. (C) Sibley, David Allen. 2000. The
Sibley Guide to Birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York. (D) Tobish, Thede. 1986.
Separation of Barrow's and Common Goldeneyes in All Plumages. Birding
18(1):17-27.
Ron Pittaway
Ontario Field Ornithologists
Minden and Toronto ON
E-mail: jeaniron(AT)sympatico.ca
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Hybrid Goldeneyes
From: Julian Hough <jrhough1(AT)SNET.NET>
Date: 9 Mar 2005 4:46pm
Ron,
Excellent post and will serve as a reference for many I'm sure. We just had
a male Barrow's here in the harbor across from the house, a good bird in
southern CT. I was wondering about hybrids so your post was well-timed and
informative.
Best,
Julian Hough,
CT, USA
jrhough1(AT)snet.net
www.naturescapeimages.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jean Iron" <jeaniron(AT)SYMPATICO.CA>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 6:30 PM
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Hybrid Goldeneyes
> Hybrid Common x Barrow's Goldeneyes are more frequent than most birders
> realize. The large Sibley (2000) is the only guide to illustrate an
> example
> of this hybrid. Martin and Di Labio (1994) cautioned that goldeneye
> hybrids
> are being misidentified as Barrow's. Record Committees reviewing
> extralimital Barrow's in some cases may want photo documentation to
> exclude
> the possibility of first generation hybrids and backcrosses. This post
> deals only with males in definitive alternate (adult breeding) plumage.
>
> 1. Hybrid misidentified as a Barrow's
> Goldeneye. http://www.spflrc.org/~walker/photodetail.php?id=10510
>
> 2. Comparison of hybrid and
> Barrow's. http://www.birdphotography.com/species/bago.html
>
> 3. Seven photos of hybrid and a Barrow's Goldeneye with Common Goldeneyes.
> http://www.ofo.ca/photos/goldeneyehybrid/ I saw this hybrid. It displayed
> like a Barrow's and had a greenish head sheen similar to the nearby Common
> Goldeneyes.
>
> 4. Probable hybrid. http://www.suttoncenter.org/okbirdspix24.html This
> bird may be the offspring of a first generation hybrid backcrossed with a
> Barrow's.
>
> 5. Probable hybrid. http://www.peninsulasportsman.com/images/BGE1.jpg
> These birds may be offspring of a first generation hybrid backcrossed with
> a Common. Note black edges on scapulars are wider than in Common
> Goldeneye.
>
> 6. Hybrid. http://www.notason.com/oiseaux/id362.htm Would this bird be
> identified as a Barrow's without a photo?
>
> 7. Photo of hybrid and Barrow's and a short note in the Wilson
> Bulletin. http://elibrary.unm.edu/sora/Wilson/v088n02/p0348-p0349.pdf
>
> 8. Finally, I've often wondered about the photo of a male Barrow's in the
> February 1986 issue of Birding, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 18 (Tobish 1986). This
> photo was taken at the Washington Zoo by Claudia Wilds (fide Bruce Di
> Labio) of probable birds of Icelandic origin. Photos can be misleading,
> but
> this male looks odd to me having seen hundreds of Barrow's in North
> America. It may be an Icelandic Barrow's as Palmer (1976) says in adult
> males "there are differences (hard to describe) in contour of head between
> birds of Iceland, e. N. Am., and w. N. Am." However, I wonder if it's a
> backcross that is mostly Barrow's for the following reasons: (1) greenish
> head sheen suggests Common Goldeneye ancestry; (2) head shape is somewhat
> like a Barrow's, but not quite typical of that species; (3) white facial
> crescent is intermediate in shape and barely extents above top of bill;
> (4)
> the facial crescent on typical Barrow's is more pointed at top and usually
> reaches well above top of bill and eyes; (5) the white spots on the
> scapulars are larger than typical Barrow's and the three forward spots
> form
> one large spot, usually separated by black on Barrow's; (6) width of
> diagonal black line dividing white wing coverts is narrower than on most
> Barrow's; and (7) black spur on side of breast is smaller than on most
> Barrow's. I conclude that these 7 points cast doubt about this bird being
> a
> pure Barrow's.
>
> Note: Statements about these hybrids are "educated guesses". None are
> proven by independent evidence such as known parents and genetics.
>
> Acknowledgements: I thank Michel Gosselin of the Canadian Museum of Nature
> for discussions and web links to hybrid goldeneyes. Thanks to Bruce Di
> Labio, Chris Escott and Bruce Mactavish for sending me photos of hybrid
> goldeneyes from Ontario, British Columbia and Newfoundland.
>
> References: (A) Martin, Paul R. and Bruce M. Di Labio. 1994.
> Identification
> of Common x Barrow's Goldeneye Hybrids in the Field. Birding
> 26(2):104-105.
> (B) Palmer, Ralph S. (editor). 1976. Volume 3, Waterfowl. Handbook of
> North
> American Birds. Yale University Press. (C) Sibley, David Allen. 2000. The
> Sibley Guide to Birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New York. (D) Tobish, Thede. 1986.
> Separation of Barrow's and Common Goldeneyes in All Plumages. Birding
> 18(1):17-27.
>
> Ron Pittaway
> Ontario Field Ornithologists
> Minden and Toronto ON
> E-mail: jeaniron(AT)sympatico.ca
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: European Herring Gull in Ontario?
From: The Holdens <holdens(AT)MOUNTAINCABLE.NET>
Date: 9 Mar 2005 3:18pm
Hello Everyone,
Sorry to bring up another gull, but I photographed this strange gull in a field
near my house in Binbrook, Ontario. (Same field as
the Binbrook Mystery Gull from late December). I felt it may be a European
Herring Gull, but don't have any experience with them, so
I would greatly appreciate any comments! (Unfortunately, I didn't get any shots
of the bird sitting on the ground), but I did get
the following flight shots:
http://www.peregrineprints.com/gulls/pg/mystery/posseuro.htm
I've also added all of my "strange" gulls to one page on my website, and
comments about any of them are always appreciated!
http://www.peregrineprints.com/gulls/maingull.htm
Good Birding!
Brandon Holden
17
Hamilton, Ontario
www.PeregrinePrints.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: European Herring Gull in Ontario?
From: "Daniela.Detlef.Gruber(AT)t-online.de" <Daniela.Detlef.Gruber@T-ONLINE.DE>
Date: 10 Mar 2005 3:07am
This gull looks superficially like a European Herring Gull. But there
are some characters which are more in line with smithsonianus. The
pattern of the greater coverts, which show extensive dark basis and pale
tips, are untypical for argentatus. The obvious pale head is also a
character which is more in line with smithsonianus. Sure, the tail
pattern und uppertail coverts are more like that of argentatus. But
could it be a very abraded (faded) bird, or just a smithsonianus which
is at the extreme pale end of the variation within this taxon?
Best regards
Detlef Gruber
Germany
-----Original Message-----
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 23:18:21 +0100
Subject: [BIRDWG01] European Herring Gull in Ontario?
From: The Holdens <holdens(AT)MOUNTAINCABLE.NET>
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Hello Everyone,
Sorry to bring up another gull, but I photographed this strange gull in
a field near my house in Binbrook, Ontario. (Same field as
the Binbrook Mystery Gull from late December). I felt it may be a
European Herring Gull, but don't have any experience with them, so
I would greatly appreciate any comments! (Unfortunately, I didn't get
any shots of the bird sitting on the ground), but I did get
the following flight shots:
http://www.peregrineprints.com/gulls/pg/mystery/posseuro.htm
I've also added all of my "strange" gulls to one page on my website, and
comments about any of them are always appreciated!
http://www.peregrineprints.com/gulls/maingull.htm
Good Birding!
Brandon Holden
17
Hamilton, Ontario
www.PeregrinePrints.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: European Herring Gull in Ontario?
From: Peter Adriaens <peter.adriaens(AT)dutchbirding.nl>
Date: 10 Mar 2005 5:21am
I agree with Detlef on this one. In addition to the characters he
mentioned, the following also look odd to me:
- the underparts are quite pale, yet the pattern that is still discernible
is that of vague transverse blotches. In European Herring Gull, especially
those with paler underparts, some longitudinal streaking is normally
present.
- The base of the rump strikes me as a bit more heavily marked than is
usually the case in European birds.
Interesting bird though. The tail pattern is quite similar to that of
European birds, so it is interesting to see that some smithsonianus can
get like this.
Regards,
Peter
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Cackling Goose
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=FE?= Hertzel <phertzel(AT)RCONNECT.COM>
Date: 10 Mar 2005 6:55am
Peter Pyle wrote:
>The response to the neck-length analysis is appreciated. I want to echo the
>sentiments of several responders that we should proceed with caution.
In addition to his tentative conclusion "it appears that neck length may,
tentatively, separate the two species with a fair degree of reliability",
there is another inference that deserves attention. It is that these data
support adopting a skeptical view of great variation in Cackling Goose neck
length.
According to Pyle's data (albeit small n), the coefficient of variation* in
the neck length of taverneri measured is about 7%, and in parvipes is also
about 7%. These degrees of variation are small, and are consistent with
the degrees in the other structural features extracted from the second
table (culmen, bill depth, tarsus-- see below). This match is not
coincidental and suggests neck length is not as variable (within a
particular subspecies) as some would have it. Unfortunately, Pyle does not
include data for hutchinsii neck length, which is the subspecies that is
given the most latitude in neck length. It is easy to find on the internet
two photos of birds both claimed to be hutchinsii, where the neck length of
one bird is twice that of the other. Pyle's data may begin to make the
case against this degree of variation. His measurements together with the
consistency in the second table strongly suggest something would be wrong
with this sort of permissiveness regarding taverneri and parvipes neck
length. If a similarly small degree of variation exists for hutchinsii,
then perhaps long-necked "hutchinsii" are actually misidentified.
Paul Hertzel
Department of Mathematics
NIACC
Mason City, IA
hertzpau(AT)niacc.edu
* coefficient of variation = SD/mean
subspecies. . . exposed culmen. . . coefficient of
variation
taverneri. . . . . . . . 32 - 42. . . . . . . . . . .
0.067
hutchinsii. . . . . . . 31 - 43. . . . . . . . . . .
0.081
parvipes. . . . . . . . 37 - 47. . . . . . . . . . .
0.059
subspecies. . . . . bill depth. . . . . . . coefficient of
variation
taverneri. . . . . . . . 17.7-21.8 . . . . . . . .
0.052
hutchinsii. . . . . . . 17.3-22.9. . . . . . . . 0.069
parvipes. . . . . . . . 20.2-24.8. . . . . . . . 0.051
subspecies. . . . . .tarsus. . . . . . . . . coefficient of
variation
taverneri. . . . . . . . 67 - 81. . . . . . . . . .
0.047
hutchinsii. . . . . . . 64 - 83. . . . . . . . . .
0.064
parvipes. . . . . . . . 71 - 85. . . . . . . . . .
0.045
subspecies. . . . neck length. . . . . . coefficient of
variation
taverneri. . . . . . . . 84 - 112. . . . . . . . .
0.071
parvipes. . . . . . . .109 - 144. . . . . . . . .0.069
hutchinsii. . . . . . . ? ?
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: European Herring Gull in Ontario?
From: Matt Sharp <sharp(AT)ACNATSCI.ORG>
Date: 10 Mar 2005 8:10am
This bird does not appear that worn, at least not on the coverts
thought there is obvious wear on the tail and primaries. Compare
to this bird. Which is what I think of as a worn and pale HEGU.
http://www.martinreid.com/hsmitp80.html
>But could it be a very abraded (faded) bird, or just a smithsonianus which
>is at the extreme pale end of the variation within this taxon?
Birds like the one at Martin's site above are also what I would consider at the
pale end of the smith spectrum, they usually have a bi-colored bill and a
creamy brown tone overall - which is why the question of Glaucous genes
comes up. It is hard to put a ratio on the number of the glaucous-like Herrings
to Herrings I see since there is not a clear-cut line, just a continuum untill I
get
to birds I think are HEGUxGLGU. However they are always present in the local
Gull flock and not at all infreguent.
They lack the gray tones of the current binbrook bird and especially the
contrast
between the paler wing coverts and darker gray scaps. The tail/rump pattern is
certainly outside of of the range of variation of the vast majority of Am HEGU
in the PA-NJ area.
Finally while the whitish head is not particularly unusual for AM HEGU this
late
in the winter the paler neck/chest with the heavy gray half-collar of streaking
is
not typical. Nor is the mix of grayish neck streaking, whitish lower neck upper
breast, brownish flanks and mid-riff and whitish rear/under-tail. AM HEGU tend
to be more unifromly muddy brown below.
SO I do not think this bird can be considered to be "just" a smithsonianus. It
may
be a smith but if it is then it casts some doubt in my mind on the
distinctiveness
between them and European HEGU. If it is not a Eur. Herring then I fear one may
have to go into the unverifiable mess of hybrids.
How-about a 1st year LBBG x HEGU.
Best
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: Another "Thayer's"
From: John Idzikowski <idzikoj(AT)UWM.EDU>
Date: 10 Mar 2005 8:47am
Here in the Midwest we occasionally see light Thayer's (or dark Kumlien's?)
like this one from March 6. I would like to know what your identifications
would be should this bird show up in your area. Do birds like this occur
within the West Coast winter range of Thayer's? Is it too dark to be
considered a Kumlien's?
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305e.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305b.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305c.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305d.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305f.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305g.jpg
John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Another "Thayer's"
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 10 Mar 2005 9:32am
The primary tips aren't too light for west coast Thayer's- a small
minority are much paler grayish than this bird. However in my
experience the vast majority including pale-end birds show a
complete black band on P6, so I suspect the broken band on
this bird probably makes it iffy, at least for "pure" Thayer's.
Cheers,
Phil
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305e.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305b.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305c.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305d.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305f.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305g.jpg
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: BIRDING waterfowl articles
From: Ian Paulsen <birdbooker(AT)ZIPCON.NET>
Date: 10 Mar 2005 11:21am
HI:
There are 3 identification articles in the latest issue of
BIRDING related to waterfowl that might be of interest:
Rare color variants of the Trumpeter Swan by Terry McEneaney. Pages
148-155.
Identification, molts, and aging of female-type wigeons by Cameron Cox and
Jessie Barry. Pages 156-165.
Exotic waterfowl in the ABA area by Steve Carbol. Pages 166-179.
--
Ian Paulsen
Bainbridge Island, WA, USA
A.K.A.: "Birdbooker"
"Rallidae all the way!"
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Binbrook Ontario Herring Gull
From: Kevin McLaughlin <kmclaughlin(AT)UNIONGAS.COM>
Date: 10 Mar 2005 3:40pm
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
I would like to comment on Brandon Holden's fascinating first basic ( first
winter ) Herring Gull, presented as a possible argenteus/argentatus.
In a holistic sense, the bird does not resemble a second calendar year L. a.
smithsonianus. Perhaps the most compelling feature contributing to this is
the make up of the tail.
Of the many thousands of juvenile and first basic " Canadian " Herring Gulls
that I have studied over the years, I have never seen any which have a tail
/ uppertail pattern remotely resembling that possessed by this bird. Our
Great Lakes " smiths " have rectrices which are essentially entirely
blackish-brown to the base, where they meet the uppertail coverts. The only
paleness typically showing is a variable amount, usually small, of fine
white " stippling ", with a few fine squiggly bars towards the outer margin
and base of P6, the outermost rectrix. Also contrasting to the dark brown
colour of the rectrices are pale or whitish bases to the shafts of at least
the outer three or four feathers. This pattern is seen when the tail is
spread in flight. What gets presented is a sharply contrasting pattern of
dark rectrices against the uppertail coverts and rump which are evenly
barred brown / whitish.
I would be most interested in seeing photos of North American Herring Gulls
which display, in first and second calendar years, a tail pattern comparable
to the Binbrook bird.
Along with the other features shown on this bird, such as the covert pattern
and the pale underparts, the distinctive tail pattern justifies
consideration of it as a " Euro " Herring Gull in my opinion.
Kevin McLaughlin
Hamilton, Ontario
CANADA.
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Binbrook Ontario Herring Gull
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 10 Mar 2005 6:03pm
Why couldn't this be a pale-end Vega? The primary pattern looks
great, particularly the exact pattern on the tips of the inner primaries.
The pattern of the tail, rump, and ut coverts looks ok for this time
of year - inc. that apparently Vega can show completely white bases
to the outermost rects like this. Pattern of greater coverts looks ok,
and they seem appropriately "soft" compared to what is more typical
for smith. Whitish, streaked/blotched underparts seem within range
for this time of year. Bill seems nicely thick and blunt.
Unfortunately I can't find any shots of 1C Vega showing the
underwing from this time of year, so not sure if the under-primaries
are too pale or not, but otherwise I'd be interested in hearing
what would rule out a Vega here. I assume that would probably
be a more likely possibility than argentatus/argenteus.
Cheers,
Phil
>http://www.peregrineprints.com/gulls/pg/mystery/posseuro.htm
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Binbrook Ontario Herring Gull
From: Julian Hough <jrhough1(AT)SNET.NET>
Date: 10 Mar 2005 6:50pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Kevin et al,
Bear with me a little....I too looked at the photos of the bird, and =
prior to viewing them had basically thought "here we go again.." which =
seems to be a thought pervasive in my head prior to looking at photos of =
such birds. That should not be taken disrespectfully, nor should it stop =
us looking, but over the years I have become very disillusioned about =
trying to claim a European Herring Gull here in the north-east. Part of =
my despair is that I grew up in the UK and birded there for 26 years, so =
I thought I'd have at least a head start. I have found that despite =
seeing some curious-looking birds in the field and on the web, I'm =
totally bewildered by the variability of smithsonianus and feel insecure =
about identifying argentatus/argenteus (and similarly Yellow-legged =
Gulls for the same reason) in the US - especially since I am not gifted =
with a Bruce Mactavish's discerning eye!
I have seen birds resembling the Ontario bird with regards to tail =
pattern here in CT, (individuals photographed by local birder Pat =
Comins) and I'll try and post photos with his permission. While =
suggesting the possibility of argenteus/argentatus, we agreed that on =
the whole they were most likely pale-end/variant smiths.
The Ontario bird does look good initially, being pale below, lacking =
dark flanks and having less well-barred undertail coverts. The =
not-so-barred rump is good but the outer webs on the outertail feathers =
perhaps should be more whitish for European Herrin. The dark outer =
greater coverts (reminiscent of a muted LBBG) are probably more smith. =
lie and probability says that this is likely a pale variation of a =
smith. I can't remember, but I thought the iris was palesih indicating a =
second-w??
Interesting, but difficult to prove for a disillusioned me...
Julian Hough,
CT, USA
jrhough1(AT)snet.net
www.naturescapeimages.net
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Kevin McLaughlin=20
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU=20
Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 5:39 PM
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Binbrook Ontario Herring Gull
I would like to comment on Brandon Holden's fascinating first basic ( =
first winter ) Herring Gull, presented as a possible =
argenteus/argentatus.
In a holistic sense, the bird does not resemble a second calendar year =
L. a. smithsonianus. Perhaps the most compelling feature contributing to =
this is the make up of the tail.
Of the many thousands of juvenile and first basic " Canadian " Herring =
Gulls that I have studied over the years, I have never seen any which =
have a tail / uppertail pattern remotely resembling that possessed by =
this bird. Our Great Lakes " smiths " have rectrices which are =
essentially entirely blackish-brown to the base, where they meet the =
uppertail coverts. The only paleness typically showing is a variable =
amount, usually small, of fine white " stippling ", with a few fine =
squiggly bars towards the outer margin and base of P6, the outermost =
rectrix. Also contrasting to the dark brown colour of the rectrices are =
pale or whitish bases to the shafts of at least the outer three or four =
feathers. This pattern is seen when the tail is spread in flight. What =
gets presented is a sharply contrasting pattern of dark rectrices =
against the uppertail coverts and rump which are evenly barred brown / =
whitish.
I would be most interested in seeing photos of North American Herring =
Gulls which display, in first and second calendar years, a tail pattern =
comparable to the Binbrook bird.
Along with the other features shown on this bird, such as the covert =
pattern and the pale underparts, the distinctive tail pattern justifies =
consideration of it as a " Euro " Herring Gull in my opinion.
Kevin McLaughlin
Hamilton, Ontario
CANADA.
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Eastern Thayer's Gull
From: Jean Iron <jeaniron(AT)SYMPATICO.CA>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 7:58am
When a Thayer's Gull photo from eastern North America (south of the Arctic)
is posted to ID-Frontiers, west coast birders usually say that "it's not
quite right" for Thayer's. Three Thayer's Gulls were collected in the 1960s
on the Niagara River in New York State by ornithologists Bob Andrle and Art
Clark of the Buffalo Museum of Science. These specimens were identified by
John Bull and Eugene Eisenmann of the American Museum of Natural History
and also compared with specimens of Thayer's in the Royal Ontario Museum.
Andrle (1969) published these records in the Auk 86(1):106-109. To read
Andrle's note and see a photo of the three
wingtips http://elibrary.unm.edu/sora/Auk/v086n01/p0106-p0109.pdf
How would today's observers identify these birds?
Ron Pittaway and Jean Iron
Minden and Toronto ON
E-mail: jeaniron(AT)sympatico.ca
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Binbrook Ontario Herring Gull - age
From: Matt Sharp <sharp(AT)ACNATSCI.ORG>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 8:40am
Thanks to Julian for pointing out the iris color. This is odd
for a 1C smith (or most large larids).
However I am not sure the age of the bird can be hinged on that.
A 2C bird should have recently (late Dec./early Jan here-abouts)
completed its 1st complete molt including wing and tail.
The wings and tail appear more worn that the coverts and scaps
on the Binbrook bird. Could this be an advanced 1C which has
replaced coverts and scaps. This may also explain the the odd
dark blotches on the scaps. Otherwise it would be a 2c which did
not grow in any ad gray feathers on the mantle/scaps. A 2C bird
is less troubling as a Am HEGU than a 1C though still this individual
still has an unusual tail pattern.
Other comments on the age of the bird would be appreciated.
Matt
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Binbrook Ontario Herring Gull - age
From: Dick Newell <dick.newell(AT)ZEN.CO.UK>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 9:07am
re: http://www.peregrineprints.com/gulls/pg/mystery/posseuro.htm
On 11/3/05 3:39 pm, "Matt Sharp" <sharp(AT)ACNATSCI.ORG> wrote:
> Other comments on the age of the bird would be appreciated.
>
> Matt
I have already replied privately with my opinion that this bird is not
European. I also wondered whether the bird was a 2nd winter. I cannot make
up my mind whether the primaries are too rounded (not pointed enough) for
1st winter or not. I can find flight shots of 1st winter large gulls with
similar pointedness, and also older birds with obviously more rounded
primaries, so I guess on balance, the primary shape would favour 1st winter.
Dick Newell
Cambridge, UK
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Binbrook Ontario Herring Gull - age
From: Peter Adriaens <peter.adriaens(AT)dutchbirding.nl>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 9:30am
>
> I have already replied privately with my opinion that this bird is not
> European. I also wondered whether the bird was a 2nd winter.
>
The pointed shape of all of the remiges, and their worn state, as well as
the tail pattern (with regular barring on, and no white tips to the
tailfeathers) and the worn state of the tailfeathers, certainly point to a
first winter. Also, in the first photograph
(http://www.peregrineprints.com/gulls/photo/Binbrook%20Euro/diditagain.jpg),
on the left, the tertials are visible and do not show enough white at
their tips to be anything but juvenile feathers.
Peter
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Eastern Thayer's Gull
From: Bruce Deuel <BDEUEL(AT)DFG.CA.GOV>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 9:31am
Not all west coast birders would say the bird under current discussion
is "not quite right." When I saw the photos, I thought "looks good to
me." If I had seen it here in Northern California I wouldn't have
hesitated to call it a Thayer's. But then I don't look at 100s of them
as some do.
Cheers,
Bruce Deuel
Redding, CA
>>> Jean Iron <jeaniron(AT)SYMPATICO.CA> 03/11/05 6:58 AM >>>
When a Thayer's Gull photo from eastern North America (south of the
Arctic)
is posted to ID-Frontiers, west coast birders usually say that "it's
not
quite right" for Thayer's. Three Thayer's Gulls were collected in the
1960s
on the Niagara River in New York State by ornithologists Bob Andrle and
Art
Clark of the Buffalo Museum of Science. These specimens were identified
by
John Bull and Eugene Eisenmann of the American Museum of Natural
History
and also compared with specimens of Thayer's in the Royal Ontario
Museum.
Andrle (1969) published these records in the Auk 86(1):106-109. To
read
Andrle's note and see a photo of the three
wingtips http://elibrary.unm.edu/sora/Auk/v086n01/p0106-p0109.pdf
How would today's observers identify these birds?
Ron Pittaway and Jean Iron
Minden and Toronto ON
E-mail: jeaniron(AT)sympatico.ca
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: 'European' Thayer's Gull in Ireland
From: "Michael O'Keeffe" <okeeffeml(AT)EIRCOM.NET>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 10:16am
Hi all,
Those with an interest in this subject might like to offer an opinion on a 1st
winter bird in Ireland?
The bird has been present with a mixed flock of Iceland and Kumlien's gulls
since March 5th. It superficially resembles American Herring Gull in plumage
but is far closer to Iceland/Kumlien's in overall shape and in key features it
appears to match other Thayer's seen over here.
http://www.birdsireland.com/pages/rare_bird_news/2005/march_photos.html
http://www.irishbirding.com/birdnews.html
Regards
Mike
_________________________________________________________________
Sign up for eircom broadband now and get a free two month trial.*
Phone 1850 73 00 73 or visit http://home.eircom.net/broadbandoffer
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ''European' Thayer's Gull in Ireland
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 12:28pm
> http://www.birdsireland.com/pages/rare_bird_news/2005/march_photos.html
>
> http://www.irishbirding.com/birdnews.html
It's hard to argue against Thayer's based on plumage, but it has
always bothered me that so many of these far eastern NA and
European Thayer's candidates necessarily have to appear so
close structurally to the Iceland/Kumlien's they are photographed
next to. In this case the proportional size of the eye indicates that
the bird is pretty small and slight, with the bill being exceptionally
small compared to the eye size. Also in the flight shot the wing
base appears a bit narrow compared to most west coast Thayer's.
Makes me wonder if we aren't oversimplifying criteria for
separating pure Thayer's, and birds like this aren't just
exceptionally dark intergrades (Kumlien's) with high enough
level of dark pigment saturation to fill in their patterning.
Cheers,
Phil
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Eastern Thayer's Gull
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 2:30pm
> wingtips http://elibrary.unm.edu/sora/Auk/v086n01/p0106-p0109.pdf
>
> How would today's observers identify these birds?
At least based on the info available, as Thayer's. No sign of Iceland
influence in primary patterns, text notes mantles slightly darker than
smith, etc.
Cheers,
Phil
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ''European' Thayer's Gull in Ireland
From: Dick Newell <dick.newell(AT)ZEN.CO.UK>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 4:06pm
There is a logical inconsistency in the pattern of occurrence of Kumlien's
Gull. If Kumleinıs Gull has hybrid origins, then it is not surprising that
some of them inherit the migratory behaviour of Iceland Gull and so turn up
on the East Coast and in Europe - and, as is popular conjecture, some of
these birds may look more like Thayer's than nominate Iceland.
But on the other hand one would also expect some of them to have inherited
the migratory tendencies of Thayerıs. So why is it that Kumleinıs-type
gulls, looking more like nominate Iceland Gull, are not a lot more common on
the West Coast?
Are they being overlooked, or does the Kumlein's gene-pool contain far more
nominate alleles than Thayer's alleles? [There is of course another
possibility that they inherit an intermediate migratory direction]
Dick Newell
Cambridge, UK
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: winter distribution of kumlieni
From: "Michael L. P. Retter" <mlretter(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 4:20pm
> So why is it
> that Kumleinıs-type
> gulls, looking more like nominate Iceland Gull, are
> not a lot more common on
> the West Coast?
I would suggest that part of the answer is that many
members of this complex, contrary to field guides and
'popular belief', winter across a wide swath of the
interior of North America--in particular the Great
Lakes and Upper Mississippi Valley. Some days in
Illinois we even see more Kumlien's/Thayer's
"intergrades" (= dark Kumlien's) than "textbook"
Kumlien's. More importantly in this context, we see
*about* 4-5 Thayer's for each Kumlien's and each
"intergrade." That would seem to indicate that
Illinois is to the west of an equilibrium point in the
winter range of thayeri/kumlieni: a place where
Kumlein's and Thayer's occur in equal numbers.
Therefore, I do not find it surprising at all that
Kumlien's-looking gulls are not occurring with (known)
regularity 2,000 mi. further west of here (where
Kumlien's is already greatly outnumbered).
========================
Michael L. P. Retter
Bloomington-Normal
McLean Co, Illinois
mlretter AT yahoo.com
309.824.7317
========================
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: winter distribution of kumlieni
From: Dick Newell <dick.newell(AT)ZEN.CO.UK>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 4:45pm
On 11/3/05 11:19 pm, "Michael L. P. Retter" <mlretter(AT)YAHOO.COM> wrote:
> I would suggest that part of the answer is that many
> members of this complex, contrary to field guides and
> 'popular belief', winter across a wide swath of the
> interior of North America--in particular the Great
> Lakes and Upper Mississippi Valley. Some days in
> Illinois we even see more Kumlien's/Thayer's
> "intergrades" (= dark Kumlien's) than "textbook"
> Kumlien's. More importantly in this context, we see
> *about* 4-5 Thayer's for each Kumlien's and each
> "intergrade." That would seem to indicate that
> Illinois is to the west of an equilibrium point in the
> winter range of thayeri/kumlieni: a place where
> Kumlein's and Thayer's occur in equal numbers.
> Therefore, I do not find it surprising at all that
> Kumlien's-looking gulls are not occurring with (known)
> regularity 2,000 mi. further west of here (where
> Kumlien's is already greatly outnumbered).
>
So, if what Michael says is true, then perhaps an intermediate migratory
pattern is what happens.
Another inconsistency related to these gulls is the position of listers.
It's apparently OK to list a Kumlien's Gull as an Iceland Gull, because most
of them look more like Iceland Gulls than Thayer's Gulls, so why is not not
OK to list one that looks more like a Thayer's Gull as a Thayer's Gull?
Dick Newell
Cambridge, UK
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: winter distribution of kumlieni
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao(AT)COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 5:54pm
Michael brings up a great point. Some references suggest that Thayer's and
Iceland (Kumlien's) winter on the coasts with little to none in the
interior. This is absolutely not the case, particularly when you look at the
Great Lakes. I assume that larger river systems (Mississippi?) probably also
have some wintering birds of this complex. The equilibrium point between
these two taxa appears to be somewhere in the Lake Erie/Lake Ontario area.
When I lived in Ontario it was routine to see many Kumlien's on Lake
Ontario, including Niagara Falls (between Lake Ontario and Erie) but fewer
Thayer's. The opposite was the case in western Lake Erie where Thayer's
greatly outnumbers Kumlien's, a fact that was reiterated in a private
conversation with Alan Wormington a few weeks ago. In Toronto I hardly ever,
maybe never, saw a wintering Thayer's Gull personally, but I did pick up a
few migrants in March. Wintering Kumlien's Gulls were common, or at least
you could go out a day and find them without much problem. The details of
the wintering distribution and migratory distribution of these forms is far
from being resolved, but it is clear that a large number winter in the Great
Lakes and in that region it is likely that many of the most confusingly
intermediate individuals are found.
Another interesting pattern which has much less data associated with
it, but I think is at least a viable hypothesis based on what I have seen is
that in general the farther north you go the higher proportion of wintering
Kumlien's types. I think this may be the case on the West Coast as well.
Reports of Kumlien's gulls are much greater in British Columbia than
California, even though the number of birders there is only a fraction of
that of California. When I lived in Vancouver I saw several birds that
looked like Kumlien's, at least based on my experience back then (10 years
ago now). My guess is that careful searching will show that Kumlien's Gulls
are regular, but extremely rare in the West (something noted by Jon King in
personal communications) but their relative "abundance" likely increases as
you go north along the West Coast. Another hypothesis to shoot down.
Thanks Michael for bringing up this Great Lakes perspective.
Regards
Alvaro
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 Michael L. P. Retter
> Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 3:20 PM
> To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] winter distribution of kumlieni
>
> > So why is it
> > that Kumlein9s-type
> > gulls, looking more like nominate Iceland Gull, are
> > not a lot more common on
> > the West Coast?
>
> I would suggest that part of the answer is that many
> members of this complex, contrary to field guides and
> 'popular belief', winter across a wide swath of the
> interior of North America--in particular the Great
> Lakes and Upper Mississippi Valley. Some days in
> Illinois we even see more Kumlien's/Thayer's
> "intergrades" (= dark Kumlien's) than "textbook"
> Kumlien's. More importantly in this context, we see
> *about* 4-5 Thayer's for each Kumlien's and each
> "intergrade." That would seem to indicate that
> Illinois is to the west of an equilibrium point in the
> winter range of thayeri/kumlieni: a place where
> Kumlein's and Thayer's occur in equal numbers.
> Therefore, I do not find it surprising at all that
> Kumlien's-looking gulls are not occurring with (known)
> regularity 2,000 mi. further west of here (where
> Kumlien's is already greatly outnumbered).
>
>
>
> ========================
> Michael L. P. Retter
> Bloomington-Normal
> McLean Co, Illinois
> mlretter AT yahoo.com
> 309.824.7317
> ========================
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
> http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.1 - Release Date: 3/9/2005
>
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.1 - Release Date: 3/9/2005
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ''European' Thayer's Gull in Ireland +
kumlieni' biometrics
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rn_Olav_Tveit?= <Bjorn.Olav.Tveit(AT)GYLDENDAL.NO>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 5:56pm
Somewhat related to Phil's concern about the glaucoides-like structure of
extralimital thayeri's, I have been puzzled by two aspects concerning the
hypothesis that 'kumlieni' is in essence a glaucoides X thayeri hybrid
population:
1. Why is it that the biometrical measurements of 'kumlieni' are
significantly closer to glaucoides than to thayeri (i.e. in Olsen &
Larsson)? One would expect a hybrid-swarm to vary within the extremes of
both ancestoral taxa, with an average right in the middle. Surely, one can
argue that the sample measurments are either too small or from a few
limited geographical areas and thus do not fully represent the clinal
variation within the distribution area of the hybrid swarm, although this
does not seem to be the case.
2. Does anyone know of any correlation between the degree of feather
pigment saturation and biometrics in 'kumlieni'? One would expect dark,
thayeri look-alikes to be larger than pale-end, glaucoides-like birds. That
is, if the hybrid-swarm hypothesis implies that dark birds have more
genetic influence from thayeri than does pale birds. Absence of correlation
(if small, dark birds are as common as large, pale ones) could perhaps
advocat the view of 'kumlieni' beeing a separat taxon.
Regards,
Bjorn O. Tveit
Oslo, Norway
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ''European' Thayer's Gull in Ireland +
kumlieni' biometrics
From: GreatGrayOwl(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 11 Mar 2005 6:32pm
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Hi all:
I know that there is differential migration distance in at least some gull
species tied to age. Though I do not know if there are any data to suggest
the possibility of such differential migration length by sex, I think that we
should all tread carefully writing and positing about gulls at edges/ends of
ranges (e.g., for Iceland on the West Coast and, perhaps, Thayer's in
northwestern Europe, or either species in the Great Lakes - where I have spent
a not
inconsequential amount of time gull-ogling). I would suggest that when
dealing with ends or edges of ranges, one certainly has to be careful about
drawing inferences to larger populations, as the end-or-range sample could be
biased by sex, thus -- and particularly in gulls -- in size. And, for gulls,
all
aspects of size (e.g., overall, bill, wing length, primary projection, etc.)
are critical factors when puzzling about species limits and trying to
identify individual birds. Certainly, if parts of the range (e.g., the
southern
edge) were to receive a higher proportion of one sex than the other, local
birders might have a very different opinion of the size of the species than
would
those at the opposite end of the distribution/size spectrum.
Sincerely,
Tony Leukering
Brighton, CO
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: winter distribution of kumlieni
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 7:13pm
Dick wrote:
> Another inconsistency related to these gulls is the position of listers.
> It's apparently OK to list a Kumlien's Gull as an Iceland Gull, because
most
> of them look more like Iceland Gulls than Thayer's Gulls, so why is not
not
> OK to list one that looks more like a Thayer's Gull as a Thayer's Gull?
Well listers don't make the rules, and the rules are currently that
Kumlien's is a form of Iceland. It's possible the latter is happening
all the time anyway.
Alvaro wrote:
>My guess is that careful searching will show that Kumlien's Gulls
>are regular, but extremely rare in the West (something noted by Jon King in
>personal communications) but their relative "abundance" likely increases as
>you go north along the West Coast. Another hypothesis to shoot down.
If true that may also have something to do with age segregation. Adults
are the most abundant age class and also tend to winter much further
north on average than non-breeders. I think adults probably also
tend to be easier to confidently detect.
Bjorn wrote:
>Why is it that the biometrical measurements of 'kumlieni' are
>significantly closer to glaucoides than to thayeri (i.e. in Olsen &
>Larsson)? One would expect a hybrid-swarm to vary within the extremes of
>both ancestoral taxa, with an average right in the middle.
The variation of the sample may be biased either regionally, or
possibly by overlooking Thayer's-like kumlieni based on
inaccurate preconceptions.
As for the avg. I think it's more likely the situation with how these
populations and their gene flows have shifted, contacted, fragmented or
broken contact, overlapped etc. throughout their histories is too complex
for that conclusion. To me it makes more logical sense that the
"hybrid-swarm" would *not* be right in the middle on average. If
climate/food supply etc. had remained perfectly stable for millennia
you might logically conclude that the avg hybrid should be
homogenous, but that obviously hasn't been the case.
Cheers,
Phil
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Red-breasted Sapsucker pics
From: Martin Reid <upupa(AT)AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 8:13pm
Dear all,
As mentioned by Sheridan, two photos of this morning's fabulous RBSA (found
by Sheridan - all I did was photograph it!) can be found here:
http://www.martinreid.com/sapsucker3.html
Cheers,
Martin
PS we tied a small strip of blue plastic on a low branch of the oak that we
found it in; look for the Sapsucker holes in the upper "V" of the right trunk.
Martin Reid
San Antonio, Texas
mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
http://www.martinreid.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: winter distribution of kumlieni
From: John Idzikowski <idzikoj(AT)UWM.EDU>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 11:34pm
> I would suggest that part of the answer is that many
> members of this complex, contrary to field guides and
> 'popular belief', winter across a wide swath of the
> interior of North America--in particular the Great
> Lakes and Upper Mississippi Valley. Some days in
> Illinois we even see more Kumlien's/Thayer's
> "intergrades" (= dark Kumlien's) than "textbook"
> Kumlien's.
To illustrate a potential "intergrade" as mentioned by Michael Retter, I
repost the digitals of this adult from Milwaukee. My intention was to
solicit views from both the main winter range of Kumlien's and of Thayer's.
Of only 3 responses 2 from the West Coast thought that this bird was okay
for Thayer's with some of their birds even lighter than this; one did not
think it was light at all for a Thayer's. This from the Canadian Maritimes-
"Looks closer to Thayer's than Kumlien's. Primaries are little too dark
on the underside for Kumlien's but good for Thayer's. Primary pattern is
actually OK for a Kumlien's but on the dark side, though not beyond
range of Kumlien's. Eye is fine for Kum also. Structure fine for Kum.
Do we see birds like this here? I think so."
_____
Here is a dark Kumlien's wingtip from Newfoundland that was included in
Howell's "Alula" (9:2-14) article on Kumlien's (photo by Bruce Mactavish)-
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/darkK.jpg
The Milwaukee bird-
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305e.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305b.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305c.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305d.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305f.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305g.jpg
John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: lotsa Glaucous-winged
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 11 Mar 2005 11:37pm
For those interested, I took the time to do a quick photo
study of Glaucous-winged today (central Oregon coast).
I tried to pick a sample representing typical variety of sizes,
head shapes, and primary patterns I see. On the wing shots
5015 is a ~4th-winter with only black on the gonys and
traces of gray in the tail, rest are of mature-looking birds.
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5001.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5002.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5003.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5004.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5005.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5006.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5007.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5008.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5009.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5010.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5011.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5012.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5013.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5014.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5015.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5016.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5017.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5018.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5019.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/gwgu5020.jpg
Eventually I hope to have a site up with hundreds of
shots for each west coast species (as suggested by
Alvaro), but for now thought this might be useful in
light of the recently posted eastern G-w candidates.
I'm obviously trying to highlight things like typical crown
shapes (without bias, I included the flattest-crowned
large males I could find), spacing of eye sockets, size
of P10 mirror, clean look to under-primaries, bill color,
bill length and thickness of base proportional to the bird's
bulk, and avg gentleness of culmen downcurve among
other things I'm probably forgetting at the moment.
Cheers,
Phil
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: winter distribution of kumlieni
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 12 Mar 2005 1:07am
To clarify, I do not recall ever seeing an otherwise normal
Thayer's on the west coast with a broken dark band on the
tip of P6. Has anyone else? On the other hand an incomplete
(or lacking) band on P6 is apparently typical of nominate Iceland.
I suspect that is more significant than the actual shade of gray/
black in this case, and makes this much more likely to be an
intergrade (Kumlien's) regardless of primary shade.
Cheers,
Phil
> To illustrate a potential "intergrade" as mentioned by Michael Retter, I
> repost the digitals of this adult from Milwaukee. My intention was to
> solicit views from both the main winter range of Kumlien's and of
Thayer's.
> Of only 3 responses 2 from the West Coast thought that this bird was okay
> for Thayer's with some of their birds even lighter than this; one did not
> think it was light at all for a Thayer's. This from the Canadian
Maritimes-
>
> "Looks closer to Thayer's than Kumlien's. Primaries are little too dark
> on the underside for Kumlien's but good for Thayer's. Primary pattern is
> actually OK for a Kumlien's but on the dark side, though not beyond
> range of Kumlien's. Eye is fine for Kum also. Structure fine for Kum.
>
> Do we see birds like this here? I think so."
> _____
>
> Here is a dark Kumlien's wingtip from Newfoundland that was included in
> Howell's "Alula" (9:2-14) article on Kumlien's (photo by Bruce Mactavish)-
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/darkK.jpg
>
> The Milwaukee bird-
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305e.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305b.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305c.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305d.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305f.jpg
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305g.jpg
>
>
> John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Red-breasted Sapsucker pics - oops
From: Martin Reid <upupa(AT)AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: 12 Mar 2005 6:04am
Dear all,
sorry about that - the long drive back from west Texas left me a bit
befuddled; I posted that email to the wrong group....
Martin
Martin Reid
San Antonio, Texas
mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
http://www.martinreid.com
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Red-breasted Sapsucker pics - oops
From: "Paul E. Lehman" <lehman.paul(AT)VERIZON.NET>
Date: 12 Mar 2005 6:39am
Martin:
Actually, I think you posted the sapsucker photo to the CORRECT group!!!
Any report of Red-breasted from Arizona eastward comes with the serious
potential problem of hybridization. Heck, I have certainly seen more
hybrids than pure Red-breasteds in Arizona. The farthest east I saw more
Red-breasteds than hybrids was in westernmost Nevada, and that wasn't by
much!
The Davis Mtns bird looks reasonable for Red-breasted. Certainly the
breast looks fine for Red-breasted, and it is often one of the more
"obvious" places one can detect hybridization. Some daggeti
Red-breasteds seem to show the small bits and pieces of white and black
in the rear head region, washed with red, that this birds shows. So, if
it ain't a Red-breasted, it IS awfully close!
Paul Lehman
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: winter distribution of kumlieni
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 12 Mar 2005 7:42am
> On the other hand an incomplete
> (or lacking) band on P6 is apparently typical of nominate Iceland.
ooops, meant kumlien's, not "nominate iceland" :) it was late..
cheers,
phil
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: winter distribution of kumlieni
From: John Idzikowski <idzikoj(AT)UWM.EDU>
Date: 12 Mar 2005 8:35am
Here's a paste of the wingtips from the only fair spread wing shot; p6 is
perhaps better defined.
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/milwwingtips.jpg
John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phillip Pickering" <philliplc(AT)harborside.com>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Cc: <idzikoj(AT)uwm.edu>
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2005 1:19 AM
Subject: Re: winter distribution of kumlieni
> To clarify, I do not recall ever seeing an otherwise normal
> Thayer's on the west coast with a broken dark band on the
> tip of P6. Has anyone else? On the other hand an incomplete
> (or lacking) band on P6 is apparently typical of Kumlien's.
> I suspect that is more significant than the actual shade of gray/
> black in this case, and makes this much more likely to be an
> intergrade (Kumlien's) regardless of primary shade.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Phil
>
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: winter distribution of kumlieni
From: Phillip Pickering <philliplc(AT)HARBORSIDE.COM>
Date: 12 Mar 2005 10:42am
> Here's a paste of the wingtips from the only fair spread wing shot; p6 is
> perhaps better defined.
>
> http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/milwwingtips.jpg
Respectfully, I don't think those blurry underwing shots mean
much. The appearance of the upperside of P6 tip seems pretty
straightforward in the standing and swimming shots (last fully
exposed tip beyond the tertials):
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305c.jpg
http://my.execpc.com/CE/5F/idzikoj/gulls/tk0305e.jpg
Looks like the dark band crosses over onto the inner web then
fades out. Thayer's almost always (always?) show an obvious
band extending solidly accross the entire inner web on the
upperside, visible while standing as well as in flight. Examples -
http://www.thebirdguide.com/gulls/thayers20.jpg
http://www.harborside.com/~philliplc/thayers6.jpg
and also see every adult shot in O & L.
Note how the P6 band can fade out starting on the inner web
on Kumlien's - O & L illustrations page 30, spread wing
shots page 225. It's possible this is one of the safest and most
defining features an intergrade can show. This bird may still be
"mostly" Thayer's of course, but I don't think it's safe as a pure,
or even "pure enough to be countable" Thayer's. If you buy into
the hybrid swarm theory it's most likely (technically) a Kumlien's.
Even if you don't I think you'd have to consider this at best a T-K
intergrade, if not a "pure" Kumlien's.
Cheers,
Phil
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: ''European' Thayer's Gull in Ireland +
kumlieni' biometrics
From: "Michael L. P. Retter" <mlretter(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 12 Mar 2005 11:28am
> I think that we
> should all tread carefully writing and positing
> about gulls at edges/ends of
> ranges . . . either species in the Great
> Lakes - where I have spent a not
> inconsequential amount of time gull-ogling). I
> would suggest that when
> dealing with ends or edges of ranges, one certainly
> has to be careful about
> drawing inferences to larger populations, as the
> end-or-range sample could be
> biased by sex, thus -- and particularly in gulls --
> in size.
With all due respect, when one can see 30+ of a
particular species at one location without much
effort, one is probably not on the edge of that
species's range. This is part of the problem I was
referring to: "common knowledge" says that thayeri
and kumlieni do not occur in the interior but very
rarely. This couldn't be further from the truth.
It's all part of the pervasive coastal bias in North
American birding.
========================
Michael L. P. Retter
Bloomington-Normal
McLean Co, Illinois
mlretter AT yahoo.com
309.824.7317
========================
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Binbrook gull again
From: Matt Sharp <sharp(AT)ACNATSCI.ORG>
Date: 12 Mar 2005 11:44am
Since there seems to be more voices in favor of
the Binbrook bird being in its' 1st cycle rather
than its'2nd cycle it reinforces my feeling that
the bird is not a smithsonianus Herring Gull.
Though I do not want to attempt to argue that it
is of European descent it looks to me more like
that type of bird than the vast majority of
smiths I see, and by vast I mean tens of
thousands. In my gull watching I am actively
Looking for such pale tailed birds (well tail-
covs/rump at any rate) And I do not see them and
think oh it is "just" a smith. I am mis-iding
them as LBBG or they show some other sign of
being in their 2nd cycle or I think YLGU and get
really excited before the bird goes away.
I find it interesting that folks from the other
side of the pond can confidently eliminate the
possibility of argentatus/teus while few
Americans can likewise eliminate the possibility
of smith. This may reflect the fact, as it has
often been said, that we (meaning Americans) do
not know our birds as intimately as the "brits"
or Europeans. Or it means that smith really is a
terribly messy taxon, or it is the taxonomy that
is a mess, or as I fear may be happening here
smithsonianus is a trash-can we dump odd looking
birds in. I fear this because it may be muddying
the picture of what smithsonianus looks like.
So for the sake or dialectical clarity I will
take a stand and say definitively that it is not
L. a. smithsonianus.
My first guess would have been argetatus/teus *
does this taxon really show such little
variation that the Binbrook bird can be ruled not
one of those with certainty? What are the other
possibilitie before it is relegated to the other
trash-can (hybrid). Excuse my ignorance here but
can somewhere eliminate michahellis/cacchinans.
And what about vegae?
Best to all
Matt Sharp
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Binbrook gull again
From: David Vander Pluym <SCRE(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 12 Mar 2005 4:57pm
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
From a West Coast US view, I have not seen anything that looks like this and
if I saw it thoughts of Vega would enter my head (though this bird does not
strike me as one). I really don't see this as a smith Herring Gull unless West
and East Coast birds are really THAT different. Though I don't have much
experience with European Herring Gulls why can this not be something like #334
in
the Olsen and Larsson Guide? It appears very similar to the bird, including
rump/tail, white head, coverts, and wing pattern? So why is this bird outside
the range of variation of one of the European Herring Gulls? Sorry to push
this but the points against the European taxa seem to be minor compared to what
is known about smith. If this bird were a "pure" smith I think we would be
pushing way beyond our known understanding of the group. As for age I see no
reason as to why this would be anything other than a 1st cycle bird as they can
frequently have lightish eyes similar to the bird in question. If this is not
a European taxa what is it? I see nothing from Asia that would match and no
obvious hybrid combination to create this bird.
David Vander Pluym
Santa Cruz, Ca
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Whooper Swan variation
From: David Vander Pluym <SCRE(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 12 Mar 2005 5:38pm
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Recently Daryl Coldren and I had an interesting swan at Lower Klamath NWR on
the California/Oregon border. The bird was the same individual Matt Brady,
Daryl, and I found back in late Nov in the same area. It has since been
reported as a Whooper Swan, but a number of things did not sit well with that.
In
Nov we had a juv swan with it that appeared to also be of Eurasian origin but
we
left it unidentified as we couldn't even id the adult swan! Two main points
bugged us about it back in Nov and again now and I'd like to see if
thequestions can be answered. Also, add to the mix is known Whistling x Whooper
Swans
seen at the same spot in previous years.
1. One main point was the size of the bird. It appeared to be the same size
as the Whistling Swans it was with. When we had it again this past weekend
it appeared to be about a 1/2 head taller than the Whistling Swans, but the
bulk was the same and we could not pick the bird out unless we saw the yellow.
Can an adult Whooper Swan be this small without raising eyebrows?
2. The yellow was not quite as extensive as I would have thought for a
Whooper but it also did not appear correct for a Bewick's Swan as well. The
yellow
came down into two points (a fork) at the nostril. Both of the yellow points
appeared to be of equal length and they appeared to end at the start of the
nostril. There was yellow on the underside of the bill (which I understand is
OK for both Bewick's and Whooper). The yellow crossed the top of the bill in
a thin line (upon closer look last weekend it was actually about 1/4 of an
inch thick) at the mid point of the yellow on the sides of the bill. On a side
view the yellow completely touched the feathering of the cheeks and the side of
the forehead. I know the amount of yellow is highly variable on Tundra Swans
is it this variable on Whooper Swans? Is what I described within known
variation of either Bewick's or Whooper Swan? Or does this sound more like its
probably one of the hybrid swans floating around?
I have some bad video captures from Nov and next week will have video
captures from last weekends bird if anyone with a lot of Eurasian Swan
experience
wants to take a look. I have shown these around to some of California birders
which merely left everyone still on the fence. Also if there are any articles
out there that talk about the max of yellow on Bewick's or min of yellow on
Whooper Swans? I would be interesting in reading them.
David Vander Pluym
Santa Cruz, CA
----DELETED text/html MIME SECTION----
|
|
|
|
BIRDxxxx
BIRDCHAT
ID-FRONTIERS
US:NewEngland