B-Mail(sm): ID-FRONTIERS for June 12-18, 2005

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Roseate Tern?
From: "Thomas J. Dunkerton" <Woundedmallard67(AT)AOL.COM>
Date: 12 Jun 2005 3:37am

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

Hey Everybirdy, 

  A friend suggested I post these to get a possible  confirmation.  I believe 
it is a Roseate Tern. 
   _www.geocities.com/jetsdunk/roseate.html_ 
(http://www.geocities.com/jetsdunk/roseate.html)  
  These pics were taken April 16th at Ft Desoto Park in St.  Petersburg , 
Florida.  The birder I was with said he had heard the  double-click call as it 
flew by.  Being a little hard of hearing, it was  out of my range! lol
  I don't believe this sighting to be a record of any kind, but a  noteworthy 
sighting nonetheless.
  Thanks for your input.

Thomas J. Dunkerton
Titusville, Florida
_woundedmallard67(AT)aol.com_ (mailto:woundedmallard67(AT)aol.com)  

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

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

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Long-eared Owl facial disc colour
From: Steve Preddy <Steve.Preddy(AT)BLUEYONDER.CO.UK>
Date: 12 Jun 2005 4:14am

Somebody was asking about this subject a while back - I think the query 
was how common are birds with pale greyish facial discs? I don't recall 
having seen one myself - gingery-buff being the usual colour, but I just 
noticed this photo of one in Lincolnshire, UK, so we do get such birds 
on this side of the Atlantic too.

http://www.kevindurose.co.uk/2004_01_01_dogsthorpedigest_archive.html

Steve Preddy

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Roseate Tern?
From: Larry Manfredi <birderlm(AT)BELLSOUTH.NET>
Date: 12 Jun 2005 5:50am

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

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

It does not look like a Roseate Tern to me; in the two photos on the right
you can see how gray the bird is on the top.  Roseate Tern would show much
white here, I think that bird looks better for a Forster's Tern.

Larry Manfredi
Homestead, FL.
E-mail:  birderlm(AT)bellsouth.net <mailto:birderlm(AT)bellsouth.net>
http://www.southfloridabirding.com <http://www.southfloridabirding.com/>

-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]On Behalf Of Thomas J. Dunkerton
Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2005 6:37 AM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Roseate Tern?

Hey Everybirdy,

  A friend suggested I post these to get a possible confirmation.  I believe
it is a Roseate Tern.
   www.geocities.com/jetsdunk/roseate.html
<http://www.geocities.com/jetsdunk/roseate.html>
  These pics were taken April 16th at Ft Desoto Park in St. Petersburg ,
Florida.  The birder I was with said he had heard the double-click call as
it flew by.  Being a little hard of hearing, it was out of my range! lol
  I don't believe this sighting to be a record of any kind, but a noteworthy
sighting nonetheless.
  Thanks for your input.

Thomas J. Dunkerton
Titusville, Florida
woundedmallard67(AT)aol.com <mailto:woundedmallard67(AT)aol.com>
Join or Leave BIRDWG01:
http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

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

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: FADU x GADW
From: SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 12 Jun 2005 1:22pm

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

Greetings All

As many of you are aware, I reported a GADW x FADU from the Baikal Teal spot 
near Seattle this winter. This was based on the bird closely resembling the 
bird at 
http://www.delhibird.org/images/GadwallxFalcatedDuck_2.jpg
which was photographed in India. 

This bird (the Indian duck on the web) does not clearly fit what I'd have 
guessed for FADUxGADW but seemed reasonable for this combo, and the ID was not 
questioned by several well-known birders/waterfowl experts with whom I discussed
it. The Seattle (actually Kent) bird showed the same long downcurved 
tertials, the bronzy iridescent cap (though more coppery on the Kent bird than
the
India bird), the black and white neck collar, the bit of white about the eye and
bill base. 

Today, just n. of Seattle, I saw a bird which is clearly the same thing. It 
was essentially a dead ringer for the web-site bird, except the white coming up
from the collar along the side of the face was a bit more evident, the 
tertials weren't as long as the India bird (but as long as the Gadwalls that
were
about, and all seemed to show tertials that were not as long as during winter--
wear?), the black neck ring was absent and the tail wasn't pure white.

Nonetheless, it was clearly the same type of bird. The question is, what is 
it? Is this just some sort of aberrancy in Gadwall. I can't pick a hybrid combo
better than GADW x FADU to match this bird, yet I find it extremely unlikely 
that I'd find two FADU x GADW in 6 months in w. WA, with one in June! It also 
doesn't match the description given by Gilham and Gilham in their hybrid duck 
series.

Any insightful thoughts on this bird would be welcome. 

Best Wishes 
Steven Mlodinow

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

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

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: FADU x GADW
From: SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 12 Jun 2005 5:35pm

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

Greetings All

The Delhibird page seems out of order. Joe Morlan was kind enough to direct 
me to photos of this bird at

http://www.birdskorea.org/hybducks.asp

just scroll down the page. Interestingly, here it is listed as "possible" and 
contains a brief discussion of its ID.

Cheers
Steven Mlodinow

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

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

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Antillean Nighthawk?
From: Ingo Waschkies <ingotkfr(AT)YAHOO.FR>
Date: 14 Jun 2005 12:31am

Hi all,

could you please comment on these two photos of a
nighthawk (taken end of May on Garden Key, Dry
Tortugas)

http://math.unice.fr/~ingo/nighthawk.jpg
http://math.unice.fr/~ingo/nighthawk2.jpg

It was suggested in birdforum, that the tail to wings
ratio alone is not enough for secure ID, but that I
better ask in this forum. This guy also has pale
tertials (as stated in Sibley's Guide for Antillean) -
can I safely assume that it is Antillean?

Thanks for any help,
Ingo Waschkies
Nice, France 

Visit my birding corner:
http://math.unice.fr/~ingo/birdingcorner.html

Ingo Waschkies
Universite de Nice - Sophia Antpolis
Laboratoire J.A. Dieudonne
Parc Valrose 
06108 Nice (France)

___________________________________________________________________________ 
Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger 
T�l�chargez cette version sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Antillean Nighthawk?
From: Matt Sharp <sharp(AT)ACNATSCI.ORG>
Date: 14 Jun 2005 7:19am

Though I am have no experience with Antillean and not enough
experience with all the variability in Common I will stick my neck 
out here and essentially guess that this is a Common with dark
wings and upperparts contrasting with the tertials.

I think the main thing pointing to Common is the whitish vent.
I would expect this to be more buffy on Antillean. Also this bird
may be too dark above for Antillean.

Matt

>>> Ingo Waschkies <ingotkfr(AT)YAHOO.FR> 06/14/05 03:21AM >>>
Hi all,

could you please comment on these two photos of a
nighthawk (taken end of May on Garden Key, Dry
Tortugas)

http://math.unice.fr/~ingo/nighthawk.jpg 
http://math.unice.fr/~ingo/nighthawk2.jpg 

It was suggested in birdforum, that the tail to wings
ratio alone is not enough for secure ID, but that I
better ask in this forum. This guy also has pale
tertials (as stated in Sibley's Guide for Antillean) -
can I safely assume that it is Antillean?

Thanks for any help,
Ingo Waschkies
Nice, France 

Visit my birding corner:
http://math.unice.fr/~ingo/birdingcorner.html 

Ingo Waschkies
Universite de Nice - Sophia Antpolis
Laboratoire J.A. Dieudonne
Parc Valrose 
06108 Nice (France)

___________________________________________________________________________ 
Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger 
T�l�chargez cette version sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com 

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Another Glossy Ibis?
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Carlos_S=E1nchez?= <casade(AT)WANADOO.ES>
Date: 14 Jun 2005 11:24am

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

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

Hi Cliff, Lisa and the rest,

the bird shown at the pics is a true Glossy ibis. Head and overall body =
structure, all chocolate brown feathers on head, neck and mantle; glossy =
green on cap and wings, some purple tinge (fifth and tenth pics), bill =
length and dark grey coloured on it and brownish grey on legs only fits =
Plegadis falcinellus in my opinion. A prosperous population in Spain by =
the way, mostly at the south and east. You can also consult the =
literature; Sibley guidebook or HBW, vol. 1 where the Threskiornithinae =
subfamily is properly described and illustrated.

Hope it helps,

kind regards,

Carlos S=E1nchez,
Madrid, Spain

Join or Leave BIRDWG01:
http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=3Dbirdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

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

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Another Glossy Ibis?
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Carlos_S=E1nchez?= <casade(AT)WANADOO.ES>
Date: 14 Jun 2005 2:09pm

Hi Cliff, Lisa and the rest,

I find that the bird shown at these pics is a true Glossy ibis according to
the head and overall body structure, all chocolate brown feathers on head,
neck and mantle; glossy green on cap and wings and some purple tinge (fifth
and tenth pics), bill length, curvature and dark grey coloured on it, and
brownish grey legs only must fit 'Plegadis falcinellus' in my opinion. A
prosperous population in Spain by the way, mostly at Andalusia (southernmost
region). You can also consult the literature as the Sibley bird guide or
even HBW, vol. 1 where the whole Threskiornithinae subfamily is properly
described and illustrated.

Hope it helps,

kind regards,

Carlos S�nchez,
Madrid, Spain

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Antillean Nighthawk response
From: Kevin Karlson <karlson3(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 15 Jun 2005 2:41pm

Response by Kevin Karlson to Antillean Nighthawk? posting on June 14, 2005

This is a response to the photos of the nighthawk from the Dry Tortugas 
posted on June 14. This species has been studied by a small number of 
people, including myself, for the past 12 years or so in the Dry 
Tortugas with hopes of separating them in the field from C.minor 
chapmani, the expected race of Common Nighthawk on the Tortugas that 
nests in Florida, E. Texas to S. Illinois and nearby southeastern 
states. After several years of floundering in the field, I made a few 
visits to the Museum of Natural History and studied the small number of 
skins available for Antillean Nighthawk, and also referenced the paper 
on Common and Antillean Nighthawks of the Florida Keys, by Henry 
Stevenson et al. (Oct., 1983). After noting several interesting 
structural differences between skins of the two species, I spent several 
more years studying all nighthawks in the Dry Tortugas (I spent 150+ 
days and nights during April/early May in the Tortugas from 1994 -2001). 
After years of having little luck separating these birds, I was able to 
finally pin down a few field marks, both in plumage and structure, that 
are helpful in separating these two very similar species. I was able to 
verify my identifications a few times by waiting until dusk and hearing 
some birds vocalize as they flew around the fort. Based on my field and 
museum studies, I feel that this bird is a male Antillean Nighthawk.

First of all, it would be best to state that Antillean Nighthawks, both 
male and female, can show plumage variations that are as extreme as 
Common Nighthawks. Based on a number of photographs given to me by Bruce 
Hallett from various Bahamian Islands, both male and female Antilleans 
can range from very rusty above and buffy below to very gray above with 
little or no buff color to the underparts. This is a feature that is 
misrepresented in the Sibley Guide, which shows males as only having a 
rufous morph, with rusty-marked upperparts and rich buff below, with 
only females having a gray and rufous morph. Most of the birds that drew 
my attention in the Dry Tortugas, however, exhibited the 
"characteristic" rusty markings to the head, neck, mantle and scapulars, 
with paler or gray wing coverts and contrastingly paler tertials, 
similar to the photos shown by Ingo in his posting. This is also 
consistent with skins that I have studied, where virtually all 
Antilleans showed bright buff to rust spotting on crown and neck as 
opposed to variable amount in C. minor chapmani. The Bahamas population 
of Antillean Nighthawks are referred to as C.vicinus in some scientific 
literature, which would afford subspecies status to these birds, but 
Bond (1956) and Monroe (1968) "regarded them inseparable at the 
subspecific level from gundlachii." According to the photos of about 8 
different Bahamian birds(vicinus) sent to me by Bruce Hallett, these 
seem to average grayer in appearance than all Antillians that I have 
seen on the Tortugas. The separation of two subspecies of Antillian 
Nighthawk is not embraced by everyone in the scientific community, but 
might be a starting point for understanding these problematic birds in 
ID terms.

One structural field mark, however, that seems consistent with all 
Antilleans that I have seen (both live and skins) is a noticeably 
smaller headed appearance (both males and females) with a smaller, more 
"petite" body structure. Some Common skins were small in comparison to 
Antillean, but the head size in relation to the body was noticeably 
larger. This difference can be subtle, depending upon your angle of 
viewing, but is helpful. Common's seem to have a larger head and thick 
neck, along with a bulkier upper body than Antillean, which often look 
'pigeon-headed' when at rest, with a narrower neck than Common.These are 
all field observations of mine, and not backed up by measurements.

The wing/tail ratio can be helpful on some birds, especially when the 
wings fall noticeably short of the tail, like the bird in the phots. 
Male Antilleans have a wing measurement of 150-183mm, while C.minor 
chapmani males average 178-195mm. Tail measurements for Antillean males 
average from 106-119mm, while C. minor chapmani males average 98-111mm. 
The average longer tail on Antillean could account for most wings 
falling short of the tail, especially with the much shorter average wing 
length on Antillean. However, there is overlap on both wing and tail 
measurements, so only extreme examples would be useful in the field. 
However, virtually all Antillean Nighthawks that I have been able to 
successfully ID in the Tortugas (after hearing calls), had primaries 
that fell short of the tail. Some were noticeably short of the tail, 
while others fell just short. Most Common's that I have photographed in 
the US have primaries that extend from the tail tip to noticeably beyond 
the tip of the tail.

Another observation that seems to hold true is the shape of the 
primaries. Antilleans have primaries that, when viewed at rest, are 
broader and more rounded than Common. This might account for their 
shallower wing flap. I once had a single Antillean flying side-by-side 
with 5 Commons, and the flight seemed less buoyant with wing strokes 
that were not as deep as Common. The length and more rounded shape of 
the primaries probably affected this subtle difference. The bird in 
question has short wings in relation to its tail, which are very broad 
and rounded in shape. Most Common primaries that I studied in 
photographs and in the field are more tapered and somewhat narrow in 
relation to Antillean.

If we could see the underparts, the narrower bars and distribution of 
buff color would also be helpful. Male Antilleans of subspecies 
gundlachii average brighter buff coloration to the vent and lower belly, 
with paler coloration to the upper breast, and rich buff color under the 
chin. However, males of the subspecies vicinus, which range throughout 
the Bahamas, are grayer overall, with some birds showing no buff 
coloration to underparts and very little to no rufous markings on the 
upperparts. This makes analysis of plumage alone a dangerous gamble with 
nighthawks seen in the Dry Tortugas or extreme S. Florida. However, a 
complete picture of stuctural field marks combined with wing/tail ratio 
and plumage can usually result in a fairly accurate conclusion.

Based on the bright rufous markings to head, neck, mantle and scapulars, 
with pale contrasting tertials; small-headed look with slender neck and 
lack of "bulk" to upper body; and very broad, rounded wings that fall 
well short of tail, I suspect that this bird is a 'typical' male 
Antillean Nighthawk. The underparts are shaded so much that any buff 
color to the vent is hard to pick out, but I would like to see that 
field mark go along with the others above to further seal the ID.

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Antillean Nighthawk response
From: Matt Sharp <sharp(AT)ACNATSCI.ORG>
Date: 16 Jun 2005 9:42am

Thanks again to Kevin for sharing his experiences and
research. I was hoping someone would add to this thread
as field ID of Nighthawks is not much discussed since it mostly
relies on voice.

I was basing much of my ID on Sibley which does suggest that
Antillean is less variable than Common and that seem to not be
the case. I certainly defer to Kevin's expertise here and agree
that the bird photo'd by Ingo is Antillean.

I checked our Antillean specimens (3) and it confirmed what Kevin
said about rusty markings which seem to be stronger than in Common
though this is an average difference, and the series of southern 
nighthawks (labeled chapmani) tended to be rustier than Commons
labeled minor. There was also a noticeable difference in overall size with 
chapmani (southern) noticeably smaller than minor. The minor series
is large and I could not say without closer looks if there is a north/south
aspect to the size difference but the ANSP chapmani series implies at
least that birds in summer in the southeastern US are smaller than most
minor specimens. All the chapmani birds were from June, July, or Aug
and the only locations were from FL.

I have heard it said that subspecies in Common Nighthawk are "rubbish"
and that variation has more to do with nesting substrate and a strong
selection for young birds being camouflaged, but it seems there are structural
differences as well so I am sure the situation is complex.

Though the Antillean series here at ANSP is too small for any conclusion I
thought
it interesting that all 3 birds (1 male from Puerto Rico, and a pair from St.
Croix)
all had heavily worn wing coverts and all were April specimens. The pale areas
especially on the greater coverts were essentially gone, at least at the tips 
leaving a large dark center. The pattern of the Gr. covs. did seem different
from Common, though all the chapmani specimens were June-August so 
no comparison of wear patterns was useful. The gr. Covs on Common  
seem more marbled with a smaller dark central area though.
examples here:

http://chandra.as.utexas.edu/~kormendy/nighthawk.html

http://www.timboyer.com/ncgallery/gallery.htm 

http://home.nyc.rr.com/sausubel/CONI5_WEB.jpg

and on the VIREO website.

here is another southern bird I IDed as common 
http://www.worldbirder.com/photonew/xpages/photo.asp?PhotoID=1890

This bird is grayer than Ingo's bird, though wing-shape seems similar
though a bit longer winged. The covert pattern seems to me
more consistent with Common.

>The underparts are shaded so much that any buff 
>color to the vent is hard to pick out, but I would like to see that 
>field mark go along with the others above to further seal the ID.

The above comment leaves me a bit confused, the vent on Ingo's
bird seems pretty much white with some slight buff tones adjacent
to the fairly broad black bars. Is this inconsistent with Antillean or 
or is the appearance an artifact of lighting?

Cheers

Matt

Matt Sharp
Collection Manager
VIREO/ANS
1900 Benjamin Franklin Pkwy.
Philadelphia PA  19103
http://vireo.acnatsci.org
(tel.) 215-299-1069
(fax) 215-299-1182

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Antillean Nighthawk response
From: Ingo Waschkies <ingotkfr(AT)YAHOO.FR>
Date: 16 Jun 2005 10:46am

Thanks Matt and Kevin for helping,

> the vent
> on Ingo's bird seems pretty much white with some 
> slight buff tones adjacent
> to the fairly broad black bars. Is this inconsistent
> with Antillean or or is the appearance an artifact
of > lighting?

I made two crops from the original pictures - they
have not been tempered with in any way, it's original
size, I don't think it's an artifact or some optical
effect - 
Matt is right, there's some bits of white, though more
from one side than from the other. I saw the bird in
flight later that day, the general appearance of the
underparts was buffy, but I can't tell for sure how
much whitish bits there were ... sorry.

http://math.unice.fr/~ingo/nighthawkdetail.jpg
http://math.unice.fr/~ingo/nighthawkdetail2.jpg

Cheers,
Ingo

Visit my birding corner:
http://math.unice.fr/~ingo/birdingcorner.html

Ingo Waschkies
Universite de Nice - Sophia Antpolis
Laboratoire J.A. Dieudonne
Parc Valrose 
06108 Nice (France)

___________________________________________________________________________ 
Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger 
T�l�chargez cette version sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Nighthawk species.
From: Larry Manfredi <birderlm(AT)BELLSOUTH.NET>
Date: 16 Jun 2005 12:57pm

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

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

I would like to make a few comments on the nighthawk photo.  I live here in
South Florida and visit the Dry Tortugas every spring for many years and for
many days at a time.  Common Nighthawks typically show up here in South
Florida usually in March, they are calling when I see them at that time.
Antillean Nighthawks do not show up in Florida until around April 20th.
This is a rough estimate from my experience with them so there could be
birds a little earlier and later, but not much earlier.  I always get good
looks at perched nighthawks at the Dry Tortugas where you can study them in
detail.  I see many different color morphs to really confuse things.

This is an extremely difficult I.D. challenge that I don�t think that anyone
can make with what we currently know.  The best way to be 100% sure is to
HEAR THEM CALL!  Kevin has gone through many field marks that are consistent
with Antillean Nighthawk.  Since Ingos photo was taken at the end of May I
would be pretty confident that the bird is an Antillean Nighthawk.  After
June 1st any nighthawk in the Key West area is going to be an Antillean
Nighthawk, and north of Key West for perhaps another 20 to 30 miles.  North
of that area you get mixed birds like at the Marathon Airport.

In conclusion I would like to say based on the photo and the time of year
that Ingos picture is most likely an Antillean Nighthawk.

The bottom line though is you really need to HEAR THEM CALL!

Larry Manfredi
Homestead, FL.
E-mail:  birderlm(AT)bellsouth.net <mailto:birderlm(AT)bellsouth.net>
http://www.southfloridabirding.com <http://www.southfloridabirding.com/>

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

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

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Nighthawk species.
From: Ingo Waschkies <ingotkfr(AT)YAHOO.FR>
Date: 16 Jun 2005 1:35pm

Ooops, I didn't pay attention, these photos were taken
on April 30th, end of April, not end of May ... there
were more Common Nighthawks around, but the first
Antilleans had been heard at Key West Airport by other
birders, and Antillean had been heard before and
during these days on Dry Tortuga, though I didn't hear
a single nighthawk the night I camped there (not even
one of the two perched Commons ...). I'd have loved to
hear him call, but what can I say, he didn't want to
...

Cheers,
Ingo

> In conclusion I would like to say based on the photo
> and the time of year that Ingos picture is most 
> likely an Antillean Nighthawk.
> 
> The bottom line though is you really need to HEAR
> THEM CALL!

Visit my birding corner:
http://math.unice.fr/~ingo/birdingcorner.html

Ingo Waschkies
Universite de Nice - Sophia Antpolis
Laboratoire J.A. Dieudonne
Parc Valrose 
06108 Nice (France)

___________________________________________________________________________ 
Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger 
T�l�chargez cette version sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Fwd:  [Tweeters] Blue-headed Vireo?
From: birdbooker(AT)zipcon.net
Date: 16 Jun 2005 2:59pm

HI:
 Here is the direct link: http://www.pbase.com/clinton62/toms_images

Ian Paulsen

Yesterday Tom Munson and I found a vireo in a lodgepole pine forest that
sounded like a Red-eyed.  But it was a Solitary type, and looked a little
different from the typical Cassin's.  Actually it was difficult to get good
looks at
it, and good pictures, but the white throat, contrasting dark gray hood, and
yellow flanks could be seen occasionally.  Maybe these photos are enough to
cinch an ID; the song was strikingly different from Cassin's.

The site is in Pend Oreille Co. along Dry Canyon Rd.  This is not far east of
the Pend Oreille River, between Usk and Sullivan Lake.  Access is north from
the east end of the bridge at Usk, through the Kalispell Reservation, past the
River Bend community, to (another) LeClerc Creek Rd jct.  Take this paved
road off the river road a mile or two to a Y, where there is a house with a
strikingly gorgeous yard.  At this yard take the road to the left, called the
West
Branch LeClerc Creek Rd.  Follow it north into Dry Canyon from this spot for
about eight miles, where the best landmarks are the power poles, which have
easily seen numbers.  The pole where the vireo was singing about as incessantly
as a Red-eyed is numbered L 69, and is at a bend in the road.  There is also a
family of Black-backed Woodpeckers in the area, which apparently recently
fledged from a nearby nest.

<A HREF="blue-hd vireo">www.pbase.com/clinton62</A>

Look at the "recent" photos.

Mark Houston
Spokane

--part1_143.471a5d47.2fe3382d_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

----DELETED HTML-ENCODED SECTION----

--part1_143.471a5d47.2fe3382d_boundary--

--===============0050287574==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Tweeters mailing list
Tweeters(AT)u.washington.edu
http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters

--===============0050287574==--

-- END OF FORWARDED MESSAGE --

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

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: FADUxGADW
From: SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 16 Jun 2005 5:58pm

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

Greetings All

So, an update.

Dennis Paulson found a couple Gadwall photos that show the traits of the duck 
in question (photos of possible GADWxFADU viewable on the BirdsKorea website: 
http://www.birdskorea.org/hybducks.asp). Dennis wrote-

Look at http://www.birdphotography.com/species/gadw.html for variation  
in head pattern in male Gadwalls - cap vs. no cap. In fact, a Google  
Image search of Gadwalls shows that dark caps are commonplace and that  
the tertials of some males are distinctly sickle-shaped (of course  
shorter than in FADU). A bit of a neck collar and white at the bill  
base is shown at  
http://www.birds.cornell.edu/programs/AllAboutBirds/BirdGuide/ 
Gadwall.html. I didn't look at all the images.

Today I also saw a fairly typical Gadwall with a distinct white ring at the 
base of the neck. So, aberrant Gadwall sounds like a fair bet, especially as 
wing pattern, etc is all Gadwall.

On the other hand, I've been in contact with four aviculturalists, three of 
whom responded with a FADUxGADW vs NOPIxGADW or odd Gadwall. One, Mike Lubbock,
I believe has seen known hybrids in captivity, so I am in pursuit of further 
details. The only answer I received from Mike, perhaps North America's 
foremost waterfowl aviculturalist, is that FADUxGADW was his ID, not why.

So, are there any anatiphiles out there???

Cheers
Steven Mlodinow

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

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

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Antillean Nighthawk - further comments
From: Kevin Karlson <karlson3(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 17 Jun 2005 1:14pm

Response to comments by Larry Manfredi and Matt Sharp on Antillean 
Nighthawk, by Kevin Karlson

With respect to my friend Larry Manfredi, I would like to respond to his 
comments on Antillean Nighthawk. First of all, the comment in bold type 
that "you really need to HEAR THEM CALL" reminds me of the the same line 
of thinking regarding the two dowitcher species for the first twenty 
years of my birding career. By accepting this limiting factor, you are 
never going to discover ways to separate any two similar species. Many 
breakthoughs have occurred with similar species that were thought to be 
impossible to separate by anything other than voice (for example, 
empidonax flycatchers, Long and Short-billed Dowitchers), and others 
that were thought to be impossible to separate at all (for example, 
juvenile jaegers, female hummingbirds,etc). It takes more than just 
looking at plumage variation in nighthawks on the Tortugas to break 
through the confusion. I listened to this "logic" during my first five 
years in the Tortugas in the mid-1990's, and thought to myself that 
there has to be something that might be useful to separate these two 
very similar species. This is why I spent many years not only studying 
problem birds, but visiting the American Museum of Natural History, 
looking at skins, and reviewing the limited scientific literature 
available. There are distinct differences (wing length, tail length, and 
ratio of these two factors; overall body structure and relation to head 
size; shape of primaries; flight styles) between the two species. After 
studying these subtle differences over a period of time, certain 
conclusions become clearer. I may have just cracked the surface, but 
opening the door will stimulate others to study this complex during the 
coming years.

As for his statement "after June 1, any nighthawk in the Key West area 
is going to be an Antillean Nighthawk", this is probably the general 
case, but Henry Stevenson states in his paper "Notes on Common and 
Antillean Nighthawks of the Florida Keys" (1983) "Common Nighthawks have 
been identified by voice in June at the Dry Tortugas, where no 
nighthawks nest (Robinson 1940, Stevenson 1966). There is a good 
possibility that northern birds of C.minor minor that winter in S. 
America and nest in Canada might still be moving into June, although 
probably silent at this time. You could get either species into June on 
the Tortugas, and timing is not a reliable factor for ID. Granted, these 
are old research documents, but the status of nighthawks in the Keys has 
changed dramatically since the 1940's, and is probably still changing. 
Prior to 1941, there was no documentation of any nighthawks summering on 
the Keys. In 1941, the first Antillean nest was found. In 1949, the 
first Common Nighthawk (C.minor chapmani) was found nesting on Stock 
Island. However, in 1957, the A.O.U. reported Miami to be the most 
southerly nesting area for Common Nighthawk, which was disproven in 1958 
with the collection of a set of eggs of C.minor chapmani on Stock Island 
on May 27.

Both nighthawk species increased on the Keys in the 1960's and 70's, 
"probably due to deforestation (Stevenson, et al, 1983)". By the late 
1970's, virtually all nighthawks nesting in the southern Florida Keys 
were Antillean, and most in the upper Keys were Common, with a mix in 
the middle areas. Larry is correct about the typical arrival dates for 
Antillean being the third week of April. Tony White's recent posting of 
the earliest Antillean on New Providence in the Bahamas this year was 
April 20. During the six or so years that I spent from two weeks to a 
month on the Tortugas in April/early May, documenting all birds that I 
saw in migration, the majority of Antillean Nighthawks passed through 
from around April 18 to April 28, with numbers of all nighthawks 
decreasing into May. While Larry sees Common Nighthawks in Florida in 
March, this is the subspecies C.minor chapmani, and birds of the 
subspecies C.minor minor, which would conceivably be moving up the 
Atlantic Seaboard, don't arrive in New Jersey until late April, early 
May, and probably later up into Canada. Late individuals could still be 
moving into late May/June.

As for Larry saying that he sees many different color morphs "to really 
confuse things", this is a great reason to look at something other than 
plumage to form your Id opinion. Plumage is often useless by itself for 
ID purposes, which is why one should study the size, shape/structure of 
all birds, and compare your notes from species to species. This is the 
main approach of our new book on shorebirds, which stresses impressions 
based on size, shape/stucture and behavior, and the value of comparative 
viewing with similar species to unlock some of the confusion caused by 
similarities in plumage. This is the best way to find subtle 
'nonchangeable' features that are useful in separating similar species, 
without the confusion of plumage.

 To be respectful to those who have designated 'color morphs' for 
nighthawks, yes, there are extreme examples of rufous or gray color 
morphs in both Common and Antillean Nighthawk (gray morph seeminly less 
common in Antillean), but there are also countless variations in 
between. In fact, the truly confusing birds are those that fall in the 
middle, with no distinctive set of plumage characters to assign them to 
a particular color morph. In fact, a majority of nighthawks that I've 
seen in the Tortugas fall into this "in-between" category. One of the 
reasons for this is the similaritiy of buff underpart color of C.minor 
chapmani to Antillean. However, of 5 male and 4 female Antilleans skins 
that I studied, all had a rich buff color to the vent area and lower 
belly with varying amount of color to the central breast area, while all 
29 C.minor chapmani skins had similar buffy color to the throat and 
upper breast, but had little or no buff color to the vent and lower 
belly. While you might think that this is the key to separating these 
two species, a number of breeding Antillean shots given to me by Bruce 
Hallett from various northern and southern Bahamian Islands prove 
otherwise. Several breeding males that Bruce photographed near the nest 
site were absolutely gray in appearance, with little or no buff color to 
the underparts. This is reason enough for me to discount plumage as 
anything other than a helpful factor to add to several other size and 
stucture impressions. One conclusion I can make is that if a nighthawk 
has a rich, buff vent and lower belly, with a paler upper breast, it is 
probably an Antillean. Males especially show this feature, and a study 
of several hundred skins from 7 subspecies of Common Nighthawk at the 
Museum of Natural History in NY revealed that none of them this rich 
vent and lower belly color with a paler central breast. The subspecies 
C.minor henryi, which breeds in the SW US into parts of Sonora and 
Chihuahua, Mexico, shows a good deal of buff coloration to the 
underparts, including the ventral area, but not as uniformly buffy as 
Antillean.

In response to Matt Sharp's comments on the size of C.minor chapmani, I 
was not able to discern any noticeable size differences between them and 
C.minor minor. Matt kept referring to only C.minor in his comparison to 
C.minor chapmani, and I suspect that he meant C.minor minor, which is 
the broad ranging subspecies that nests widely in Canada and also the 
central and ne US, and winters in S. America east of the Andes, south to 
n. Argentina. This is the expected subspecies in addition to C.minor 
chapmani in Florida in spring.  However, in fairness to Matt, I was not 
looking for this feature in comparing Antillean to all seven subspecies 
of Common. This is exactly what I meant in the earlier paragraph about 
people taking your initial finding and going a little bit further, 
adding to the knowledge base. Since C.minor chapmani nests as far north 
as S. Indiana and as far west as e. Texas, I wonder if Matt had enough 
skins to compare northern and western birds of this subspecies for size 
in addition to those from the se. US.

However, as to his comments about there not being any discernable 
differences attributable to subspecies of Common, I have a few 
reservations about this. Several of the seven major subspecies groups of 
 C.minor had a fairly distinct average of plumage coloration, especially 
C.minor henryi, of which all 32 specimens exhibited various amounts of 
buff coloration to the underparts. Many female C.minor howelli, which 
breeds from ne.N.Mexico to Nebraska, N.Texas, C. Oklahoma and north to 
Colorado, Wyoming and ne Utah, also showed a fairly uniform buff wash 
 to the undertail coverts and vent with off white color to belly and 
breast. It is possible that the geographic region and local topography 
contribute to this coloration, as Matt suggests, since there were 
variations in all seven subspecies and it would have been difficult to 
assign a definite set of plumage characters to all subspecies.

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Anglo-American Agreement on Goose Split
From: Angus Wilson <gadflypetrel(AT)HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: 17 Jun 2005 1:30pm

Anglo-American Agreement on Goose Split, Rest of Europe to Follow?

Hi All,

It occurred to me that ID-F members might be interested in some news posted 
by Dominic Mitchell to the excellent newsgroup WestPalBirds (on Yahoo). 
First, there is the announcement from the British Ornithologists' Union 
Records Committee (BOURC) spitting the Canada Geese in line with the AOU 
split. One difference is the name used for the smaller species: Lesser 
Canada Goose rather than Cackling. I think this is a reasonable choice and 
avoids the confusion with the subspeices minima.

Dominic's second message includes an informative and sagely statement from 
Killian Mullarney origianlly published in the Irish Bird Report (Irish Birds 
7 :385 - 412). The quote from Dave Sibley at the end remains very apropos. 
As you can imagine, candidates for vagrant Canada-type geese are studied 
with great interest in Europe and almost all of the species have been 
claimed.

Cheers, Angus Wilson
New York City

******************************
The following press release was received today from the Records Committee of 
the British Ornithologists' Union:Taxonomic changes to the British List

The following recommendations relating to the taxonomy of birds on the 
British List will take effect from the publication of the BOURC Taxonomic 
Subcommittee's (BOURC-TSC) next report in Ibis.

Canada Goose (Branta canadensis) Canada Goose is currently treated as a 
single polytypic species. Molecular, ecological and behavioural evidence 
suggest that populations of 'large-bodied' and 'small-bodied' taxa are best 
treated as separate species.

- Greater Canada Goose (B. canadensis) - polytypic, with subspecies 
canadensis, fulva, interior, maxima, moffitti, occidentalis and parvipes)
- Lesser Canada Goose (B. hutchinsii) - polytypic, with subspecies 
hutchinsii, leucopareia, minima and taverneri).

Note that B. c. parvipes, often referred to as a 'lesser' Canada Goose, is 
placed within the Greater Canada Goose group.

Greater Canada Goose is on Category C of the British List on the basis of 
the established naturalised population. No vagrant 'Canada Goose' had, prior 
to this recommendation, been assigned to subspecific level. Records will now 
be reviewed to determine whether any individuals can be assigned to either 
group.

Although the following message from Killian Mullarney appeared on IBN in 
response to a specific question about the status of the newly split canada 
geese (sensu lato) in Ireland, I'm forwarding it to WestPalBirds as it 
touches on a question which everyone will be asking in the wake of the 
BOURC's  decision to follow this AOU split - namely, which forms of Lesser 
Canada/Cackling Goose have already been documented on this side of the 
Atlantic? Apologies to those who may have already seen Killian's reply on 
IBN:

>>>>
Today's announcement by the BOURC concerning the decision to officially 
treat 'Canada Goose' as comprising two species should come as no great 
surprise to anyone who is aware that the American Ornithologist's Union 
(AOU) already arrived at this decision last year. As soon as there is a 
consensus on this matter among the various European taxonomic committees 
that, in effect, guide the Association of European Rarities and Records 
Committees (AERC) the IRBC will follow suit, but until such time it is 
probably safe to assume that this 'split' will be adopted here too.

There is clear evidence that examples of what are now considered 'Cackling 
Goose' (AOU) or 'Lesser Canada Goose' (BOURC), the proposed vernacular names 
for the 'new' species, occur in Ireland, though there is still work to be 
done in establishing precisely which subspecies of both Canada Geese species 
are involved in these records. In this regard, the comment published in the 
most recent Irish Bird Report (Irish Birds 7 :385 - 412) summarises the IRBC 
position of six months ago, and answers at least some of the questions 
raised in Eric's mail

>From the 2002 IBM, p387:

"The recent decision by the AOU to split Canada Goose into two species 
(Banks et al 2004) has a significant bearing on records of vagrant Canada 
Geese in Ireland. Up until recently, it seemed that North American 
ornithologists were resigned to the idea that attempts to assign Canada 
Geese to particular subspecies were often futile, on account of individual 
variation and interbreeding of formerly discreet populations blurring the 
small differences between the eleven or so recognised subspecies. In 
Britain, goose identification enthusiasts took a different view, and a 
couple of stimulating papers offering guidance on the subspecific 
identification of vagrant Canada Geese were published (Batty and Lowe 2001, 
Batty, Hackett and Lowe 2001) in which several of the birds discussed were 
photographed in Ireland.  The AOU split has generated considerable interest 
in the subject among North American birders, and contrary to how it may have 
seemed, it is clear that a number of people there have, all along, been 
working hard at elucidating the complex identification problems.

Single vagrant Canada Geese are much more difficult to assign to subspecies 
than flocks, or small homogenous parties, and on present knowledge many may 
be impossible to identify conclusively in the field. The IRBC will continue 
to monitor progress in these matters on both sides of the Atlantic, with a 
view to assigning well-observed/photographed birds to taxon, where it seems 
possible. At this stage however, it seems prudent to bear in mind the advice 
of the eminent North American ornithologist, David Sibley, on the subject of 
Canada Goose identification "This is an irresistible challenge for some of 
us, but until we have a better sense of the variation and limits of these
subspecies all identification should be approached with a healthy dose of 
scepticism". Observers of vagrant Canada Geese in Ireland are reminded of 
the importance of obtaining a photographic/ video record if there is any 
intention of pursuing the identification beyond what is obvious."

Note that in anticipation of the need to formally assess documentary 
evidence relating to Canada Goose occurrences, the IRBC decided to retain 
'Canada Goose' in the Appendix 1 Revised Rarity List (IRBC Report in Irish 
Birds 7:413 - 418).

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Antillean Nighthawk comments on museum skins
From: Kevin Karlson <karlson3(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 17 Jun 2005 1:55pm

Comments sent to me (Kevin Karlson) by Dan Lane on June 17, 2005

About your comments on nighthawks, I would recommend that you be careful 
with using skins to support your conclusions about the head size with 
respect to the body, as well as overall size among populations (I notice 
Matt Sharp's response makes similar comparisons). Skins have no body 
within, so that the size of the head and the dimensions of the body are 
entirely determined by the style of preparation of the person who made 
the skin. Comparing body length, width, and other such body dimension 
characters are equally ineffectual for this reason. To compare sizes 
among specimens, therefore, one must rely on measurements of wing 
length, tail length, tarsus length, bill length, and weight (if recorded 
by the preparator on the tag prior to preparation, this is rarely the 
case in pre-1970 specimens). These are measurements that are not 
affected by preparation (but will be affected by drying, so that they 
are not comparible, except in a broad sense, to live bird 
measurements) and often one of this suite of morphometrics will reflect 
real differences in body size (tarsus length is usually thought to be 
the best character among closely-related taxa). Any other size 
comparisons made from skins are simply illusions based on how much 
cotton was used in stuffing, whether the neck and tail were drawn in or 
pushed out, etc.

This is not to say that your observations of differences in structure 
between the two species in the field hold no merit: I am sure you are 
correct about them (I can't offer any of my own insight into the 
discussion, as I have almost zero experience with Antillean Nighthawk). 
I simply mean to say that the specimens you examined are unlikely to 
back up your comments for the reasons above.

Hope all's well, and good birding to ya!
Dan

PS: feel free to post this to ID Frontiers if you like (I am not a 
member, so I can't).

Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

[ << | >> | ^^ ]

Subject: Re: Nighthawk species (in Key West) (Lesser
         Nighthawk)
From: Phil Davis <pdavis(AT)IX.NETCOM.COM>
Date: 18 Jun 2005 12:53am

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

Larry, et al.

Chiming in on this interesting south Florida nighthawk discussion ... On=20
the evening of April 8, 2005, we clearly heard a Lesser Nighthawk giving=20
its trill call at the Stock Island Marina, immediately north of Key West.=20
We were spending the night on our boat, the R/V Tiburon, prior to our early=
=20
morning departure for the Tortugas. My wife first heard the call from the=20
other side of the marina and thought it might be a Eastern Screech Owl;=20
however, listening a bit longer, it was clear it was a Lesser Nighthawk.=20
(We also knew that Eastern Screech Owls are not known in the southern keys=
=20
and that Lesser Nighthawks are rare, primarily a winter species). I had=20
little prior experience with the behavior of this species when giving this=
=20
vocalization, so my trip report also includes the relevant sections of the=
=20
Birds of North America (BNA) account for this species. Talking later to=20
Mark Hedden of Key West, we realized that this could be a notable=20
observation. For the record, what follows, below, is the extract from my=20
trip report and the BNA citation.

Phil Davis
High Lonesome BirdTours

[PD] Lesser Nighthawk. Those that stayed up late on the first night at the=
=20
marina on Stock Island were treated to a calling Lesser Nighthawk across=20
the water on the other side of the marina. We were a bit perplexed by the=20
fact that the bird seemed to be stationary while calling. Back at home, I=20
checked the vocalization section in the Birds of North American On-Line=20
account for this species. Here's the appropriate quote =85

[BNA] "Vocal array. No distinction made between songs and calls in this=20
species, so vocalizations here are considered calls because of their simple=
=20
structure. Much less vocal than Common Nighthawk, never booming nor giving=
=20
nasal peent characteristic of that species. Several types of calls, most=20
associated with breeding-season events, and given primarily in evening.=20
After nesting is completed, birds are silent (Wetmore 1968).

[BNA] "Toadlike Trill. See Figure 2. Most distinctive call of the species,=
=20
presumably that of male (Miller 1937), but Dawson (1923) reports both birds=
=20
calling; uttered while perched, most often on or near the ground, during=20
breeding season. Compared to melodius purring of toad (Dawson 1923), soft=20
yodeling (Ligon 1961), or peculiar bubbling notes or single-pitched whinny=
=20
of screech-owls (Otus spp.), except softer (Grinnell and Storer 1924). Low,=
=20
churring, amphibianlike trill, urrrrrrr, is typically heard in bursts of=20
7-13 s duration (at times lasting 26 s), which often run into series=20
lasting >3 min; churrs swell quickly and fade abruptly with a 1- to 3-s=20
pause between churrs in long series (Howell and Webb 1995). Notes have=20
frequency of about 0.5 kHz. In Brazil, call is said to be given in flight=20
and is described as shrop, shrop-gogogogogo (Sick 1993)."

Referenced Literature:
Latta, S. C., and M. E. Baltz. 1997. Lesser Nighthawk (Chordeiles=20
acutipennis). In The Birds of North America, No. 314 (A. Poole and F. Gill,=
=20
eds.). The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA, and The American=
=20
Ornithologists=92 Union, Washington, D.C.

At 15:58 06/16/2005, Larry Manfredi wrote:
>I would like to make a few comments on the nighthawk photo.  I live here=20
>in South Florida and visit the Dry Tortugas every spring for many years=20
>and for many days at a time.  Common Nighthawks typically show up here in=
=20
>South Florida usually in March, they are calling when I see them at that=20
>time.  Antillean Nighthawks do not show up in Florida until around April=20
>20th.  This is a rough estimate from my experience with them so there=20
>could be birds a little earlier and later, but not much earlier.
(snip)
>After June 1st any nighthawk in the Key West area is going to be an=20
>Antillean Nighthawk, and north of Key West for perhaps another 20 to 30=20
>miles.  North of that area you get mixed birds like at the Marathon=
 Airport.

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Phil Davis      Davidsonville, Maryland     USA
                 mailto:PDavis(AT)ix.netcom.com
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=20

Join or Leave BIRDWG01:
http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=3Dbirdwg01

Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

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

The Virtual Birder

ID-FRONTIERS for June 12-18, 2005

Send feedback on these pages to: BMail@greatblue.com
B-Mail Message Content Disclaimer
Layout Copyright © 1999-2001 Great Blue Media Works
Last Updated: Friday, November 2, 2007 11:40am MT

The Virtual Birder

ID-FRONTIERS for June 12-18, 2005

Send feedback on these pages to: BMail@greatblue.com B-Mail Message Content Disclaimer Layout Copyright © 1999-2001 Great Blue Media Works Last Updated: Friday, November 2, 2007 11:40am MT

Send feedback on these pages to: BMail@greatblue.com
B-Mail Message Content Disclaimer
Layout Copyright © 1999-2001 Great Blue Media Works
Last Updated: Friday, November 2, 2007 11:40am MT