 |
|
|
|
|
ID-FRONTIERS for December 17-23, 2006
[ Prev Week
| Next Week
| Calendar Month
| ID-FRONTIERS Info
]
|
Messages are displayed in the order they were received.
|
| Subject | From | Date | Time |
| Re: Tundra or Trumpeter | SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM | Sun, 17 Dec 2006 | 4:40pm |
| Dusky and Vancouver Canada Goose. | Alvaro Jaramillo | Sun, 17 Dec 2006 | 10:26pm |
| Re: Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted | David Sibley | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 | 8:05am |
| Re: Dusky and Vancouver Canada Goose. | sgmlod(AT)AOL.COM | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 | 9:15am |
| Re: Dusky and Vancouver Canada Goose. | Joseph Morlan | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 | 10:42am |
| Re: LBMU vs MAMU | Peter Pyle | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 | 12:08pm |
| Re: LBMU vs MAMU | Lethaby, Nick | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 | 12:26pm |
| Re: Dusky and Vancouver Canada Goose. | Andrew Engilis | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 | 12:58pm |
| Tundra vs Trumpeter NYC recap | Lloyd Spitalnik | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 | 2:00pm |
| Re: Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted | rsheil | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 | 4:36pm |
| Re: Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted | Julian Hough | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 | 5:16pm |
| Re: LBMU vs MAMU | sgmlod(AT)AOL.COM | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 | 5:37pm |
| Re: LBMU vs MAMU | Lethaby, Nick | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 | 6:17pm |
| Re: Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted | Christopher Vogel | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 | 11:27pm |
| Re: Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted | Allen Chartier | Tue, 19 Dec 2006 | 6:22am |
| Re: Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted | Christopher Vogel | Tue, 19 Dec 2006 | 6:34am |
| FW: Wood Pewee id | Lethaby, Nick | Tue, 19 Dec 2006 | 10:22am |
| RFI: RT Pipit wintering status | =?windows-1252?Q?Jim | Tue, 19 Dec 2006 | 12:28pm |
| Re: RFI: RT Pipit wintering status | sgmlod(AT)AOL.COM | Tue, 19 Dec 2006 | 12:31pm |
| eye, bill color in small accipiters | James H. Barton | Tue, 19 Dec 2006 | 6:03pm |
| Re: RFI: RT Pipit wintering status | Calvin Gehlen | Tue, 19 Dec 2006 | 8:57pm |
| Re: RFI: RT Pipit wintering status | =?windows-1252?Q?Jim | Wed, 20 Dec 2006 | 11:46am |
| Wigeon ID | Derek Hill | Wed, 20 Dec 2006 | 8:02pm |
| Re: Wigeon ID | Alan Contreras | Wed, 20 Dec 2006 | 8:18pm |
| Re: Wigeon ID | Colin Bradshaw | Thu, 21 Dec 2006 | 2:39am |
| Re: Wigeon ID | Alan Dean | Thu, 21 Dec 2006 | 3:39am |
| Re: Wigeon ID | Harry Lehto | Thu, 21 Dec 2006 | 3:45am |
| Re: Wigeon ID | Jerry Tangren | Thu, 21 Dec 2006 | 10:39am |
| lots of gulls in Houston, Texas | Martin Reid | Fri, 22 Dec 2006 | 8:50am |
| Re: lots of gulls in Houston, Texas | Phil Pickering | Fri, 22 Dec 2006 | 9:56am |
| Rose-breasted Grosbeak Age | Nick Anich | Fri, 22 Dec 2006 | 3:53pm |
| MEGA: Long-billed Murrelet in Romania, Europe! | David Erterius | Fri, 22 Dec 2006 | 5:25pm |
| Massachusetts Thayer's Gull | Tom Johnson | Sat, 23 Dec 2006 | 8:00am |
| Solitary Vireo ID | Derek Hill | Sat, 23 Dec 2006 | 9:07pm |
|
To use email addresses replace '(AT)' with '@'.
This is done to confuse the spam 'bots.
|
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Tundra or Trumpeter
From: SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 17 Dec 2006 4:40pm
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Greetings All
I feel fairly confident that this bird is a Trumpeter Swan. Went out this pm
to look at swans to firm up some thoughts on the matter.
Unfortunately, this bird suffers in part from the fate of photos taken too
close!!! I'd have liked one or two more photos of the bird in whole at an angle
more typical for field observation.
First, most imm Trumps have all dark bills like this bird now, whereas most
Tundras have varying amounts of orange. Exceptions are present, but still this
points towards Trump.
I believe the shape of the facial skin around the eye also fits imm Trump
better than imm Tundra.
Finally, the swimming away shot is very Trump like. A dark gray bird with
white blotches, darkest on head. Most imm Tundras are more evenly colored (not
darker on head) and paler, and less splotchy (perhaps because the light feathers
coming in contrast less with the darker fall plumage).
Best Wishes
Steven Mlodinow
Everett WA
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: Dusky and Vancouver Canada Goose.
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao(AT)COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: 17 Dec 2006 10:26pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Folks
We have a smallish and very dark Canada Goose hanging around the gull
flock in Half Moon Bay. General consensus is that it is a Dusky Canada
Goose. However it is wintering right on the beach, and the only thing I have
seen it forage on is Bull Kelp. I gather that typically Dusky winters inland
and forages on grass like a regular goose, but the Vancouver (fulva) Canada
Goose is coastal and foraging on marine "stuff". Is the Dusky sometimes
found on coastal sites in winter? Is there any reliable way to adequately
separate Dusky from Vancouver? Are there any banding recoveries of Vancouver
Canada Geese south of their breeding latitudes? The bird is pretty small for
a Canada, "Lesser" Canada Goose size, which makes me think that the
identification as Dusky is probably the right one.
Just wondering if anyone knows much about these birds. By the way, it
appears to be a youngster.
Regards
Alvaro
Alvaro Jaramillo
chucao(AT)coastside.net
Half Moon Bay, California
Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide
www.fieldguides.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: Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted
From: David Sibley <david_sibley(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 18 Dec 2006 8:05am
Even though I haven't had a chance to check specimens or do much more
research I have been able to ponder this bird more thoroughly and to digest
the comments of others, and just wanted to follow-up since I think this bird
is still confusing and very interesting. Thanks to Tom Schultz especially
for a very informative post.
One cautionary note - I wonder how much of my first impressions of the odd
appearance of this bird is due to high contrast in the photos? Some photos
show a white throat, while others show yellowish. Some photos show a strange
blotchy pattern of yellowish and white on the breast. It seems possible that
even the appearance of bright white undertail coverts could be caused by
increased contrast and the camera "reading" pale yellowish as white. In that
case it looks better for Bay-breasted. Some field description would be very
helpful for confirming the appearance of the photos, especially whether or
not the undertail coverts appeared white in the field.
I think there's plenty of evidence suggesting that the bird is NOT a
Blackpoll, and Tom summarized these. The leg and foot color seems to me the
strongest point against Blackpoll. I also agree with Tom that bill color is
useful.
But I'm not yet comfortable calling it an odd Bay-breasted. I was surprised
to learn from Tom's post that the streaked breast may be possible at the
"extreme end" of variation in Bay-breasted. But still, to call the bird a
Bay-breasted one has to explain the white undertail coverts (maybe due to
photo artifacts), well-defined pale edges on greater secondary coverts
(maybe also at least partly due to photo artifacts), and tail pattern. There
may be other subtle details as well, but I won't go out on a limb any
further.
As I said at the beginning, I haven't had a chance to check specimens.
Someone with access to a collection could quickly check tail patterns and
greater covert edges and report on how obvious and how variable these
features are on fall Bay-breasted.
To update my comments on tail pattern, I don't recall ever seeing a
Blackpoll or Bay-breasted warbler with the white tail spots meeting the pale
undertail coverts and showing no dark at the base of the outer tail
feathers. Most of my experience comes from Cape May, where most of these
birds are first-fall with relatively less white in the tail, so maybe I
haven't seen enough adults to see the range of variation for Bay-breasted.
Or maybe I've just never noticed the birds that don't fit my preconceptions.
But I'd like to see real evidence of that before I give up on my
preconceptions.
In summary, if the white undertail coverts were not confirmed in the field
(and might be camera artifact) and if the tail pattern is within the range
of variation for Bay-breasted, then I will accept the identification as an
odd Bay-breasted. But if this tail pattern is indeed abnormal for
Bay-breasted, along with the streaked breast, and possibly the white
undertail coverts and pale greater covert edges, it makes the identification
as Bay-breasted less likely. Then other unlikely possibilities should be
considered. This is why I originally tossed in the possibility of another
species as hybrid, even though that seems unlikely and the "jizz" does not
suggest hybrid. I don't think such a hybrid would necessarily be obvious, so
it's still worth keeping an open mind.
More study is needed!
David Sibley
Concord MA
-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of John Idzikowski
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 11:31 AM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted
The following comment is from Tom Schultz, one of the artists for the
Warbler Field Guide from the Peterson Series-
John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
_____
My impression of the bird (by the way, that's a nice array of photos!) is
that it shows characteristics that seem largely consistent
with Bay-breasted. Many of these features have been mentioned by others,
but my listing would include:
- Brighter greenish upperparts and sides of neck and face (as opposed to
duller olive for Blackpoll).
- Dark feet, with no yellow on soles (or elsewhere on feet).
- Less conspicuous eye-stripe.
- Hints of buffy coloration in flanks, upper breast, and base of undertail
coverts. A Blackpoll would generally show more of a pure
lemony yellow in the underparts -- especially the neck sides and upper
breast. Unfortunately, the impression of this color varies
from photo to photo here (perhaps due to changes in reflected light?), so it
is less certain than might be hoped, but in most cases
I get the suggestion of some buffy tinting.
One feature that is helpful with fall birds that I don't believe is
mentioned in the field guide (I illustrated this distinction in
my figures, but unfortunately due to the relatively small reproduction size
it doesn't show up very well in the book) is that fall
Blackpolls have bi-colored bills that have some yellowish along the cutting
edge and at the base of the lower mandible.
Bay-breasteds are also bi-colored but typically have pinkish or
flesh-colored tints in these areas. This bird appears to match the
latter pattern. (I have found that these bill color differences are
consistent with the toe/foot pad color distinctions between the
two species, which can be helpful as a memory aid.)
In doing the specimen research, we found that a small percentage of
Bay-breasteds can have dusky streaking or "stippling" on the
breast sides. There is a line in the book that mentions this. Typically,
however, most fall "Baypolls" that show dark or dusky
breast streaks will be Blackpolls. As a result, other plumage and soft part
characteristics must also be considered for individuals
that show these. This individual is likely at the extreme end of the
variability scale for this feature for a Bay-breasted.
Tail spots can be somewhat variable by age. In the Warblers field guide we
were limited to showing primarily adult male undertail
patterns, so they might not be identical in all age/sex classes. Because of
this variation, this feature might not be overly
helpful or diagnostic.
As mentioned, the dark breast streaks and primarily white undertail coverts
(although there is definitely a fairly strong buffy wash
across the vent) could suggest possible hybridization with Blackpoll, as
might the indefinite tone of yellow (if determined to be
less buffy) in the upper breast. This might indeed be a possibility,
although if so (and this would be impossible to prove or
disprove), I might contend that it is most likely a second-generation
backcross that shows features of predominantly Bay-breasted
parentage. I would say that I don't see other warbler species in a possible
hybrid mix.
As you may have gathered, my vote would be for Bay-breasted, but I feel that
the possibility for some Blackpoll hybrid influence
cannot be ruled out.
Tom Schultz
trschultz(AT)vbe.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: Dusky and Vancouver Canada Goose.
From: sgmlod(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 18 Dec 2006 9:15am
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Greetings All
=20
Per the USGS folks in AK, fulva and occidentalis are essentially inseparable=
in the field except by size, and there is overlap. I think if you have a fl=
ock of dark moffitti-sized birds, the chances are good they are fulva, but a=
ny single bird????? If it is huge, I guess one might call it a fulva. There=20=
is some rumored average breast color difference, but it is overwhelmed by in=
tra-taxon variability.
=20
In studying birds from hunter bags in sw. WA (via mtDNA), they found that a=20=
surprising number (5%?) of "Duskies" were indeed fulva. So, yes, some head s=
outh. The "standard" thought, even before the genetic data above, was that a=
small number wintered in the n. Willamette Valley and that a small group of=
large dark Canadas in Snohomish County (~10 birds) that has wintered for a=20=
couple decades in Snoho County is fulva.
=20
Cheers
Steve Mlodinow
=20
=20
-----Original Message-----
From: chucao(AT)COASTSIDE.NET
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Sent: Sun, 17 Dec 2006 9:00 PM
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Dusky and Vancouver Canada Goose.
Folks
=20
We have a smallish and very dark Canada Goose hanging around the gull floc=
k in Half Moon Bay. General consensus is that it is a Dusky Canada Goose. Ho=
wever it is wintering right on the beach, and the only thing I have seen it=20=
forage on is Bull Kelp. I gather that typically Dusky winters inland and for=
ages on grass like a regular goose, but the Vancouver (fulva) Canada Goose i=
s coastal and foraging on marine =E2=80=9Cstuff=E2=80=9D. Is the Dusky somet=
imes found on coastal sites in winter? Is there any reliable way to adequate=
ly separate Dusky from Vancouver? Are there any banding recoveries of Vancou=
ver Canada Geese south of their breeding latitudes? The bird is pretty small=
for a Canada, =E2=80=9CLesser=E2=80=9D Canada Goose size, which makes me th=
ink that the identification as Dusky is probably the right one.=20
=20
Just wondering if anyone knows much about these birds. By the way, it appear=
s to be a youngster.=20
=20
Regards
=20
Alvaro
=20
Alvaro Jaramillo
chucao(AT)coastside.net
Half Moon Bay, California
=20
Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide
www.fieldguides.com
=20
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=3Dbird=
wg01=20
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html=20
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security t=
ools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, fr=
ee AOL Mail and more.
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: Dusky and Vancouver Canada Goose.
From: Joseph Morlan <jmorlan(AT)CCSF.ORG>
Date: 18 Dec 2006 10:42am
ID Frontiers,
For those who may be interested, I have posted a photo of this bird at:
http://outdoors.webshots.com/photo/2422143540040004820yXavWr
The photo shows size comparison with an adjacent Snow Goose.
The two birds arrived together. If they migrated together, I think that
would further support B. c. occidentalis which breeds further north, and
which is said to be more migratory than B. c. fulva.
Although Half Moon Bay is well south of its normal range, there is a B. c.
occidentalis record from Hawaii.
http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/pdf/op81.pdf
Also, several years ago a B. c. occidentalis came into the Wild Animal Park
in Escondido from rehab (fide Jim Pike).
Moffitt discusses this form in detail in his paper: The White-cheeked Goose
in California (39:149-159, 1937). There he mentions seeing one at the
mouth of Tomales Bay on 26 November 1932, and shooting another on San Pablo
Bay in the winter of 1919. Unfortunately, he did not save the skin of the
latter and did not wish to claim either as scientific records:
http://elibrary.unm.edu/sora/Condor/files/issues/v039n04/p0149-p0159.pdf
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:15:27 -0500, <sgmlod(AT)AOL.COM> wrote:
>Greetings All
>
>Per the USGS folks in AK, fulva and occidentalis are essentially inseparable in
the field except by size, and there is overlap. I think if you have a flock of
dark moffitti-sized birds, the chances are good they are fulva, but any single
bird????? If it is huge, I guess one might call it a fulva. There is some
rumored average
breast color difference, but it is overwhelmed by intra-taxon variability.
>
>In studying birds from hunter bags in sw. WA (via mtDNA), they found that a
surprising number (5%?) of "Duskies" were indeed fulva. So, yes, some head
south. The "standard" thought, even before the genetic data above, was that a
small number wintered in the n. Willamette Valley and that a small group of
large dark Canadas in
Snohomish County (~10 birds) that has wintered for a couple decades in Snoho
County is fulva.
>
>Cheers
>Steve Mlodinow
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: chucao(AT)COASTSIDE.NET
>To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
>Sent: Sun, 17 Dec 2006 9:00 PM
>Subject: [BIRDWG01] Dusky and Vancouver Canada Goose.
>
>
>Folks
>
> We have a smallish and very dark Canada Goose hanging around the gull flock
in Half Moon Bay. General consensus is that it is a Dusky Canada Goose. However
it is wintering right on the beach, and the only thing I have seen it forage on
is Bull Kelp. I gather that typically Dusky winters inland and forages on grass
like a regular
goose, but the Vancouver (fulva) Canada Goose is coastal and foraging on marine
“stuff”. Is the Dusky sometimes found on coastal sites in winter? Is there
any reliable way to adequately separate Dusky from Vancouver? Are there any
banding recoveries of Vancouver Canada Geese south of their breeding latitudes?
The bird is pretty
small for a Canada, “Lesser” Canada Goose size, which makes me think that
the identification as Dusky is probably the right one.
>
>Just wondering if anyone knows much about these birds. By the way, it appears
to be a youngster.
>
>Regards
>
>Alvaro
>
>Alvaro Jaramillo
>chucao(AT)coastside.net
>Half Moon Bay, California
>
>Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide
>www.fieldguides.com
>
>Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
>Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>________________________________________________________________________
>Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security
tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free
AOL Mail and more.
>
>
>Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
>
>Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
--
Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA 94044 jmorlan (at) ccsf.edu
Birding Classes start Feb 6 in SF http://fog.ccsf.edu/~jmorlan/
California Bird Records Committee http://www.wfo-cbrc.org/cbrc/
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: LBMU vs MAMU
From: Peter Pyle <ppyle(AT)BIRDPOP.ORG>
Date: 18 Dec 2006 12:08pm
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Hi all -
I have looked at specimens regarding the underwing plumage and there
is an age component that is stronger than the species component:
first-year birds of both species have more white to the underwing
coverts than adults. So I wouldn't use this in species
identification, unless the age is known, and even then I wouldn't
hang my hat on it.
Some basic-plumaged Marbleds can show a variable amount of
"alternate" aspect, which is actually dark basic feathers rather than
alternate feathers. The amount of this is related to the timing of
the prebasic molt, those molting later apparently acquiring more dark
feathers, usually those feathers that are replaced later in the molt.
In all plumages, however, there is still a straight line between the
dark cap/nape and paler throat/auriculars in Long-billed whereas this
line curves down below the eye and up at the nape in Marbleds. I can
appreciate that a basic Marbled that happens to have a darker nape
but not auriculars may simulate the look of a Long-billed but this
pattern should still be discernable on close inspection, and I would
guess it to be a rare combination.
Peter Pyle
At 07:16 PM 12/16/2006, SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM wrote:
>Greetings All
>
>The real title should be
>"Things I learned while dipping on Long-billed Murrelet "
>
>A CAUTIONARY TALE
>A Long-billed Murrelet was found a week ago not far from my house,
>at Point No Point, in nw. Washington. It had been reported
>throughout the week. About 20-30 of us gathered there today, under
>superb viewing conditions. Glassy water and skies that varied from
>high overcast to weak, watery sunshine. Observers looking north, sun
>mostly to the south. Excellent.
>
>There were at least 4 MAMUs that showed what appeared to be partial
>alternate plumage. Whether these birds were retaining alt plum or
>acquiring it early is hard to say. In any case, in 3 of these, the
>neck collar was challenging to see. In two (or perhaps three) of
>these birds the fact that the bird was partly in alternate plumage
>was pretty obvious. However, the bird seen at day's end, after most
>folks had gone, was most devious.
>
>The neck collar was as inapparent as on any full alternate plumage
>MAMU I have ever seen. And even when seen, one could easily convince
>oneself that these faint paler areas were "nape ovals" rather than a
>partial collar (though in reality, the position was wrong for a
>LBMU's nape ovals). The bird looked sharply demarcated between dark
>and light. The uppersides actually looked a tad darker than that of
>the normal basic-plumaged MAMU it appeared paired with. There was a
>straight (Xantus's or Craveri's-like) line going from bill past eye
>down side of neck. Or Pacific Loon-like, if you wish. None of the
>little white bump in front of the eye displayed by typical
>basic-plumaged MAMUs, the neck collar difficult to discern, and the
>dark shoulder mark also difficult to discern, if present at all. The
>scaps were white/whitish, and not quite as obvious as those on
>MAMU's, a mark that I've heard touted as useful for LBMU ID.
>Finally, the underparts looked whitish -- but that is the key; they
>did NOT look bright white, like a normal basic MAMU. Instead, the
>underparts looked vaguely dusky. Not very dark, but clearly not the
>bright white of the nearby normal basic-plumaged MAMUs. So, though
>the back looked darker than normal December MAMUs, the
>upperpart/underpart contrast was actually a bit diminished. The
>bird's structure was identical to that of its partner.
>
>Under average winter Washington viewing conditions, and if this bird
>was on its own, it would have been extremely easy to call it a LBMU.
>Indeed, it was rather similar to the bird I mentioned on this
>listserv from nearby Whidbey Island in July or August in 2005. But
>who'd expect a funky partial alternate MAMU in Dec?! Again, I (we?)
>were saved by it being paired with a MAMU. I think this emphasizes
>the importance of exceptional care in accepting LBMU records from
>coastal areas where MAMUs abound. Even realizing this was an
>atypical bird, it took us a while to shake all doubts and be fully
>convinced it was indeed a MAMU.
>
>By the way, this is not to cast aspersions on this record as a
>whole. Most folks who saw this bird said it was NOT paired (as were
>the vast majority of 350 or so MAMUs present at various points
>today), and at least one observer mentioned the great contrast
>between upper parts and underparts.
>
>
>MURRELET POSTURE
>I have heard it asserted that LBMUs are more likely to swim with
>necks outstretched than the MAMUs which are typically in a "neck-in"
>squat posture. However, partly because of courtship, it was common
>(today) to see MAMUs swimming with next stretched out, bills tilted
>up. Not all birds were obviously involved in social interactions.
>
>UNDERWING COVERTS
>An article in Western Birds (a year or two back) detailed the
>finding of an alt plum LBMU in se WA during Aug. It also examined
>the validity of the underwing covert mark for separating LBMU from
>MAMU in alt and basic plumage both. As I remember (sorry for being
>lazy, I should dig the actual article out), this paper actually had
>pics from museum skins showing LBMUs with dark underwing coverts and
>MAMUs with white on the underwing coverts. The conclusion was that
>underwing covert color was worthless for ID.
>
>I can't comment on LBMU underwing coverts. I've not looked at enough
>specimens, and still have not had the pleasure of seeing a live
>bird. However, since that article came out, I've been very
>attentative to MAMUs in flight, and we saw them in flight often
>today. I have yet to see white or significant pale on a MAMUs
>underwing coverts. If it occurs, it is either very rare or not
>apparent under usual field conditions, including the advantageous
>conditions experienced today. I'd say seeing white/whitish underwing
>coverts would be highly supportive of the ID of LBMU from MAMU.
>
>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
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: LBMU vs MAMU
From: "Lethaby, Nick" <nlethaby(AT)TI.COM>
Date: 18 Dec 2006 12:26pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
I pointed out the age aspect in article in did on LB Murrelets for
Birding some years ago. Basically all juv (can't remember about first
winters off hand but I think they show this too) Marbled Murrelets show
white underwing coverts, although it appears this is pretty much
undetectable in the field (and therefore of little use on live birds).
Adult Marbled Murrelets are pretty consistent in showing all dark
underwing coverts.
=20
I have looked at quite a few LB Murrelets specimens, including a bunch
in Japan about a year or so ago. I have seen a couple of alternate
plumage adults that had dark underwings. However all basic-plumage (and
juvenile) birds I have looked at, had at least a fair bit of pale in the
underwing coverts. It's unlikely that these were all first basic birds
and I couldn't see any difference in feather wear in the wings
suggesting the birds were first winters.
=20
I think there may be a difference in juv plumage with LB Murrelet being
more heavily marked below than a typical MAMU. I have a couple of photos
of juv LBMU if anyone is willing to check this out.
=20
Nick Lethaby
Texas Instruments
805 562 5106
nlethaby(AT)ti.com
=20
________________________________
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Peter Pyle
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 11:08 AM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] LBMU vs MAMU
=20
Hi all -
I have looked at specimens regarding the underwing plumage and there=20
is an age component that is stronger than the species component:=20
first-year birds of both species have more white to the underwing=20
coverts than adults. So I wouldn't use this in species=20
identification, unless the age is known, and even then I wouldn't=20
hang my hat on it.
Some basic-plumaged Marbleds can show a variable amount of=20
"alternate" aspect, which is actually dark basic feathers rather than=20
alternate feathers. The amount of this is related to the timing of=20
the prebasic molt, those molting later apparently acquiring more dark=20
feathers, usually those feathers that are replaced later in the molt.=20
In all plumages, however, there is still a straight line between the=20
dark cap/nape and paler throat/auriculars in Long-billed whereas this=20
line curves down below the eye and up at the nape in Marbleds. I can=20
appreciate that a basic Marbled that happens to have a darker nape=20
but not auriculars may simulate the look of a Long-billed but this=20
pattern should still be discernable on close inspection, and I would=20
guess it to be a rare combination.
Peter Pyle
At 07:16 PM 12/16/2006, SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM wrote:
Greetings All
The real title should be
"Things I learned while dipping on Long-billed Murrelet "
A CAUTIONARY TALE
A Long-billed Murrelet was found a week ago not far from my house, at
Point No Point, in nw. Washington. It had been reported throughout the
week. About 20-30 of us gathered there today, under superb viewing
conditions. Glassy water and skies that varied from high overcast to
weak, watery sunshine. Observers looking north, sun mostly to the south.
Excellent.
There were at least 4 MAMUs that showed what appeared to be partial
alternate plumage. Whether these birds were retaining alt plum or
acquiring it early is hard to say. In any case, in 3 of these, the neck
collar was challenging to see. In two (or perhaps three) of these birds
the fact that the bird was partly in alternate plumage was pretty
obvious. However, the bird seen at day's end, after most folks had gone,
was most devious.
The neck collar was as inapparent as on any full alternate plumage MAMU
I have ever seen. And even when seen, one could easily convince oneself
that these faint paler areas were "nape ovals" rather than a partial
collar (though in reality, the position was wrong for a LBMU's nape
ovals). The bird looked sharply demarcated between dark and light. The
uppersides actually looked a tad darker than that of the normal
basic-plumaged MAMU it appeared paired with. There was a straight
(Xantus's or Craveri's-like) line going from bill past eye down side of
neck. Or Pacific Loon-like, if you wish. None of the little white bump
in front of the eye displayed by typical basic-plumaged MAMUs, the neck
collar difficult to discern, and the dark shoulder mark also difficult
to discern, if present at all. The scaps were white/whitish, and not
quite as obvious as those on MAMU's, a mark that I've heard touted as
useful for LBMU ID. Finally, the underparts looked whitish -- but that
is the key; they did NOT look bright white, like a normal basic MAMU.
Instead, the underparts looked vaguely dusky. Not very dark, but clearly
not the bright white of the nearby normal basic-plumaged MAMUs. So,
though the back looked darker than normal December MAMUs, the
upperpart/underpart contrast was actually a bit diminished. The bird's
structure was identical to that of its partner.
Under average winter Washington viewing conditions, and if this bird was
on its own, it would have been extremely easy to call it a LBMU. Indeed,
it was rather similar to the bird I mentioned on this listserv from
nearby Whidbey Island in July or August in 2005. But who'd expect a
funky partial alternate MAMU in Dec?! Again, I (we?) were saved by it
being paired with a MAMU. I think this emphasizes the importance of
exceptional care in accepting LBMU records from coastal areas where
MAMUs abound. Even realizing this was an atypical bird, it took us a
while to shake all doubts and be fully convinced it was indeed a MAMU.
By the way, this is not to cast aspersions on this record as a whole.
Most folks who saw this bird said it was NOT paired (as were the vast
majority of 350 or so MAMUs present at various points today), and at
least one observer mentioned the great contrast between upper parts and
underparts.
MURRELET POSTURE =20
I have heard it asserted that LBMUs are more likely to swim with necks
outstretched than the MAMUs which are typically in a "neck-in" squat
posture. However, partly because of courtship, it was common (today) to
see MAMUs swimming with next stretched out, bills tilted up. Not all
birds were obviously involved in social interactions.
UNDERWING COVERTS
An article in Western Birds (a year or two back) detailed the finding of
an alt plum LBMU in se WA during Aug. It also examined the validity of
the underwing covert mark for separating LBMU from MAMU in alt and basic
plumage both. As I remember (sorry for being lazy, I should dig the
actual article out), this paper actually had pics from museum skins
showing LBMUs with dark underwing coverts and MAMUs with white on the
underwing coverts. The conclusion was that underwing covert color was
worthless for ID.
I can't comment on LBMU underwing coverts. I've not looked at enough
specimens, and still have not had the pleasure of seeing a live bird.
However, since that article came out, I've been very attentative to
MAMUs in flight, and we saw them in flight often today. I have yet to
see white or significant pale on a MAMUs underwing coverts. If it
occurs, it is either very rare or not apparent under usual field
conditions, including the advantageous conditions experienced today. I'd
say seeing white/whitish underwing coverts would be highly supportive of
the ID of LBMU from MAMU.
Best Wishes
Steven Mlodinow=20
Join or Leave BIRDWG01:
http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=3Dbirdwg01=20
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html=20
Join or Leave BIRDWG01:
http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=3Dbirdwg01=20
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html=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----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Dusky and Vancouver Canada Goose.
From: Andrew Engilis <aengilisjr(AT)UCDAVIS.EDU>
Date: 18 Dec 2006 12:58pm
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Alvaro -- I looked at the photo posted by Joe Morlan and the bird is
most definitely a Dusky/Vancouver based on plumage, size and overall
head and bill morphology. The Dusky Canada Goose is a long-distance
migrant while Vancouver's are essentially non-migratory. I suspect
that based on this behavioral difference, that the bird in question
is more than likely a Dusky. Geese are very traditional birds and
non-migratory forms rarely if ever show up as vagrants.
It is conceivable that the bird could have become lost and joined a
flock of Brant or even Aleutian's on a southward movement (from
Washington or Oregon). Based on feather wear and structure, the bird
does appear to be a young of the year. In particular, the buffy and
worn edges on the back and scapulars, the shape of the breast
feathers (small and not broad, and the smooth, fading color
transition from the neck to the breast are consistent for a bird of
the year. I have compared the photo of this bird to specimens in our
collection and it is consistent with other young Duskys. We have
documented Dusky Canada Goose as a vagrant in Hawaii (Engilis et al
2004, http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/pdf/op81.pdf ).
Hope this helps
Andy Engilis
Curator
At 09:00 PM 12/17/2006, Alvaro Jaramillo wrote:
>Folks
>
> We have a smallish and very dark Canada Goose hanging around the
> gull flock in Half Moon Bay. General consensus is that it is a
> Dusky Canada Goose. However it is wintering right on the beach, and
> the only thing I have seen it forage on is Bull Kelp. I gather that
> typically Dusky winters inland and forages on grass like a regular
> goose, but the Vancouver (fulva) Canada Goose is coastal and
> foraging on marine "stuff". Is the Dusky sometimes found on coastal
> sites in winter? Is there any reliable way to adequately separate
> Dusky from Vancouver? Are there any banding recoveries of Vancouver
> Canada Geese south of their breeding latitudes? The bird is pretty
> small for a Canada, "Lesser" Canada Goose size, which makes me
> think that the identification as Dusky is probably the right one.
>
>Just wondering if anyone knows much about these birds. By the way,
>it appears to be a youngster.
>
>Regards
>
>Alvaro
>
>Alvaro Jaramillo
><mailto:chucao(AT)coastside.net>chucao(AT)coastside.net
>Half Moon Bay, California
>
>Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide
><http://www.fieldguides.com>www.fieldguides.com
>
>
>Join or Leave BIRDWG01:
>http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
>
>Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
=====================================================================
Andrew Engilis, Jr.
Museum Curator
Museum of Wildlife and Fish Biology
Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Conservation Biology
One Shields Avenue
University of California, Davis
Davis, CA 95616
Phone: (530) 752-0364
Fax: (530) 752-0364
E-mail: aengilisjr(AT)ucdavis.edu
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: Tundra vs Trumpeter NYC recap
From: Lloyd Spitalnik <Lloyd22(AT)NYC.RR.COM>
Date: 18 Dec 2006 2:00pm
Hi all,
I've had several off-line responses regarding the swan seen in Central Park,
NYC on 12/16/2006 (see photos at
http://www.lloydspitalnikphotos.com/v/Waterfowl/Tundra+or+Trumpeter/) The
vast majority favor Trumpeter Swan.
Here are some excerpts with no names mentioned:
TUNDRA:
I only see these species occasionally these days but I remember the last
couple of juv Tundras down here generated the same question. I think this is
a tricky bird but I would go for Tundra based the eye looking a little
isolated and the shape of the feathering where it meets the side of bill.
However on this bird I think features only slightly favor Trumpeter.
Your bird looks like a Tundra to me. The bill isn't massive enough, and
the loral area joins the eye too narrowly for a Trumpeter. The "peaked"
forehead is typical for juvenile Tundras and will disappear soon - you
can see that the shape is already changing to the broader forehead of
the Tundra.
Greetings from Alaska. If I saw that here I would call it Tundra based on
bill shape and eye position. Also the shape of the feathers on the upper
bill suggests Tundra. How often does one see Tundra Swans in Central Park?
TRUMPETER:
looks like a young trumpeter to me. juv. molt looks right for Tumpeter, as
does head/neck ratio, bill shape, etc.
On to your bird. In my humble opinion this looks good for Trumpeter based
off
the head and bill shape together. The black window connecting the bill to
the
eye is too wide for TUSW in my opinion. And finally note the border where
the
bill meets the forehead. It is a deep V, where a Tundra Swan has a rounded
border along the forehead.
Definitely an immature Trumpeter. With your excellent photos you can see
the V shape at the base of the bill and the fact it's so dusky in color,
both characteristics of Trumpeter. Also the bill has an even slope from the
base unlike Tundra.
Lloyd, I feel confident that it is a Trumpeter Swan. I wrestled with a
similar challenge a year ago (see photos and discussion at
http://www.pbase.com/quetzal/swans11272005). The all black bill and low ride
(referring to the small angle formed between the surface of the water and
the swan's rear end) are key. The Trumpeter Swan Society website is very
helpful and can be accessed through the link provided here.
...I think the bill shape features are more reliable on adults, and dont
seem to work on your bird, but the overall long-billed appearance, the all
black bill and the dark dusky color are good marks. I also think the
contrast of dark feather centers with paler edges, on the upper back in at
least one of your photos, is a good mark for Trumpeter and less
subjective....
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted
From: rsheil <rsheil(AT)JUNO.COM>
Date: 18 Dec 2006 4:36pm
David et al,
I haven't seen much evidence to dismiss straight Blackpoll as still the
strongest candidate. The bird clearly has rather bright white undertail
coverts (apparent on every photo and therefore unlikely to be an artifact)
and an extensive white belly. The greenish head and upperparts, and the
yellow wash across the vent are not a problem for Blackpoll. The bird has
extensive dark streaking, some well defined, some more obscure, in the malar
area, on the sides of the breast, extending towards the center of the
breast, and down the sides onto the flanks. The strongest point against
Blackpoll relies upon an at least somewhat variable (seasonally and with
regard to age and sex) soft part coloration. Geographically who knows?
I still contend that photos #17-19 appears to show pale yellowish (or
at least contrastingly paler, whatever the color) undersides to the feet.
I've viewed these on two different monitors. I don't think we can say with
certainty what the color of the underside of the feet was from these photos.
At any rate, which is more of a problem, a variable soft part coloration for
a Blackpoll, or white undertail coverts and extensive dark streaking for a
Bay-breasted?
Although the "jizz" between these two species is slightly different, I
don't think any morphometrics stands out on this bird. The bill perhaps
does look slightly heavier than average for Blackpoll, but not
extraordinarily so. Might this bird be a Blackpoll from the far north and
west (e.g., Alaska) which average larger and darker? Curson, Quinn, and
Beadle in 'Warblers of the Americas' state that some birds from Alaska may
have ... more olive upperparts. Pyle says birds breeding west of Ontario
may average slightly larger and duller. These birds have been described as
a seperate race, D.s.lurida, but the subspecies is not generally considered
valid since the differences have been considered too weak. Probably a
Blackpoll in Kansas would be more likely an Alaskan (or western) product
than being one originating from say Quebec.
Richard Heil
S. Peabody, MA
rsheil(AT)juno.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Sibley" <david_sibley(AT)COMCAST.NET>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 10:05 AM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted
> Even though I haven't had a chance to check specimens or do much more
> research I have been able to ponder this bird more thoroughly and to
digest
> the comments of others, and just wanted to follow-up since I think this
bird
> is still confusing and very interesting. Thanks to Tom Schultz especially
> for a very informative post.
>
> One cautionary note - I wonder how much of my first impressions of the odd
> appearance of this bird is due to high contrast in the photos? Some photos
> show a white throat, while others show yellowish. Some photos show a
strange
> blotchy pattern of yellowish and white on the breast. It seems possible
that
> even the appearance of bright white undertail coverts could be caused by
> increased contrast and the camera "reading" pale yellowish as white. In
that
> case it looks better for Bay-breasted. Some field description would be
very
> helpful for confirming the appearance of the photos, especially whether or
> not the undertail coverts appeared white in the field.
>
> I think there's plenty of evidence suggesting that the bird is NOT a
> Blackpoll, and Tom summarized these. The leg and foot color seems to me
the
> strongest point against Blackpoll. I also agree with Tom that bill color
is
> useful.
>
> But I'm not yet comfortable calling it an odd Bay-breasted. I was
surprised
> to learn from Tom's post that the streaked breast may be possible at the
> "extreme end" of variation in Bay-breasted. But still, to call the bird a
> Bay-breasted one has to explain the white undertail coverts (maybe due to
> photo artifacts), well-defined pale edges on greater secondary coverts
> (maybe also at least partly due to photo artifacts), and tail pattern.
There
> may be other subtle details as well, but I won't go out on a limb any
> further.
>
> As I said at the beginning, I haven't had a chance to check specimens.
> Someone with access to a collection could quickly check tail patterns and
> greater covert edges and report on how obvious and how variable these
> features are on fall Bay-breasted.
>
> To update my comments on tail pattern, I don't recall ever seeing a
> Blackpoll or Bay-breasted warbler with the white tail spots meeting the
pale
> undertail coverts and showing no dark at the base of the outer tail
> feathers. Most of my experience comes from Cape May, where most of these
> birds are first-fall with relatively less white in the tail, so maybe I
> haven't seen enough adults to see the range of variation for Bay-breasted.
> Or maybe I've just never noticed the birds that don't fit my
preconceptions.
> But I'd like to see real evidence of that before I give up on my
> preconceptions.
>
> In summary, if the white undertail coverts were not confirmed in the field
> (and might be camera artifact) and if the tail pattern is within the range
> of variation for Bay-breasted, then I will accept the identification as an
> odd Bay-breasted. But if this tail pattern is indeed abnormal for
> Bay-breasted, along with the streaked breast, and possibly the white
> undertail coverts and pale greater covert edges, it makes the
identification
> as Bay-breasted less likely. Then other unlikely possibilities should be
> considered. This is why I originally tossed in the possibility of another
> species as hybrid, even though that seems unlikely and the "jizz" does not
> suggest hybrid. I don't think such a hybrid would necessarily be obvious,
so
> it's still worth keeping an open mind.
>
> More study is needed!
> David Sibley
> Concord MA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
> [mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of John Idzikowski
> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 11:31 AM
> To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted
>
> The following comment is from Tom Schultz, one of the artists for the
> Warbler Field Guide from the Peterson Series-
>
> John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
>
> _____
>
> My impression of the bird (by the way, that's a nice array of photos!) is
> that it shows characteristics that seem largely consistent
> with Bay-breasted. Many of these features have been mentioned by others,
> but my listing would include:
>
> - Brighter greenish upperparts and sides of neck and face (as opposed to
> duller olive for Blackpoll).
> - Dark feet, with no yellow on soles (or elsewhere on feet).
> - Less conspicuous eye-stripe.
> - Hints of buffy coloration in flanks, upper breast, and base of undertail
> coverts. A Blackpoll would generally show more of a pure
> lemony yellow in the underparts -- especially the neck sides and upper
> breast. Unfortunately, the impression of this color varies
> from photo to photo here (perhaps due to changes in reflected light?), so
it
> is less certain than might be hoped, but in most cases
> I get the suggestion of some buffy tinting.
>
> One feature that is helpful with fall birds that I don't believe is
> mentioned in the field guide (I illustrated this distinction in
> my figures, but unfortunately due to the relatively small reproduction
size
> it doesn't show up very well in the book) is that fall
> Blackpolls have bi-colored bills that have some yellowish along the
cutting
> edge and at the base of the lower mandible.
> Bay-breasteds are also bi-colored but typically have pinkish or
> flesh-colored tints in these areas. This bird appears to match the
> latter pattern. (I have found that these bill color differences are
> consistent with the toe/foot pad color distinctions between the
> two species, which can be helpful as a memory aid.)
>
> In doing the specimen research, we found that a small percentage of
> Bay-breasteds can have dusky streaking or "stippling" on the
> breast sides. There is a line in the book that mentions this. Typically,
> however, most fall "Baypolls" that show dark or dusky
> breast streaks will be Blackpolls. As a result, other plumage and soft
part
> characteristics must also be considered for individuals
> that show these. This individual is likely at the extreme end of the
> variability scale for this feature for a Bay-breasted.
>
> Tail spots can be somewhat variable by age. In the Warblers field guide
we
> were limited to showing primarily adult male undertail
> patterns, so they might not be identical in all age/sex classes. Because
of
> this variation, this feature might not be overly
> helpful or diagnostic.
>
> As mentioned, the dark breast streaks and primarily white undertail
coverts
> (although there is definitely a fairly strong buffy wash
> across the vent) could suggest possible hybridization with Blackpoll, as
> might the indefinite tone of yellow (if determined to be
> less buffy) in the upper breast. This might indeed be a possibility,
> although if so (and this would be impossible to prove or
> disprove), I might contend that it is most likely a second-generation
> backcross that shows features of predominantly Bay-breasted
> parentage. I would say that I don't see other warbler species in a
possible
> hybrid mix.
>
> As you may have gathered, my vote would be for Bay-breasted, but I feel
that
> the possibility for some Blackpoll hybrid influence
> cannot be ruled out.
>
> Tom Schultz
> trschultz(AT)vbe.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
>
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted
From: Julian Hough <jrhough1(AT)SNET.NET>
Date: 18 Dec 2006 5:16pm
I've looked at the photos and can't add much to those excellent observers
(Sibley, Schultz, Heil et al) going before me but offer the following if
only to add weight for/against the id.
I agree with Tom Schultz, that initially, the overall "jizz" and facial look
of the bird, combined with the stout bill and legs, bright greenish tone to
the head and mantle all seem to fit Bay-breasted. However, the bright,
obviously whitish vent with a yellow "vent" strap of yellow and dusky olive
flanks with faint "streaks" are at odds with that id. based on the modern
literature and fit Blackpoll perfectly.
I cannot validate the tail pattern since I don't have the experience, yet
the white tail spots do seem to extend rather far up (per D. Sibley) than
what I might expect, yet, to be honest, if I'm at the point of having to
look at tail spots for an id - I'm in real trouble!!
Also, the markings on the underparts are very strange. I've never seen
Blackpoll or Bay-breast in fall showing any markings like these - they don't
fit either to me.
Also, the olive fringed greater coverts referred to by several people seem
fine for either species in my opinion, unless I'm misinterpreting what they
are referring to. Bay-breasted's often show a 'longer' greater covert bar
since the white tips to the innermost feathers are often noticeably
white-tipped, though this can be subjective and not useful on all
individuals (this one being one of them!)
I don't want to hazard a guess, since I don't know what it is and I'm not
sure it can be identified as either species by what we have in the photos,
excellent though they are.
Julian Hough,
CT, USA
jrhough1(AT)snet.net
www.naturescapeimages.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "rsheil" <rsheil(AT)JUNO.COM>
To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 6:35 PM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted
> David et al,
> I haven't seen much evidence to dismiss straight Blackpoll as still
> the
> strongest candidate. The bird clearly has rather bright white undertail
> coverts (apparent on every photo and therefore unlikely to be an artifact)
> and an extensive white belly. The greenish head and upperparts, and the
> yellow wash across the vent are not a problem for Blackpoll. The bird has
> extensive dark streaking, some well defined, some more obscure, in the
> malar
> area, on the sides of the breast, extending towards the center of the
> breast, and down the sides onto the flanks. The strongest point against
> Blackpoll relies upon an at least somewhat variable (seasonally and with
> regard to age and sex) soft part coloration. Geographically who knows?
>
> I still contend that photos #17-19 appears to show pale yellowish (or
> at least contrastingly paler, whatever the color) undersides to the feet.
> I've viewed these on two different monitors. I don't think we can say
> with
> certainty what the color of the underside of the feet was from these
> photos.
> At any rate, which is more of a problem, a variable soft part coloration
> for
> a Blackpoll, or white undertail coverts and extensive dark streaking for a
> Bay-breasted?
>
> Although the "jizz" between these two species is slightly different, I
> don't think any morphometrics stands out on this bird. The bill perhaps
> does look slightly heavier than average for Blackpoll, but not
> extraordinarily so. Might this bird be a Blackpoll from the far north and
> west (e.g., Alaska) which average larger and darker? Curson, Quinn, and
> Beadle in 'Warblers of the Americas' state that some birds from Alaska may
> have ... more olive upperparts. Pyle says birds breeding west of Ontario
> may average slightly larger and duller. These birds have been described
> as
> a seperate race, D.s.lurida, but the subspecies is not generally
> considered
> valid since the differences have been considered too weak. Probably a
> Blackpoll in Kansas would be more likely an Alaskan (or western) product
> than being one originating from say Quebec.
>
> Richard Heil
> S. Peabody, MA
> rsheil(AT)juno.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Sibley" <david_sibley(AT)COMCAST.NET>
> To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
> Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 10:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted
>
>
>> Even though I haven't had a chance to check specimens or do much more
>> research I have been able to ponder this bird more thoroughly and to
> digest
>> the comments of others, and just wanted to follow-up since I think this
> bird
>> is still confusing and very interesting. Thanks to Tom Schultz especially
>> for a very informative post.
>>
>> One cautionary note - I wonder how much of my first impressions of the
>> odd
>> appearance of this bird is due to high contrast in the photos? Some
>> photos
>> show a white throat, while others show yellowish. Some photos show a
> strange
>> blotchy pattern of yellowish and white on the breast. It seems possible
> that
>> even the appearance of bright white undertail coverts could be caused by
>> increased contrast and the camera "reading" pale yellowish as white. In
> that
>> case it looks better for Bay-breasted. Some field description would be
> very
>> helpful for confirming the appearance of the photos, especially whether
>> or
>> not the undertail coverts appeared white in the field.
>>
>> I think there's plenty of evidence suggesting that the bird is NOT a
>> Blackpoll, and Tom summarized these. The leg and foot color seems to me
> the
>> strongest point against Blackpoll. I also agree with Tom that bill color
> is
>> useful.
>>
>> But I'm not yet comfortable calling it an odd Bay-breasted. I was
> surprised
>> to learn from Tom's post that the streaked breast may be possible at the
>> "extreme end" of variation in Bay-breasted. But still, to call the bird a
>> Bay-breasted one has to explain the white undertail coverts (maybe due to
>> photo artifacts), well-defined pale edges on greater secondary coverts
>> (maybe also at least partly due to photo artifacts), and tail pattern.
> There
>> may be other subtle details as well, but I won't go out on a limb any
>> further.
>>
>> As I said at the beginning, I haven't had a chance to check specimens.
>> Someone with access to a collection could quickly check tail patterns and
>> greater covert edges and report on how obvious and how variable these
>> features are on fall Bay-breasted.
>>
>> To update my comments on tail pattern, I don't recall ever seeing a
>> Blackpoll or Bay-breasted warbler with the white tail spots meeting the
> pale
>> undertail coverts and showing no dark at the base of the outer tail
>> feathers. Most of my experience comes from Cape May, where most of these
>> birds are first-fall with relatively less white in the tail, so maybe I
>> haven't seen enough adults to see the range of variation for
>> Bay-breasted.
>> Or maybe I've just never noticed the birds that don't fit my
> preconceptions.
>> But I'd like to see real evidence of that before I give up on my
>> preconceptions.
>>
>> In summary, if the white undertail coverts were not confirmed in the
>> field
>> (and might be camera artifact) and if the tail pattern is within the
>> range
>> of variation for Bay-breasted, then I will accept the identification as
>> an
>> odd Bay-breasted. But if this tail pattern is indeed abnormal for
>> Bay-breasted, along with the streaked breast, and possibly the white
>> undertail coverts and pale greater covert edges, it makes the
> identification
>> as Bay-breasted less likely. Then other unlikely possibilities should be
>> considered. This is why I originally tossed in the possibility of another
>> species as hybrid, even though that seems unlikely and the "jizz" does
>> not
>> suggest hybrid. I don't think such a hybrid would necessarily be obvious,
> so
>> it's still worth keeping an open mind.
>>
>> More study is needed!
>> David Sibley
>> Concord MA
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
>> [mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of John Idzikowski
>> Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 11:31 AM
>> To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted
>>
>> The following comment is from Tom Schultz, one of the artists for the
>> Warbler Field Guide from the Peterson Series-
>>
>> John Idzikowski, Milwaukee
>>
>> _____
>>
>> My impression of the bird (by the way, that's a nice array of photos!) is
>> that it shows characteristics that seem largely consistent
>> with Bay-breasted. Many of these features have been mentioned by others,
>> but my listing would include:
>>
>> - Brighter greenish upperparts and sides of neck and face (as opposed to
>> duller olive for Blackpoll).
>> - Dark feet, with no yellow on soles (or elsewhere on feet).
>> - Less conspicuous eye-stripe.
>> - Hints of buffy coloration in flanks, upper breast, and base of
>> undertail
>> coverts. A Blackpoll would generally show more of a pure
>> lemony yellow in the underparts -- especially the neck sides and upper
>> breast. Unfortunately, the impression of this color varies
>> from photo to photo here (perhaps due to changes in reflected light?), so
> it
>> is less certain than might be hoped, but in most cases
>> I get the suggestion of some buffy tinting.
>>
>> One feature that is helpful with fall birds that I don't believe is
>> mentioned in the field guide (I illustrated this distinction in
>> my figures, but unfortunately due to the relatively small reproduction
> size
>> it doesn't show up very well in the book) is that fall
>> Blackpolls have bi-colored bills that have some yellowish along the
> cutting
>> edge and at the base of the lower mandible.
>> Bay-breasteds are also bi-colored but typically have pinkish or
>> flesh-colored tints in these areas. This bird appears to match the
>> latter pattern. (I have found that these bill color differences are
>> consistent with the toe/foot pad color distinctions between the
>> two species, which can be helpful as a memory aid.)
>>
>> In doing the specimen research, we found that a small percentage of
>> Bay-breasteds can have dusky streaking or "stippling" on the
>> breast sides. There is a line in the book that mentions this.
>> Typically,
>> however, most fall "Baypolls" that show dark or dusky
>> breast streaks will be Blackpolls. As a result, other plumage and soft
> part
>> characteristics must also be considered for individuals
>> that show these. This individual is likely at the extreme end of the
>> variability scale for this feature for a Bay-breasted.
>>
>> Tail spots can be somewhat variable by age. In the Warblers field guide
> we
>> were limited to showing primarily adult male undertail
>> patterns, so they might not be identical in all age/sex classes. Because
> of
>> this variation, this feature might not be overly
>> helpful or diagnostic.
>>
>> As mentioned, the dark breast streaks and primarily white undertail
> coverts
>> (although there is definitely a fairly strong buffy wash
>> across the vent) could suggest possible hybridization with Blackpoll, as
>> might the indefinite tone of yellow (if determined to be
>> less buffy) in the upper breast. This might indeed be a possibility,
>> although if so (and this would be impossible to prove or
>> disprove), I might contend that it is most likely a second-generation
>> backcross that shows features of predominantly Bay-breasted
>> parentage. I would say that I don't see other warbler species in a
> possible
>> hybrid mix.
>>
>> As you may have gathered, my vote would be for Bay-breasted, but I feel
> that
>> the possibility for some Blackpoll hybrid influence
>> cannot be ruled out.
>>
>> Tom Schultz
>> trschultz(AT)vbe.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
>>
>
>
> 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: LBMU vs MAMU
From: sgmlod(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 18 Dec 2006 5:37pm
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Greetings All
I do not understand the presence of white on the underwing coverts in museum
specimens of MAMUs. This vastly differs with field experience. We saw hundreds
of birds in flight, under perfect lighting conditions, and the underwings looked
consistently uniformly dark; no pale on the underwing coverts at all. So,
perhaps LBMU would appear similarly all dark under the wing in real life. What I
can say is that I'd be surprised if a bird seen in the field showing white on
the underwing coverts was a MAMU. Maybe Fix, Elias, Strong or others have had a
different experience. The combined experience of Bill Tweit, Scott Mills, and
others watching murrelets this past weekend, however, was pretty extensive. Not
one of us has seen white (or again, even notable pale) on a MAMUs underwing
coverts in the field.
Regarding the dark plumage actually being dark basic vs alternate feathers.
Can't comment. One bird, however, was heavily scalloped in brown above and below
and showed little if any delineation between face and throat.
And again, without a good look, the bird described in detail would have been
difficult to ID as a MAMU without it being close on flat waters. Upon initial
glance, it appeared to have the perfect Pac Loon like line going from bill
through face down sides of neck. The neck collar was difficult to discern, but
definitely present, but may not have actually fully connected with the off-white
throat/anterior neck. Of course they key here was that the bird was a vague
dingy dusky beneath (no clear scalloping seen, as in bird mentioned above) --
and there it differed from a typical MAMU, hinting that there was something
amiss. This bird lacked the typical white bump in front of eye and other
"non-straight" markings of a normal winter MAMU - though we found this to be
somewhat variable among the hordes of birds present.
Cheers
Steven Mlodinow
-----Original Message-----
From: ppyle(AT)BIRDPOP.ORG
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Sent: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:07 AM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] LBMU vs MAMU
Hi all -
I have looked at specimens regarding the underwing plumage and there
is an age component that is stronger than the species component:
first-year birds of both species have more white to the underwing
coverts than adults. So I wouldn't use this in species
identification, unless the age is known, and even then I wouldn't
hang my hat on it.
Some basic-plumaged Marbleds can show a variable amount of
"alternate" aspect, which is actually dark basic feathers rather than
alternate feathers. The amount of this is related to the timing of
the prebasic molt, those molting later apparently acquiring more dark
feathers, usually those feathers that are replaced later in the molt.
In all plumages, however, there is still a straight line between the
dark cap/nape and paler throat/auriculars in Long-billed whereas this
line curves down below the eye and up at the nape in Marbleds. I can
appreciate that a basic Marbled that happens to have a darker nape
but not auriculars may simulate the look of a Long-billed but this
pattern should still be discernable on close inspection, and I would
guess it to be a rare combination.
Peter Pyle
At 07:16 PM 12/16/2006, SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM wrote:
Greetings All
The real title should be
"Things I learned while dipping on Long-billed Murrelet "
A CAUTIONARY TALE
A Long-billed Murrelet was found a week ago not far from my house, at Point No
Point, in nw. Washington. It had been reported throughout the week. About 20-30
of us gathered there today, under superb viewing conditions. Glassy water and
skies that varied from high overcast to weak, watery sunshine. Observers looking
north, sun mostly to the south. Excellent.
There were at least 4 MAMUs that showed what appeared to be partial alternate
plumage. Whether these birds were retaining alt plum or acquiring it early is
hard to say. In any case, in 3 of these, the neck collar was challenging to see.
In two (or perhaps three) of these birds the fact that the bird was partly in
alternate plumage was pretty obvious. However, the bird seen at day's end, after
most folks had gone, was most devious.
The neck collar was as inapparent as on any full alternate plumage MAMU I have
ever seen. And even when seen, one could easily convince oneself that these
faint paler areas were "nape ovals" rather than a partial collar (though in
reality, the position was wrong for a LBMU's nape ovals). The bird looked
sharply demarcated between dark and light. The uppersides actually looked a tad
darker than that of the normal basic-plumaged MAMU it appeared paired with.
There was a straight (Xantus's or Craveri's-like) line going from bill past eye
down side of neck. Or Pacific Loon-like, if you wish. None of the little white
bump in front of the eye displayed by typical basic-plumaged MAMUs, the neck
collar difficult to discern, and the dark shoulder mark also difficult to
discern, if present at all. The scaps were white/whitish, and not quite as
obvious as those on MAMU's, a mark that I've heard touted as useful for LBMU ID.
Finally, the underparts looked whitish -- but that is the key;
they did NOT look bright white, like a normal basic MAMU. Instead, the
underparts looked vaguely dusky. Not very dark, but clearly not the bright white
of the nearby normal basic-plumaged MAMUs. So, though the back looked darker
than normal December MAMUs, the upperpart/underpart contrast was actually a bit
diminished. The bird's structure was identical to that of its partner.
Under average winter Washington viewing conditions, and if this bird was on its
own, it would have been extremely easy to call it a LBMU. Indeed, it was rather
similar to the bird I mentioned on this listserv from nearby Whidbey Island in
July or August in 2005. But who'd expect a funky partial alternate MAMU in Dec?!
Again, I (we?) were saved by it being paired with a MAMU. I think this
emphasizes the importance of exceptional care in accepting LBMU records from
coastal areas where MAMUs abound. Even realizing this was an atypical bird, it
took us a while to shake all doubts and be fully convinced it was indeed a MAMU.
By the way, this is not to cast aspersions on this record as a whole. Most folks
who saw this bird said it was NOT paired (as were the vast majority of 350 or
so MAMUs present at various points today), and at least one observer mentioned
the great contrast between upper parts and underparts.
MURRELET POSTURE
I have heard it asserted that LBMUs are more likely to swim with necks
outstretched than the MAMUs which are typically in a "neck-in" squat posture.
However, partly because of courtship, it was common (today) to see MAMUs
swimming with next stretched out, bills tilted up. Not all birds were obviously
involved in social interactions.
UNDERWING COVERTS
An article in Western Birds (a year or two back) detailed the finding of an alt
plum LBMU in se WA during Aug. It also examined the validity of the underwing
covert mark for separating LBMU from MAMU in alt and basic plumage both. As I
remember (sorry for being lazy, I should dig the actual article out), this paper
actually had pics from museum skins showing LBMUs with dark underwing coverts
and MAMUs with white on the underwing coverts. The conclusion was that underwing
covert color was worthless for ID.
I can't comment on LBMU underwing coverts. I've not looked at enough specimens,
and still have not had the pleasure of seeing a live bird. However, since that
article came out, I've been very attentative to MAMUs in flight, and we saw them
in flight often today. I have yet to see white or significant pale on a MAMUs
underwing coverts. If it occurs, it is either very rare or not apparent under
usual field conditions, including the advantageous conditions experienced today.
I'd say seeing white/whitish underwing coverts would be highly supportive of
the ID of LBMU from MAMU.
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
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security
tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free
AOL Mail and more.
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: LBMU vs MAMU
From: "Lethaby, Nick" <nlethaby(AT)TI.COM>
Date: 18 Dec 2006 6:17pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
The experience of Dave Fix is just the same as yours. He sees plenty of
juvs and never sees pale underwings. The feature just isn't seeable in
the field for a variety of reasons:
=20
1. Even on birds with pale markings, the flight feathers are all
dark. Also the coverts are not solidly white but typically mostly
darkish with some pale feathering especially in the primary coverts.
2. MAMUs beat their wings very fast making a proper study of the
underwing very difficult. I can't recall them raising their wings up
while swimming in manner of some other alcids.
=20
In my article, I drew the comparison with the claim that Little Auks
(Dovekies) could be id'd from puffins by their all dark underwings. The
claim was disproven at the time by someone showing specimens of Little
Auks with pale on the underwing. However on the one seawatch I saw both
species on the same day, it did seem to be useful feature.
=20
Nick Lethaby
DSP/BIOS Product Manager
Software Development Systems
Texas Instruments
805 562 5106
nlethaby(AT)ti.com
=20
________________________________
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of sgmlod(AT)AOL.COM
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 4:37 PM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] LBMU vs MAMU
=20
Greetings All
=20
I do not understand the presence of white on the underwing coverts in
museum specimens of MAMUs. This vastly differs with field experience. We
saw hundreds of birds in flight, under perfect lighting conditions, and
the underwings looked consistently uniformly dark; no pale on the
underwing coverts at all. So, perhaps LBMU would appear similarly all
dark under the wing in real life. What I can say is that I'd be
surprised if a bird seen in the field showing white on the underwing
coverts was a MAMU. Maybe Fix, Elias, Strong or others have had a
different experience. The combined experience of Bill Tweit, Scott
Mills, and others watching murrelets this past weekend, however, was
pretty extensive. Not one of us has seen white (or again, even notable
pale) on a MAMUs underwing coverts in the field.
=20
Regarding the dark plumage actually being dark basic vs alternate
feathers. Can't comment. One bird, however, was heavily scalloped in
brown above and below and showed little if any delineation between face
and throat.=20
=20
And again, without a good look, the bird described in detail would have
been difficult to ID as a MAMU without it being close on flat waters.
Upon initial glance, it appeared to have the perfect Pac Loon like line
going from bill through face down sides of neck. The neck collar was
difficult to discern, but definitely present, but may not have actually
fully connected with the off-white throat/anterior neck. Of course they
key here was that the bird was a vague dingy dusky beneath (no clear
scalloping seen, as in bird mentioned above) -- and there it differed
from a typical MAMU, hinting that there was something amiss. This bird
lacked the typical white bump in front of eye and other "non-straight"
markings of a normal winter MAMU - though we found this to be somewhat
variable among the hordes of birds present.
=20
Cheers
Steven Mlodinow
=20
=20
=20
=20
-----Original Message-----
From: ppyle(AT)BIRDPOP.ORG
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Sent: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:07 AM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] LBMU vs MAMU
Hi all -
I have looked at specimens regarding the underwing plumage and there=20
is an age component that is stronger than the species component:=20
first-year birds of both species have more white to the underwing=20
coverts than adults. So I wouldn't use this in species=20
identification, unless the age is known, and even then I wouldn't=20
hang my hat on it.
Some basic-plumaged Marbleds can show a variable amount of=20
"alternate" aspect, which is actually dark basic feathers rather than=20
alternate feathers. The amount of this is related to the timing of=20
the prebasic molt, those molting later apparently acquiring more dark=20
feathers, usually those feathers that are replaced later in the molt.=20
In all plumages, however, there is still a straight line between the=20
dark cap/nape and paler throat/auriculars in Long-billed whereas this=20
line curves down below the eye and up at the nape in Marbleds. I can=20
appreciate that a basic Marbled that happens to have a darker nape=20
but not auriculars may simulate the look of a Long-billed but this=20
pattern should still be discernable on close inspection, and I would=20
guess it to be a rare combination.
Peter Pyle
At 07:16 PM 12/16/2006, SGMlod(AT)AOL.COM wrote:
Greetings All
The real title should be
"Things I learned while dipping on Long-billed Murrelet "
A CAUTIONARY TALE
A Long-billed Murrelet was found a week ago not far from my house, at
Point No Point, in nw. Washington. It had been reported throughout the
week. About 20-30 of us gathered there today, under superb viewing
conditions. Glassy water and skies that varied from high overcast to
weak, watery sunshine. Observers looking north, sun mostly to the south.
Excellent.
There were at least 4 MAMUs that showed what appeared to be partial
alternate plumage. Whether these birds were retaining alt plum or
acquiring it early is hard to say. In any case, in 3 of these, the neck
collar was challenging to see. In two (or perhaps three) of these birds
the fact that the bird was partly in alternate plumage was pretty
obvious. However, the bird seen at day's end, after most folks had gone,
was most devious.
The neck collar was as inapparent as on any full alternate plumage MAMU
I have ever seen. And even when seen, one could easily convince oneself
that these faint paler areas were "nape ovals" rather than a partial
collar (though in reality, the position was wrong for a LBMU's nape
ovals). The bird looked sharply demarcated between dark and light. The
uppersides actually looked a tad darker than that of the normal
basic-plumaged MAMU it appeared paired with. There was a straight
(Xantus's or Craveri's-like) line going from bill past eye down side of
neck. Or Pacific Loon-like, if you wish. None of the little white bump
in front of the eye displayed by typical basic-plumaged MAMUs, the neck
collar difficult to discern, and the dark shoulder mark also difficult
to discern, if present at all. The scaps were white/whitish, and not
quite as obvious as those on MAMU's, a mark that I've heard touted as
useful for LBMU ID. Finally, the underparts looked whitish -- but that
is the key; they did NOT look bright white, like a normal basic MAMU.
Instead, the underparts looked vaguely dusky. Not very dark, but clearly
not the bright white of the nearby normal basic-plumaged MAMUs. So,
though the back looked darker than normal December MAMUs, the
upperpart/underpart contrast was actually a bit diminished. The bird's
structure was identical to that of its partner.
Under average winter Washington viewing conditions, and if this bird was
on its own, it would have been extremely easy to call it a LBMU. Indeed,
it was rather similar to the bird I mentioned on this listserv from
nearby Whidbey Island in July or August in 2005. But who'd expect a
funky partial alternate MAMU in Dec?! Again, I (we?) were saved by it
being paired with a MAMU. I think this emphasizes the importance of
exceptional care in accepting LBMU records from coastal areas where
MAMUs abound. Even realizing this was an atypical bird, it took us a
while to shake all doubts and be fully convinced it was indeed a MAMU.
By the way, this is not to cast aspersions on this record as a whole.
Most folks who saw this bird said it was NOT paired (as were the vast
majority of 350 or so MAMUs present at various points today), and at
least one observer mentioned the great contrast between upper parts and
underparts.
MURRELET POSTURE =20
I have heard it asserted that LBMUs are more likely to swim with necks
outstretched than the MAMUs which are typically in a "neck-in" squat
posture. However, partly because of courtship, it was common (today) to
see MAMUs swimming with next stretched out, bills tilted up. Not all
birds were obviously involved in social interactions.
UNDERWING COVERTS
An article in Western Birds (a year or two back) detailed the finding of
an alt plum LBMU in se WA during Aug. It also examined the validity of
the underwing covert mark for separating LBMU from MAMU in alt and basic
plumage both. As I remember (sorry for being lazy, I should dig the
actual article out), this paper actually had pics from museum skins
showing LBMUs with dark underwing coverts and MAMUs with white on the
underwing coverts. The conclusion was that underwing covert color was
worthless for ID.
I can't comment on LBMU underwing coverts. I've not looked at enough
specimens, and still have not had the pleasure of seeing a live bird.
However, since that article came out, I've been very attentative to
MAMUs in flight, and we saw them in flight often today. I have yet to
see white or significant pale on a MAMUs underwing coverts. If it
occurs, it is either very rare or not apparent under usual field
conditions, including the advantageous conditions experienced today. I'd
say seeing white/whitish underwing coverts would be highly supportive of
the ID of LBMU from MAMU.
Best Wishes
Steven Mlodinow=20
Join or Leave BIRDWG01:
http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=3Dbirdwg01=20
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html=20
Join or Leave BIRDWG01:
http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=3Dbirdwg01=20
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html=20
________________________________
Check out the new AOL
<http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/1615326657x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redi
r=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaol%2Ecom%2Fnewaol> . Most comprehensive set of
free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality
videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
Join or Leave BIRDWG01:
http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=3Dbirdwg01=20
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html=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----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted
From: Christopher Vogel <glaucidium(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 18 Dec 2006 11:27pm
Just a few points regarding this rather confounding
Dendroica-
If the bird is a hybrid, I think the parentage is
probably made clear by the subject field, and the fact
that the bird has several features which seem
intermediate between Black-poll and Baybreasted.
The outer web of the outer retrix is indeed dark- not
lamp-black mind you, but dark nevertheless.
The pattern of chevroned streaking is much more
distinct than I should expect in a blue-blooded
Bay-breasted, which when combined with the white
undertail coverts, and complete lack of earth tones
seems rather unconvincing for that species.
I would likewise contend that bare-part coloration is
perhaps not the sturdiest tack to hang one's hat from.
This goes doubly for narrowing the examination to
plantar pads.
Without busting out the calipers, an easy way to gauge
bill thickness is by comparing it to eye-diameter. The
base of a Bay-breasted's bill is wider than the eye, a
Blackpoll's exposed eye is not broader than the base
of the bill. Our bird's eye is at least equal to or
wider than the base of its bill.
While yes, the wing contrasts a bit more with the
relatively plain mantle than I should like for
joe-average Blackpoll, the face is a bit bland, and
the legs dark;I think it is a matter of choosing which
features are more or less aberrant for which species,
and the analysis of it being a western Black-poll is
most astute.
That being said- one strike against it being an
indistinctly marked Blackpoll is the fact that it has
dark legs. If it has dark legs, melanin being as it
is, it should follow that it would be overall a
heavily marked, not toned down or yellowish Blackpoll.
However, if it is Bay-breasted, it should most
definitely not have distinctly contrasting whitish
undertail coverts, or obvious darts down its flanks.
I still think it is just not the most heavily marked
Blackpoll warbler ever to show up in Kansas, and if it
is a hybrid, it is pretty clearly a
BlackpollxBaybreast.
As an aside, I do not think that outlandish hybrid
combinations should be our default setting when
"funny" pureblooded birds birds are oftentimes just as
likely.
As a further aside, there was serendipitously a very
late, and not terribly heavily streaked Blackpoll
Warbler seen and heard by me and a few other competent
observers while CBC-ing yesterday at Higbee's Beach in
Cape May. While I did not see its plantar pads, or the
outer web of its outer retrices terribly well, his
breast was hardly boldly streaked, and given the fact
that it is mid December I admit to thinking it was a
Kinglet when it first popped up! Given the spate of
westerly birds in the neighbourhood lately, perhaps
this Blackpoll was one of the duller, western types?
Food for thought.
This Kansas Baypoll may just go down as one of thos
birds which teaches us humility.
Cheers
CJV
Cape May, NJ
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted
From: Allen Chartier <amazilia1(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 19 Dec 2006 6:22am
Chris,
You stated:
> Without busting out the calipers, an easy way to gauge
> bill thickness is by comparing it to eye-diameter. The
> base of a Bay-breasted's bill is wider than the eye, a
> Blackpoll's exposed eye is not broader than the base
> of the bill.
Aren't these two options exactly the same thing? Did you intend to state
that the base of Bay-breasted's bill is wider than the eye and the base of
Blackpoll's bill is narrower than the eye? Do you intend to make a
distinction between "eye" and "exposed eye"?
I've been wondering if there are any additional photos of this bird, which
might show an open wing. Even a blurry shot of the open wing might allow us
to see whether p6 is emarginated or not; yet another (frequent) distinction
between Bay-breasted and Blackpoll. Or, more food for thought.
Allen Chartier
amazilia1(AT)comcast.net
1442 West River Park Drive
Inkster, MI 48141
Website: http://www.amazilia.net
Michigan HummerNet: http://www.amazilia.net/MIHummerNet
===============================================
Every day, the hummingbird eats its own weight in food.
You may wonder how it weighs the food. It doesn't.
It just eats another hummingbird.
---Steven Wright
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Blackpoll vs Bay-breasted
From: Christopher Vogel <glaucidium(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 19 Dec 2006 6:34am
--- Allen Chartier <amazilia1(AT)COMCAST.NET> wrote:
> Chris,
>
> You stated:
>
>
> > Without busting out the calipers, an easy way to
> gauge
> > bill thickness is by comparing it to eye-diameter.
> The
> > base of a Bay-breasted's bill is wider than the
> eye, a
> > Blackpoll's exposed eye is not broader than the
> base
> > of the bill.
>
>
> Aren't these two options exactly the same thing? Did
> you intend to state
> that the base of Bay-breasted's bill is wider than
> the eye and the base of
> Blackpoll's bill is narrower than the eye?
yup.
Do you
> intend to make a
> distinction between "eye" and "exposed eye"?
Nope- sorry for ambiguous verbage.
CJV
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: FW: Wood Pewee id
From: "Lethaby, Nick" <nlethaby(AT)TI.COM>
Date: 19 Dec 2006 10:22am
All:
Gavin Bieber asked for my opinion on this pewee. I'm not much of an
expert on this species pair so if you are willing to look at it I will
forward the photos.
Nick Lethaby
805 562 5106
nlethaby(AT)ti.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Gavin Bieber [mailto:kingbird77(AT)hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 5:24 PM
To: Lethaby, Nick
Subject: Wood Pewee
Hi Nick,
Was wondering if you might like to look at some images of a Pewee from
May
28, 2006 on Saint Paul Island. Do you have any thoughs as to the
identity
of this individual? Feel free to forward these on to anyone who you
think
might be interested, just ask them to send comments to me.
Thanks,
and Merry Xmas!
Gavin Bieber
Kingbird77(AT)hotmail.com
Tucson, AZ
www.wingsbirds.com
_________________________________________________________________
Fixing up the home? Live Search can help
http://imagine-windowslive.com/search/kits/default.aspx?kit=improve&loca
le=en-US&source=hmemailtaglinenov06&FORM=WLMTAG
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: RFI: RT Pipit wintering status
From: =?windows-1252?Q?Jim_Pike?= <jpike44(AT)EARTHLINK.NET>
Date: 19 Dec 2006 12:28pm
Hi,
A Red-throated Pipit found by Leo Ohtsuki on Nov 22 in Irvine, CA has been
seen on a regular basis until as recently as Dec 17. I don't believe one
has previously wintered in the state or anywhere else in the US, and the
closest location I can think of where birds have been found in winter is
the southernmost tip of the Baja peninsula. Is anyone aware of more
northerly winter records than that?
thanks, Jim Pike
Huntington Beach, CA
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: RFI: RT Pipit wintering status
From: sgmlod(AT)AOL.COM
Date: 19 Dec 2006 12:31pm
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Greetings All
As I recall, there is a winter record from the Vancouver BC area from the late
1980s or early 1990s. None from WA or OR.
Cheers
Steve Mlodinow
-----Original Message-----
From: jpike44(AT)EARTHLINK.NET
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Sent: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 11:28 AM
Subject: [BIRDWG01] RFI: RT Pipit wintering status
Hi,
A Red-throated Pipit found by Leo Ohtsuki on Nov 22 in Irvine, CA has been
seen on a regular basis until as recently as Dec 17. I don't believe one
has previously wintered in the state or anywhere else in the US, and the
closest location I can think of where birds have been found in winter is
the southernmost tip of the Baja peninsula. Is anyone aware of more
northerly winter records than that?
thanks, Jim Pike
Huntington Beach, CA
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security
tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free
AOL Mail and more.
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: eye, bill color in small accipiters
From: "James H. Barton" <redwingatfp1986(AT)COMCAST.NET>
Date: 19 Dec 2006 6:03pm
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----INCLUDING text/plain MIME SECTION----
Hello. I've been looking at puzzling photographs of a seemingly =
large small accipiter (yes( which would appear to be a Sharp-shinned =
Hawk, A. striatus. But the eye is entirely dark, and so is the bill. A =
yellow cere is detectable in one photo. (I don't as yet have permission =
to share the photos with anyone.)
So, I would like to inquire as to the incidence of distinctly dark =
eyes and mostly dark bills in striatus, nisus (Sparrowhawk) and brevipes =
(Levant Sparrowhawk).=20
The bird in question appears to be an immature female,which may help =
to account for its apparent large size. The photos only show the bird =
from the back, perched, facing to the right. =20
A North American might normally assume that the bird is striatus. =
But just how often does striatus present an entirely dark eye and bill?
Yours,
Jim Barton
Cambridge, MA
U.S. Coordinator, Proact
defending birds and their habitats
before it's too late
www.proact-campaigns.net=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----
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: RFI: RT Pipit wintering status
From: Calvin Gehlen <cgehlen(AT)GOBIRDING.COM>
Date: 19 Dec 2006 8:57pm
There are three records for coastal BC according to The Birds of British
Columbia Volume 3: December 1990 at Boundary Bay in Delta, November 1991 at
Sandspit, Queen Charlotte Islands and September 1992 in Central Saanich on
Vancouver Island.
Calvin Gehlen
Vancouver, BC
-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]On Behalf Of Jim Pike
Sent: December 19, 2006 11:29 AM
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] RFI: RT Pipit wintering status
Hi,
A Red-throated Pipit found by Leo Ohtsuki on Nov 22 in Irvine, CA has been
seen on a regular basis until as recently as Dec 17. I don't believe one
has previously wintered in the state or anywhere else in the US, and the
closest location I can think of where birds have been found in winter is
the southernmost tip of the Baja peninsula. Is anyone aware of more
northerly winter records than that?
thanks, Jim Pike
Huntington Beach, CA
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: RFI: RT Pipit wintering status
From: =?windows-1252?Q?Jim_Pike?= <jpike44(AT)EARTHLINK.NET>
Date: 20 Dec 2006 11:46am
Hi,
Guy Monty and Don Cecile have informed me that the date span for the
winter period Red-throated Pipit in Delta,BC was Dec 22-28, 1990.
Many thanks to all who responded.
Jim Pike
Huntington Beach,CA
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Wigeon ID
From: Derek Hill <kinglet32(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 20 Dec 2006 8:02pm
During the Lake Ray Hubbard CBC this past Sunday someone foun
Hi Folks
During the Lake Ray Hubbard CBC this past Sunday someone found and reported a
drake Eurasian Wigeon. The bird was absent the next day, but was refound
Tuesday 19 Dec and still present today. It is associating with a flock of
American Wigeon and is very easily picked out by its rufous head and gray back
and flanks. However the face shows some contrast in a pattern similar to
American (although no green is present). Photos were taken 19 Dec. in Rockwall
County, Texas, under dark overcast conditions hence the poor image quality. Is
this ok for a pure Eurasian Wigeon?
Photos by Brian Gibbons:
http://nctexasbirding.com/wigeon1.jpg
http://nctexasbirding.com/wigeon2.jpg
http://nctexasbirding.com/wigeon3.jpg
My photos taken the same day:
http://nctexasbirding.com/EUWI1.jpg
http://nctexasbirding.com/EUWI2.jpg
http://nctexasbirding.com/EUWI3.jpg
Good birding,
Derek Hill
Richardson, Texas
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.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: Wigeon ID
From: Alan Contreras <acontrer(AT)MINDSPRING.COM>
Date: 20 Dec 2006 8:18pm
Hi Derek. We see hybrids fairly often in w. Oregon, where Eurasians are
regular in all sizable flocks of Americans, and this is a hybrid. The head
pattern says hybrid, even with no green, and so does the seepage of brown
back into the gray sides, which would be pretty crisply cut off on a real
Eurasian.
--
Alan Contreras
EUGENE, OREGON
acontrer(AT)mindspring.com
> From: Derek Hill <kinglet32(AT)YAHOO.COM>
> Reply-To: Derek Hill <kinglet32(AT)YAHOO.COM>
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 18:51:52 -0800
> To: <BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Wigeon ID
>
> During the Lake Ray Hubbard CBC this past Sunday someone foun
> Hi Folks
>
> During the Lake Ray Hubbard CBC this past Sunday someone found and reported a
> drake Eurasian Wigeon. The bird was absent the next day, but was refound
> Tuesday 19 Dec and still present today. It is associating with a flock of
> American Wigeon and is very easily picked out by its rufous head and gray
back
> and flanks. However the face shows some contrast in a pattern similar to
> American (although no green is present). Photos were taken 19 Dec. in
> Rockwall County, Texas, under dark overcast conditions hence the poor image
> quality. Is this ok for a pure Eurasian Wigeon?
>
> Photos by Brian Gibbons:
>
> http://nctexasbirding.com/wigeon1.jpg
> http://nctexasbirding.com/wigeon2.jpg
> http://nctexasbirding.com/wigeon3.jpg
>
> My photos taken the same day:
>
> http://nctexasbirding.com/EUWI1.jpg
> http://nctexasbirding.com/EUWI2.jpg
> http://nctexasbirding.com/EUWI3.jpg
>
> Good birding,
> Derek Hill
> Richardson, Texas
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.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: Wigeon ID
From: Colin Bradshaw <drcolin.bradshaw(AT)BTINTERNET.COM>
Date: 21 Dec 2006 2:39am
I agree with Alan on this. I can't think of any male Eurasian Wigeon I've
seen [and we get a lot around here - so many that, in all honesty, I don't
look at them that critically] that mimics the male American Wigeon pattern
[but not colour] of the head.
I would clarify Alan's comments on the flank pattern though. He is correct
that there is usually a sharp demarkation between the breast colour and the
grey of the flanks. However it is not unusual to get some bleeding of the
colour along the waterline of swimming wigeon - ie about halfway down the
breast. I've never checked for this when they are standing up but I guess it
is where the white of the belly mixes with grey flanks and brown breast.
However his general point is well made.
If anyone wants photos of male EuWi just email me and I can download photos
of about 5-6+ different individuals to you for comparison
Cheers
Colin
-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Derek Hill
Sent: 21 December 2006 02:52
To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Wigeon ID
During the Lake Ray Hubbard CBC this past Sunday someone foun Hi Folks
During the Lake Ray Hubbard CBC this past Sunday someone found and reported
a drake Eurasian Wigeon. The bird was absent the next day, but was refound
Tuesday 19 Dec and still present today. It is associating with a flock of
American Wigeon and is very easily picked out by its rufous head and gray
back and flanks. However the face shows some contrast in a pattern similar
to American (although no green is present). Photos were taken 19 Dec. in
Rockwall County, Texas, under dark overcast conditions hence the poor image
quality. Is this ok for a pure Eurasian Wigeon?
Photos by Brian Gibbons:
http://nctexasbirding.com/wigeon1.jpg
http://nctexasbirding.com/wigeon2.jpg
http://nctexasbirding.com/wigeon3.jpg
My photos taken the same day:
http://nctexasbirding.com/EUWI1.jpg
http://nctexasbirding.com/EUWI2.jpg
http://nctexasbirding.com/EUWI3.jpg
Good birding,
Derek Hill
Richardson, Texas
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Join or Leave BIRDWG01:
http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.15.25/593 - Release Date: 19/12/2006
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Wigeon ID
From: Alan Dean <alan_r_dean(AT)BTINTERNET.COM>
Date: 21 Dec 2006 3:39am
As well as the plumage features mentioned by others, the bill appears to
show a partial black border where it abuts the lores (which are themselves
too pale for Eurasian). Such a black line is a feature of American but not
Eurasian Wigeon.
Alan
--------------------------------------------
Alan R. Dean
Email: alan_r_dean 'at' btinternet.com
Web: www.deanar.btinternet.co.uk
--------------------------------------------
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
> [mailto:BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Derek Hill
> Sent: 21 December 2006 02:52
> To: BIRDWG01(AT)LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Wigeon ID
>
>
> During the Lake Ray Hubbard CBC this past Sunday someone foun Hi Folks
>
> During the Lake Ray Hubbard CBC this past Sunday someone
> found and reported a drake Eurasian Wigeon. The bird was
> absent the next day, but was refound Tuesday 19 Dec and still
> present today. It is associating with a flock of American
> Wigeon and is very easily picked out by its rufous head and
> gray back and flanks. However the face shows some contrast in
> a pattern similar to American (although no green is present).
> Photos were taken 19 Dec. in Rockwall County, Texas, under
> dark overcast conditions hence the poor image quality. Is
> this ok for a pure Eurasian Wigeon?
>
> Photos by Brian Gibbons:
>
> http://nctexasbirding.com/wigeon1.jpg
> http://nctexasbirding.com/wigeon2.jpg
> http://nctexasbirding.com/wigeon3.jpg
>
> My photos taken the same day:
>
> http://nctexasbirding.com/EUWI1.jpg
> http://nctexasbirding.com/EUWI2.jpg
> http://nctexasbirding.com/EUWI3.jpg
>
> Good birding,
> Derek Hill
> Richardson, Texas
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.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: Wigeon ID
From: Harry Lehto <hlehto(AT)UTU.FI>
Date: 21 Dec 2006 3:45am
Derek,
Intersting bird. As mentioned earlier by others this is a clear hybrid.
On the other side of the big pond this kind of a bird could cause initially a
possible American Wigeon (Anas americana) alert as did a bird quite similar to
yours.
http://users.utu.fi/hlehto/photo/hybrid/aamexpen.shtml
This bird shows some green on the head, but seems otherwise appears quite
similar to your bird.
A few days later, in 2003, another hybrid showed up
http://users.utu.fi/hlehto/photo/hybrid/aamexpen2.shtml
On this page the second picture (although small by present standards) gives you
some indication of the variability of the pale forehead in Eurasian wigeon (Anas
penelope).
These birds prompted me to do a minisurvey of a few thousand Eurasian wigeons in
April/May 2003. It was obvious that the extent and the color of the pale on the
forehead of an Eurasian Wigeon varied quite considerably. A large fraction of
Eurasian wigeons had green on the head, but this was usually restricted to a
green spot behind the eye, but sometimes the green area appeared quite large. In
certain light some ind individuals showed even an American wigeon like
non-green impression. The pattern in your bird is still too American wigeon-like
for me to call it an Eurasian wigeon.
The non-colored field mark that strikes me most is the shape for the head. It
seems too "full bodied" and round for a pure Eurasian wigeon, and based on this
character alonne this bird would be picked up as an odd bird over here in a
flock of Eurasian wigeons. Looking at your picture I also have the feeling that
the bill seems kind of bulky for an Eurasian wigeon - anybody know if this is
can be substantiated as a difference between the two species or it is just an
illusionof mine?
Harry
-------------------------------------------------
Dr. Harry J Lehto
Tuorla Observatory
University of Turku
Vislntie 20
FI-21500 Piikki
FINLAND
hlehto(at)utu.fi
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: Wigeon ID
From: Jerry Tangren <tangren(AT)WSU.EDU>
Date: 21 Dec 2006 10:39am
For anyone that's interested I've posted a picture my daughter took last
February at a popular swan feeding spot near Niigata, Japan. The photo shows
two interesting birds--one hybrid in the center foreground, and a second
bird with a green "American" head patch on the left toward the back.
I've posted versions in the original resolution and one cut down in size:
http://jenny.tfrec.wsu.edu/storedImages/tangren/wigeon.jpg (1686 X 1200)
http://jenny.tfrec.wsu.edu/storedImages/tangren/wigeon72.jpg (674 X 480)
--Jerry <tangren(AT)wsu.edu>
WSU-Tree Fruit Research & Extension Center
Wenatchee, WA
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: lots of gulls in Houston, Texas
From: Martin Reid <upupa(AT)AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: 22 Dec 2006 8:50am
Dear all,
My work forced me to study huge numbers of gulls at a landfill east
of Houston on Wednesday. the number of birds present was
unprecedented for this early in the gulling season - probably
affected by all the weather systems in the NW (plus maybe that one
that got me in St. Louis a couple of weeks ago).
Anyway, I managed to find two straightforward (i hope you agree!) rarities:
an Iceland Gull:
http://www.martinreid.com/Gull%20website/icgup05.html
and a GBBG:
http://www.martinreid.com/Gull%20website/gbbgp09.html
- plus a juvenile Thayer's, adult California, 10 LBBGs, and more
than 20 Franklin's Gulls (some of which may winter).
Among the huge numbers of Laughing Gulls and Ringbills, there were
more than 1,500 Herring-types, plus these guys/gals that I'd
appreciate some feedback on:
a Western wannabe?:
http://www.martinreid.com/Gull%20website/gullsp154.html
This looks like a lot of Slaty-backs on the Ujihara's site:
http://www.martinreid.com/Gull%20website/gullsp155.html
and this one looks like some of the Vegas in Japan:
http://www.martinreid.com/Gull%20website/gullsp156.html
while this really looks like an Old World Herring-type:
http://www.martinreid.com/Gull%20website/gullsp157.html
A LBBG-type with some good heuglini features:
http://www.martinreid.com/Gull%20website/gullsp158.html
what the heck is this?:
http://www.martinreid.com/Gull%20website/gullsp159.html
Happy Hols, and good gulling,
Martin
--
>Martin Reid
>San Antonio, Texas
>mailto:upupa(AT)airmail.net
>http://www.martinreid.com
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Re: lots of gulls in Houston, Texas
From: Phil Pickering <philliplc(AT)CHARTER.NET>
Date: 22 Dec 2006 9:56am
>a Western wannabe?:
http://www.martinreid.com/Gull%20website/gullsp154.html
Too many minority/extreme features to be a serious candidate I think -
flat-looking skull with somewhat forward eye position, very pale inner
webs to all P's, and a lot of pale at bill base and tip in December. Bill
shape is superficially suggestive, but seems to have too much bulk
distal to the gonys even for Western, more suggesting something hybridy.
>This looks like a lot of Slaty-backs on the Ujihara's site:
http://www.martinreid.com/Gull%20website/gullsp155.html
In some ways it does, although most (all?) on that site that are this pale
and worn overall show noticeably paler and more contrasty rump/UT
coverts.
Cheers,
Phil Pickering
Lincoln City, Oregon
philliplc(AT)charter.net
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Rose-breasted Grosbeak Age
From: Nick Anich <nicka29(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 22 Dec 2006 3:53pm
A Rose-breasted Grosbeak which seems to be injured has
been coming to a feeder in northern Wisconsin
recently. The bird appears to be male, but we are a
bit puzzled by the plumage on this bird.
Photos:
http://www.pbase.com/rbrady/image/71904360
http://www.pbase.com/rbrady/image/71903082
Does anyone have any thoughts on the age of this bird?
Does anyone have any photos of male RBGRs in basic
plumage?
Please direct comments to Ryan Brady
(ryanbrady10(AT)hotmail.com), myself (nicka29(AT)yahoo.com),
or the list.
Thanks,
Nick Anich
Ashland, WI
http://www.pbase.com/nanich
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: MEGA: Long-billed Murrelet in Romania, Europe!
From: David Erterius <exulanz(AT)YAHOO.SE>
Date: 22 Dec 2006 5:25pm
Dear all on both sides of the Atlantic,
I have just got news from a friend of mine (Olof
Jnsson) that four images of a Long-billed murrelet
seen in Romania today 22nd of December (southeastern
part of Europe) are uploaded (obviously recently) at
the Europe Stop Press Rarity Photos on Surfbirds.com
Please have a look at:
http://www.surfbirds.com/cgi-bin/gallery/display.cgi?gallery=gallery11
This is certainly of interest to many birders in the
whole of Europe as well as in the United States, not
least considering the British record in November this
year.
I suppose more details will come out tomorrow by the
photographer Jozsef Szabo, jr. or by others involved
but at least the news is now public.
Best wishes,
David Erterius, Sweden
_________________________
David Erterius
Tullgatan 5A
SE-223 54 Lund
SWEDEN
Phone: +46 46 12 62 64
Mobile: +46 70 597 86 09
E-mail: exulanz(AT)yahoo.se
_________________________
_________________________________________________________
Flyger tiden ivg? Fnga dagen med Yahoo! Mails inbyggda
kalender. Dessutom 250 MB gratis, virusscanning och antispam. F den p:
http://se.mail.yahoo.com
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Massachusetts Thayer's Gull
From: Tom Johnson <tbj4(AT)CORNELL.EDU>
Date: 23 Dec 2006 8:00am
Larophiles,
Justin and Devin Bosler, E.J. Raynor, Cameron Rutt, and I observed a first
cycle Thayer's Gull at McMillan Wharf in Provincetown Harbor, MA yesterday
afternoon. The bird was first seen around noon and appeared very
interesting as it flew directly over our heads, but it quickly
disappeared. It was relocated about an hour later as it posed on the
water 20 feet away and we studied it from up on the pier. Since we were
aware of the difficult identification challenged posed by this poorly
understood taxon (and its rarity in the east, especially on the Atlantic
seaboard), the great views and opportunities for documentation
(photos and extensive video) were appreciated. The bird appeared overall
paler than normal first cycle Herring Gulls but darker than Kumlien's
Iceland Gull. However, the really exciting features of this bird were the
pale edged primary pattern, dark-centered tertial pattern, and dark
secondary bar viewed in flight. I took over 100 photos of the bird and
uploaded the 21 most illustrative to
http://picasaweb.google.com/jaegermaster/MAThayerSGull
From a cursory examination of the Massachusetts Avian Records Committee
website, there are four accepted state records (since MARC's formation).
Comments regarding the identification of this individual (and Thayer's
Gull in general) are welcome.
Cheers,
Tom
--
Thomas Brodie Johnson
Cornell University - CAS 2010
tbj4(AT)cornell.edu
mobile: 717.991.5727
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
[ << | >> | ^^ ]
Subject: Solitary Vireo ID
From: Derek Hill <kinglet32(AT)YAHOO.COM>
Date: 23 Dec 2006 9:07pm
A couple days ago some folks and I passed through a village w
Hi Folks
A couple days ago some folks and I passed through a village when we came across
an interesting vireo. It was a nice find for whatever species it was, although
one species would be a rarer bird than its look-alike. It was very hyperactive
and we covered about 3 blocks of the town in 15 minutes trying to follow and
photograph this bird. Any input on its ID would be appreciated:
http://nctexasbirding.com/vireo1.jpg
http://nctexasbirding.com/vireo2.jpg
http://nctexasbirding.com/vireo3.jpg
http://nctexasbirding.com/vireo4.jpg
http://nctexasbirding.com/vireo5.jpg
http://nctexasbirding.com/vireo6.jpg
Good birding
Derek Hill
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01
Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
|
|
|
|
BIRDxxxx
BIRDCHAT
ID-FRONTIERS
US:NewEngland