Birdingonthe.Net

Recent Postings from
Frontiers of Identification

> Home > Mail
> Alerts

Updated on Monday, July 21 at 05:14 PM EST
The most recently received Mail is at the top.


Yellow-breasted Chat,©David Sibley

21 Jul Birds and UV Light ["Mike O'Keeffe" ]
12 Jul Presumed Grant’s Storm-Petrel onshore + COTExROST hybrid? [Mark B Bartosik ]
10 Jul NM Fall Sandpiper []
10 Jul Re: Fw: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper ["Lethaby, Nick" ]
10 Jul Re: Fw: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper [Suzanne Sullivan ]
9 Jul Fw: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper [julian hough ]
9 Jul Re: NM fall sandpiper [Kevin McLaughlin ]
8 Jul Re: NM fall sandpiper [Noah Arthur ]
8 Jul Re: NM fall sandpiper []
7 Jul Re: NM fall sandpiper [Jeff Gilligan ]
7 Jul Re: NM fall sandpiper []
5 Jul Re: NM fall sandpiper [Jeff Gilligan ]
5 Jul NM fall sandpiper [Noah Arthur ]
3 Jul RFI: Dark-eyed Junco identification [Bill Pranty ]
27 Jun Re: Fw: Gull - Western or Western X Glaucous-winged? [Chuck Carlson ]
27 Jun Re: Fw: Gull - Western or Western X Glaucous-winged? [Alvaro Jaramillo ]
27 Jun Re: Fw: Gull - Western or Western X Glaucous-winged? [Peter Pyle ]
27 Jun Re: Fw: Gull - Western or Western X Glaucous-winged? [Peter Pyle ]
27 Jun Fw: Gull - Western or Western X Glaucous-winged? [Chuck Carlson ]
19 Jun Re: Birds and UV Light ["Kevin J. McGowan" ]
19 Jun Birds and UV Light ["Mike O'Keeffe" ]
13 Jun Re: Mystery sparrow (or Emberiza bunting?) at Pt. Reyes ["Lethaby, Nick" ]
12 Jun Mystery sparrow (or Emberiza bunting?) at Pt. Reyes [Noah Arthur ]
11 Jun Fwd: [BIRDWG01] Large White-headed Gull ID [Tony leukering ]
10 Jun odd gull [John Sterling ]
10 Jun Re: Large White-headed Gull ID [John Sterling ]
10 Jun Re: Large White-headed Gull ID [Kevin McLaughlin ]
10 Jun Re: Large White-headed Gull ID [Kirk Zufelt ]
10 Jun Large White-headed Gull ID [Kirk Zufelt ]
10 Jun Re: Large White-headed Gull ID [Tony Leukering ]
10 Jun Fw: Re: [BIRDWG01] Large White-headed Gull ID [Alan Wormington ]
10 Jun Re: Large White-headed Gull ID [Amar Attach ]
10 Jun Re: Large White-headed Gull ID [Alan Wormington ]
10 Jun Large White-headed Gull ID [Amar Ayyash ]
9 Jun Re: Unidentified Empidonax flycatcher, Larimer County, Colorado, USA [Jay K ]
9 Jun Re: Unidentified Empidonax flycatcher, Larimer County, Colorado, USA [Ted Floyd ]
9 Jun Re: Unidentified Empidonax flycatcher, Larimer County, Colorado, USA [Jay K ]
9 Jun Unidentified Empidonax flycatcher, Larimer County, Colorado, USA [Ted Floyd ]
29 May Featured Photo, Gnatcatcher, Birding magazine [Ted Floyd ]
29 May Re: Help with Catharus species seen in Northern Arizona ["Mike O'Keeffe" ]
28 May Paul R Wood/UK/TLS/PwC is out of the office. [Paul Wood ]
27 May Re: Help with Catharus species seen in Northern Arizona [Jason A Wilder ]
23 May Re: Thoughts on an unknown gull, SE Michigan [Steve Hampton ]
23 May Thoughts on an unknown gull, SE Michigan [Jerry Jourdan ]
22 May Re: Help with Catharus species seen in Northern Arizona ["Lethaby, Nick" ]
22 May Re: Help with Catharus species seen in Northern Arizona [Reid Martin ]
22 May Re: Catharus species question ["Mike O'Keeffe" ]
21 May Re: Catharus species question [Tony Leukering ]
22 May Help with Catharus species seen in Northern Arizona [Jason A Wilder ]
20 May On Colour Standards and Colour Nomenclature ["Mike O'Keeffe" ]
17 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [David Sibley ]
17 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [Peter Pyle ]
17 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [Jeff Davis ]
17 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [David Sibley ]
16 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [Tony Leukering ]
16 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [Jan Jorgensen ]
16 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [Alvaro Jaramillo ]
16 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [Jan Jrgensen ]
16 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [Suzanne Sullivan ]
15 May Re: Spizella sparrow in Central Park NYC May 12, 2014. ["dallenyc AT earthlink.net" ]
15 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [Alvaro Jaramillo ]
15 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [Chuck Sexton ]
16 May Re: Spizella sparrow in Central Park NYC May 12, 2014. ["Lethaby, Nick" ]
15 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [Tony Leukering ]
15 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [Rob Parsons ]
15 May Spizella sparrow in Central Park NYC May 12, 2014. ["dallenyc AT earthlink.net" ]
15 May Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario [Wayne Hoffman ]
15 May Mystery Passerine in Ontario [Alan Wormington ]
14 May Swifts finally sort themselves out ["Robert O'Brien" ]
13 May A New Colour Profiling Method ["Mike O'Keeffe" ]
10 May Archives have returned! [Chuck & Jaye Otte ]
7 May ADMIN: Archive issues and Yahoo DMARC [Chuck & Jaye Otte ]
7 May Re: Molt Nomenclature with 1st Cycle Ring-billeds [Amar Ayyash ]
7 May Re: Molt Nomenclature with 1st Cycle Ring-billeds [Peter Pyle ]
7 May Molt Nomenclature with 1st Cycle Ring-billeds [Amar Ayyash ]
7 May Re: Molt Nomenclature with 1st Cycle Ring-billeds [Peter Pyle ]

Subject: Birds and UV Light
From: "Mike O'Keeffe" <okeeffeml AT EIRCOM.NET>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 22:35:01 +0100
Hi,

 

From what I can gather most UV photographers use DSLR stills cameras. While 
this produces higher quality than video it creates some of its own difficulties 
including high equipment costs, long exposure times and images focusing 
difficulties. Not surprisingly perhaps, UV reflectance images of birds seem to 
be practically non-existent on the web. 


 

Well I hope to change that. I had a hunch that the old Digital 8 and Mini-DV 
camcorders which carried IR Night Vision features might offer a better solution 
for the birder than stills photography. So, on that basis I bought a Baader-U 
filter and attached it to various old cameras and camcorders I had lying around 
gathering dust. I trust you find the results of interest. 


 

  
http://birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2014/07/uv-imaging.html 


 

Regards

 

Mike O’Keeffe

Ireland  

 

 

 

 

From: Mike O'Keeffe [  
mailto:okeeffeml AT eircom.net] 

Sent: 19 June 2014 20:04
To: 'BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU'
Subject: Birds and UV Light

 

Hi,

 

I hope there are birders out there with some insight into the following 
questions. 


 

Have any birders on this forum taken the plunge and modified or purchased 
specialist camera or video equipment to try and capture UV patterning in birds? 


 

Does anyone know if there has been any systematic investigation of UV 
patterning in the total avifauna of a region? 


 

In particular I am wondering if anyone has taken a UV camera and lamp into a 
large museum collection and viewed or photographed large quantities of skins in 
search for new and unexpected UV reflectance or absorbance plumage patterning? 


 

Lastly, has anyone tried to capture UV and/or full spectrum images of birds in 
the field as opposed to in a more controlled setting like a museum skin 
collection or of birds in captivity, and if so what were the results like? 


 

If anyone has any particular insights into these questions I would love to hear 
from you. 


 

For more thoughts and discussion on this please see 
 
http://birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2014/06/birds-and-uv-light.html 


 

Regards

 

Mike O’Keeffe

Ireland

 

 

 


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Presumed Grant’s Storm-Petrel onshore + COTExROST hybrid?
From: Mark B Bartosik <MBB22222 AT AOL.COM>
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 13:53:33 -0400
Hi All,
 
I would appreciate ID confirmation (or correction) so I could enter valid  
record to the eBird database. I think only couple of documented inland 
records exist in Texas. Not quite ‘inland‘, just onshore but still away 
from 

offshore  deep waters.
 
Grant’s Storm-Petrel (Band-rumped Storm-Petrel complex) ID I based mostly  
on description in Howell’s book (2012) who also states that onshore and 
inland  records are very rare:
 
Most Grant’s [Band-rumped] Storm-Petrels off the East Coast are in obvious  
wing molt during spring, when Leach’s Storm-Petrels are not molting or only 
 starting wing molt. As well as obvious wing molt, note relatively narrow 
white  rump band wrapping around to lateral tail coverts, relatively short 
notched  tail, dull upperwing band, and overall sooty plumage tones.
 
So base on above description and molt timing everything seems point to  
Grant’s.
 
I found this Storm-Petrel very weak on the beach, on June 28 in Galveston  
County but still able to fly. There was some bad, stormy weather in the Gulf 
at  that time.
 
Here are a few photos 
 
http://www.pbase.com/mbb/image/156539586
(BTW  I could not find this trait described; the base halves of tail 
feathers are  white, so the tail in fact is bi-colored)
 
http://www.pbase.com/mbb/image/156539582
http://www.pbase.com/mbb/image/156539585
http://www.pbase.com/mbb/image/156539587
And  in flight
http://www.pbase.com/mbb/image/156539587
 
This year spring and beginning of summer was incredible on the UTC with  
several very interesting birds showed on the shore. Here is another one if  
somebody wants to take a shot at. Common Tern with extremely long steamers.  
Perhaps possible hybrid COTE X ROST. To me this tern is in interesting molt  
stage case but I cannot be sure if it is pure COTE or not. Hybrids COTE X 
ROST  were found on several occasions. There are also suggestions of checking 
Eastern  Common Tern Sterna hirundo longipennis but as S. h. hirundo can 
also have black  bill (records exist) in breeding plumage it will be difficult 
to ID; in non  breeding plumage practically impossible. Perhaps someone with 
experience with  both (Common and Roseate) and/or longipennis can post an 
opinion. Red arrows are  mostly pointed to molt traits but the shape and 
length of the white V on inner webs of the outer primaries are diagnostic when 

separating COTE and ROST.  My most important question is: can Common have 
so long steamers?
 
http://www.pbase.com/mbb/image/156479069/original
 
BTW I recall that there was an interesting study done showing  that  bill 
color in breeding plumage depends on diet and stress, and can change quite  
rapidly. Also I have seen adult (ASY) Least Tern, end of spring, in full  
breeding plumage (all black cap) with all black bill and very dark legs; sort 
of  like miniature Sooty (the head pattern). But, no, I do not suggest that  
something scared the hell out of this bird to change the bill color. Rather  
hormonal imbalance. 
 
Cheers,
 
Mark
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: NM Fall Sandpiper
From: karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:58:43 +0000
all: I am responding mostly to Kevin's comments about how the primary 
projection was outside the range of Western Sandpiper, and also how the plumage 
condition was not a juvenile bird. Female Western Sandpipers often show primary 
projection past the tail, unlike smaller males who typically don't. This bird's 
primary projection is well within the range of normal primary projection for a 
large female Western, whose wings are proportionally longer than males. I have 
provided a link to a juvenile female Western on my website that shows a similar 
bill, similar long legs (also typical of large female Westerns, who show much 
longer legs than males), and a much more worn appearance to the retained 
juvenile feathers than the NM bird, but this is because my bird was 
photographed three weeks later on Sept. 19. 
http://www.kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Shorebirds/Sandpipers/Peep/Western+Sandpiper+juv+fem_+NJ_+Sept+.jpg.html 



The very pale appearance to this bird is mainly because the lighting is strong 
overhead light, and the images are clearly overexposed (note the pale gray 
versus black primaries on this bird, which suggests a lightening of the photo 
that gives the bird a much paler appearance than real life. It is very easy to 
over lighten a shorebird photo, with even a few degrees of lightening creating 
very pale looking feathers. 


On some juvenile Westerns, the wing coverts show virtually no internal 
markings, similar to the NM bird, while others will show a dark central shaft 
line, like my photo. Westerns are variable in this respect, but the feathers on 
this bird are clearly juvenile feathers that have not been replaced yet (as 
Julian Hough pointed out in his response). My bird shows much longer upperpart 
feathers and wing coverts, while the NM bird still has relatively neatly 
arranged wing coverts, similar to a younger bird. As Julian pointed out, 
Western juveniles usually start to replace upperpart feathers by early to 
mid-September, so this juvenile showing all juvenile feathers is also within 
the molt timing schedule of Westerns. My bird shows a few grayer scapulars 
coming in, but this is Sept. 19. The pattern of rusty scapulars and otherwise 
gray plumage can only be a juvenile bird, with no adult or late first cycle 
Western in nonbreeding plumage ever showing rusty markings to the upperparts, 
as Kevin M suggested. There is really nothing extraordinary about this bird 
other than the pale appearance, and I strongly feel it is a result of over 
lightening. 


Kevin Karlson 

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Fw: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper
From: "Lethaby, Nick" <nlethaby AT TI.COM>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 15:58:43 +0000
      
            <001201cf9b5c$60837c40$218a74c0$ AT shaw.ca>
            <1404930912.50716.YahooMailNeo AT web181202.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
 <1404960860.8596.YahooMailNeo AT web181203.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <1404960860.8596.YahooMailNeo AT web181203.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [128.247.5.50]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="_000_390C090471A3A241991BBF3AD2CD64380C5EB8F5DFLE10entticom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: 
	CIP:198.47.26.152;CTRY:US;IPV:NLI;EFV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;SFS:(438002)(24454002)(27584003)(377454003)(189002)(199002)(74662001)(46102001)(77982001)(85852003)(81542001)(92726001)(2656002)(86362001)(2171001)(79102001)(92566001)(84326002)(15202345003)(74502001)(19300405004)(512874002)(18717965001)(31966008)(16601075003)(76176999)(76482001)(106116001)(95666004)(16297215004)(19580405001)(85306003)(55846006)(77096002)(83072002)(44976005)(107046002)(106466001)(64706001)(15975445006)(19625215002)(107886001)(19580395003)(93886003)(33656002)(80022001)(20776003)(71186001)(54356999)(110136001)(66066001)(99396002)(83322001)(50986999)(15974865002)(81342001)(6806004)(87836001)(21056001)(16236675004)(4546003);DIR:INB;SFP:;SCL:1;SRVR:BLUPR05MB434;H:comal.ext.ti.com;FPR:;MLV:sfv;PTR:comal.ext.ti.com;MX:1;A:1;LANG:en;
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:
Received-SPF: Pass (: domain of ti.com designates 198.47.26.152 as permitted
 sender) receiver=; client-ip=198.47.26.152; helo=comal.ext.ti.com;
Authentication-Results: spf=pass (sender IP is 198.47.26.152)
 smtp.mailfrom=nlethaby AT ti.com; 
X-OriginatorOrg: KSUemailProd.onmicrosoft.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossPremises-OriginalClientIPAddress: 198.47.26.152
X-MS-Exchange-CrossPremises-AuthSource: BL2FFO11FD039.protection.gbl
X-MS-Exchange-CrossPremises-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossPremises-AVStamp-Service: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossPremises-SCL: 1
X-MS-Exchange-CrossPremises-Antispam-ScanContext: 
	DIR:Incoming;SFV:NSPM;SKIP:0;
X-MS-Exchange-CrossPremises-Processed-By-Journaling: Journal Agent
X-OrganizationHeadersPreserved: BLUPR05MB434.namprd05.prod.outlook.com
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.4 at cts-virus2
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.72 on 129.130.253.251

--_000_390C090471A3A241991BBF3AD2CD64380C5EB8F5DFLE10entticom_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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--_000_390C090471A3A241991BBF3AD2CD64380C5EB8F5DFLE10entticom_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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--_000_390C090471A3A241991BBF3AD2CD64380C5EB8F5DFLE10entticom_--

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

Subject: Re: Fw: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper
From: Suzanne Sullivan <swampy435 AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 06:51:43 -0400
All,
One thing that I have learned over the years is a slight  primary
extension (of one, hardly ever 2) past the tail on juv. Calidris like
SESA is more the norm than not. The wing tips of the subject bird
appear to be sharp, well pointed as opposed to more rounded of an
adult, I believe another common trait of juveniles. The difference in
juveniles from adult primaries is theorized to aid them in flight
because they are not as good of fliers and when you have a Peregrine
on your tail you better have some help or you become lunch. So I agree
with the others' comments, I don't think it is a good enough reason to
consider something else than juv. Western and I don't think all that
unusual. A search on line will also show many juv. Westerns with
primary extension. I do agree also that this appears to be a juv.
Western. Considering there are so many factors that control molt
timing, I also don't think the stage of molt and faded feathers are
that unusual. That being said, living in Massachusetts, we obviously
get Westerns, mostly juv. but I do not have as much experience with
Westerns as the other Caliidris. But the same rules apply as far as
primary extension/projection.

On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 10:54 PM, julian hough  wrote:
> Kevin et al,
>
> Given the date, it doesn't look like a classic juvenile Western, although I
> do agree with the bird being a Western..the primary projection doesn't
> really extend past the wingtip to be much of a concern. Also, the tertials
> may not be fully grown and appear pushed up, so are exposing more of the
> primaries..maybe this suggests the wings are longer than they are in
> reality?
>
> I don't see the need to invoke a hybrid with this individual since structure
> and plumage fit Western.
>
> The plumage is rather pallid for a typical juvenile Western, at least in my
> experience of birds here in the east. It may just be a rather pale variant
> juvenile, especially since the feather centers of the lower scaps and
> greater coverts seem pale and unmarked than in a "typical" juvenile. The
> richly patterned feathers on the topshot seem fine for retained juvenile
> feathers.
>
> As for molt, and I am sure someone else with more time and a critical eye
> can add more on the state of molt of this individual. Based on my notes,
> from the first week of September, many juveniles have replaced the lower
> scapulars and crown feathers with new, greyer, formative (first-winter)
> feathers. In the NM bird, all the feathers seem to be of the same generation
> and the primaries look fresh – there seems to be a neat row of grey
> formative (first-winter) scaps coming in  - and the head and crown seems to
> have molted out the juvenile feathers. So, it appears as I would expect a
> Western to look – except that it seems a bit earlier than usual in my
> experience.
>
> So, my thoughts are that this is just a rather pale Western Sandpiper that
> is in an advanced state of molt into formative (first-winter) plumage.
>
> Julian Hough
> New Haven, CT 06519
> www.naturescapeimages.wordpress.com
>
>
>
> From: Kevin McLaughlin 
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Sent: Wednesday, July 9, 2014 5:58 AM
>
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper
>
> Noah.
>
> To answer your question first…No, this is not OK for a Western Sandpiper.
> Along with the long legs and heavy Dunlin-like bill, Western is precluded in
> my view by the long primary tip extension which, as you noted, projects
> clearly past the tail tip. I also disagree with this being a juvenile of any
> species. The uniform pale gray upperparts give the look of a basic plumaged
> sandpiper (i.e. first alternate) of the genus calidris. The median and
> greater coverts are pale gray with a dark shaft streak and worn tip fringes.
> I see the covert fringes as being much too abraded for a juvenile Western in
> late August.  The bits of red in the tertials, upper scapulars and mantle
> can be explained in another way. This is to say a partial acquisition of
> alternate feathering in second calendar year.
>
> You should consider your bird as being a putative hybrid. I am not clear on
> the occurrence of any apparent Baird’s Sandpiper x Dunlin in North America.
> However, Nick Anich published an excellent paper last year in Wisconsin
> detailing approximately 20 suspected White-rumped Sandpiper x Dunlin hybrids
> in Canada and the USA. Among these were three from Ontario, including the
> first, carefully documented and copiously photographed at Point Pelee in May
> 1994.
>
> Kevin McLaughlin
> Hamilton, Ontario.
>
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
> [mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Noah Arthur
> Sent: July-09-14 1:29 AM
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper
>
> Yes, I agree the pale plumage is within range for juv Western. It's not the
> plumage that was bothering me for Western -- it's the very long primary
> projection. The wingtips project well past the tail tip, and cross over each
> other, making the rear end look very Baird's-like. Is this still okay for
> Western?
>
> Thanks
>
> Noah
>
> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 1:04 PM,  wrote:
> Jeff and all:
> An adult would never replace its wing coverts in perfect synchrony like this
> bird shows, which is a trait of juvenile birds who grow all their wing
> coverts concurrently. An adult bird would show a gradual replacement of wing
> coverts over a period of time, and would not show the incredibly neatly
> arranged wing panel. I also don't think that this juvenile has molted any of
> its juvenile feathers, but instead shows typical worn edges to the wing
> coverts and a typical juvenile upperpart pattern that includes prominent
> rusty scapular lines. While the feathers are paler than normal, it could be
> a factor of light reflection, camera exposure and sun bleaching. Kevin
> Karlson
>
> From: "Jeff Gilligan" 
> To: "karlson, kevin" 
> Cc: "Frontiers, ID" 
> Sent: Monday, July 7, 2014 8:02:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper
>
>
>
> On Jul 7, 2014, at 12:35 PM, karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET wrote:
>
>
> Noah and all:
> Other than the pale appearance, which may be a result of slightly
> sun-bleached juvenile feathers, this is a perfectly fine juvenile female
> Western Sandpiper. An early second cycle bird that goes into its first adult
> basic molt in July to mid-August would not show the contrasting rusty
> scapular lines that this bird shows, and would instead have uniformly pale
> upperpart feathers with no rust markings. The neatly arranged worn wing
> coverts are fine for a late August juvenile Western, which could have
> hatched as early as mid-to-late June. Kevin Karlson
>
>
>
> Kevin and all
>
> I agree that it is a female Western Sandpiper.  I was back and forth a bit
> on its age.  I don't recall ever seeing a juvenile that had progressed so
> far in its molt by late August though, and to me  it looks to be a paler and
> cleaner plumage overall for a first winter bird with retained rufous
> scapular lines.  The plumage overall (except for the scapulars) looks fine
> for a winter adult.  I am speculating that it is an adult that just hasn't
> molted its scapulars, though they are very pretty bright and obvious for an
> adult that late in the summer.
>
> Jeff Gilligan
>
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>
>
>
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html



-- 
Suzanne M. Sullivan
Wilmington, MA
swampy435 AT gmail.com

Be the Voice of the River
http://www.ipswichriver.org

Please support me in Buzz for a Cure
http://my.e2rm.com/PersonalPage.aspx?registrationID=2319868&langPref=en-CA

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Fw: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper
From: julian hough <jrhough1 AT SNET.NET>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 19:54:20 -0700
Kevin et al,


Given the date, it doesn't look like a classic juvenile Western, although I do 
agree with the bird being a Western..the primary projection doesn't really 
extend past the wingtip to be much of a concern. Also, the tertials may not be 
fully grown and appear pushed up, so are exposing more of the primaries..maybe 
this suggests the wings are longer than they are in reality? 


I don't see the need to invoke a hybrid with this individual since structure 
and plumage fit Western. 


The plumage is rather pallid for a typical juvenile Western, at least in my 
experience of birds here in the east. It may just be a rather pale variant 
juvenile, especially since the feather centers of the lower scaps and greater 
coverts seem pale and unmarked than in a "typical" juvenile. The richly 
patterned feathers on the topshot seem fine for retained juvenile feathers. 


As for molt, and I am sure someone else with more time and a critical eye can 
add more on the state of molt of this individual. Based on my notes, from the 
first week of September, many juveniles have replaced the lower scapulars and 
crown feathers with new, greyer, formative (first-winter) feathers. In the NM 
bird, all the feathers seem to be of the same generation and the primaries look 
fresh – there seems to be a neat row of grey formative (first-winter) scaps 
coming in  - and the head and crown seems to have molted out the juvenile 
feathers. So, it appears as I would expect a Western to look – except that it 
seems a bit earlier than usual in my experience.  


So, my thoughts are that this is just a rather pale Western Sandpiper that is 
in an advanced state of molt into formative (first-winter) plumage. 


Julian Hough
New Haven, CT 06519
www.naturescapeimages.wordpress.com
 



________________________________
 From: Kevin McLaughlin 
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU 
Sent: Wednesday, July 9, 2014 5:58 AM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper
  


Noah.
 
To answer your question first…No, this is not OK for a Western Sandpiper. 
Along with the long legs and heavy Dunlin-like bill, Western is precluded in my 
view by the long primary tip extension which, as you noted, projects clearly 
past the tail tip. I also disagree with this being a juvenile of any species. 
The uniform pale gray upperparts give the look of a basic plumaged sandpiper 
(i.e. first alternate) of the genus calidris. The median and greater coverts 
are pale gray with a dark shaft streak and worn tip fringes. I see the covert 
fringes as being much too abraded for a juvenile Western in late August.  The 
bits of red in the tertials, upper scapulars and mantle can be explained in 
another way. This is to say a partial acquisition of alternate feathering in 
second calendar year. 

 
You should consider your bird as being a putative hybrid. I am not clear on the 
occurrence of any apparent Baird’s Sandpiper x Dunlin in North America. 
However, Nick Anich published an excellent paper last year in Wisconsin 
detailing approximately 20 suspected White-rumped Sandpiper x Dunlin hybrids in 
Canada and the USA. Among these were three from Ontario, including the first, 
carefully documented and copiously photographed at Point Pelee in May 1994. 

 
Kevin McLaughlin
Hamilton, Ontario.
 
From:NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification 
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Noah Arthur 

Sent: July-09-14 1:29 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper
 
Yes, I agree the pale plumage is within range for juv Western. It's not the 
plumage that was bothering me for Western -- it's the very long primary 
projection. The wingtips project well past the tail tip, and cross over each 
other, making the rear end look very Baird's-like. Is this still okay for 
Western? 

 
Thanks
 
Noah
 
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 1:04 PM,  wrote:
Jeff and all:
An adult would never replace its wing coverts in perfect synchrony like this 
bird shows, which is a trait of juvenile birds who grow all their wing coverts 
concurrently. An adult bird would show a gradual replacement of wing coverts 
over a period of time, and would not show the incredibly neatly arranged wing 
panel. I also don't think that this juvenile has molted any of its juvenile 
feathers, but instead shows typical worn edges to the wing coverts and a 
typical juvenile upperpart pattern that includes prominent rusty scapular 
lines. While the feathers are paler than normal, it could be a factor of light 
reflection, camera exposure and sun bleaching. Kevin Karlson 

 

________________________________

From: "Jeff Gilligan" 
To: "karlson, kevin" 
Cc: "Frontiers, ID" 
Sent: Monday, July 7, 2014 8:02:03 PM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper
 
 
 
On Jul 7, 2014, at 12:35 PM, karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET wrote:
 
>Noah and all:
>Other than the pale appearance, which may be a result of slightly sun-bleached 
juvenile feathers, this is a perfectly fine juvenile female Western Sandpiper. 
An early second cycle bird that goes into its first adult basic molt in July to 
mid-August would not show the contrasting rusty scapular lines that this bird 
shows, and would instead have uniformly pale upperpart feathers with no rust 
markings. The neatly arranged worn wing coverts are fine for a late August 
juvenile Western, which could have hatched as early as mid-to-late June. Kevin 
Karlson 

> 
>
>________________________________
>
 
Kevin and all
 
I agree that it is a female Western Sandpiper.  I was back and forth a bit on 
its age.  I don't recall ever seeing a juvenile that had progressed so far in 
its molt by late August though, and to me  it looks to be a paler and cleaner 
plumage overall for a first winter bird with retained rufous scapular lines. 
 The plumage overall (except for the scapulars) looks fine for a winter adult. 
 I am speculating that it is an adult that just hasn't molted its scapulars, 
though they are very pretty bright and obvious for an adult that late in the 
summer.   

 
Jeff Gilligan
 
 
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html 
 
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html 
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: NM fall sandpiper
From: Kevin McLaughlin <kam50 AT SHAW.CA>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 05:58:47 -0400
Noah.

 

To answer your question first…No, this is not OK for a Western Sandpiper. 
Along with the long legs and heavy Dunlin-like bill, Western is precluded in my 
view by the long primary tip extension which, as you noted, projects clearly 
past the tail tip. I also disagree with this being a juvenile of any species. 
The uniform pale gray upperparts give the look of a basic plumaged sandpiper 
(i.e. first alternate) of the genus calidris. The median and greater coverts 
are pale gray with a dark shaft streak and worn tip fringes. I see the covert 
fringes as being much too abraded for a juvenile Western in late August. The 
bits of red in the tertials, upper scapulars and mantle can be explained in 
another way. This is to say a partial acquisition of alternate feathering in 
second calendar year. 


 

You should consider your bird as being a putative hybrid. I am not clear on the 
occurrence of any apparent Baird’s Sandpiper x Dunlin in North America. 
However, Nick Anich published an excellent paper last year in Wisconsin 
detailing approximately 20 suspected White-rumped Sandpiper x Dunlin hybrids in 
Canada and the USA. Among these were three from Ontario, including the first, 
carefully documented and copiously photographed at Point Pelee in May 1994. 


 

Kevin McLaughlin

Hamilton, Ontario.

 

From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification 
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Noah Arthur 

Sent: July-09-14 1:29 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper

 

Yes, I agree the pale plumage is within range for juv Western. It's not the 
plumage that was bothering me for Western -- it's the very long primary 
projection. The wingtips project well past the tail tip, and cross over each 
other, making the rear end look very Baird's-like. Is this still okay for 
Western? 


 

Thanks

 

Noah

 

On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 1:04 PM,  wrote:

Jeff and all:

An adult would never replace its wing coverts in perfect synchrony like this 
bird shows, which is a trait of juvenile birds who grow all their wing coverts 
concurrently. An adult bird would show a gradual replacement of wing coverts 
over a period of time, and would not show the incredibly neatly arranged wing 
panel. I also don't think that this juvenile has molted any of its juvenile 
feathers, but instead shows typical worn edges to the wing coverts and a 
typical juvenile upperpart pattern that includes prominent rusty scapular 
lines. While the feathers are paler than normal, it could be a factor of light 
reflection, camera exposure and sun bleaching. Kevin Karlson 


 

  _____  

From: "Jeff Gilligan" 
To: "karlson, kevin" 
Cc: "Frontiers, ID" 
Sent: Monday, July 7, 2014 8:02:03 PM
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper

 

 

 

On Jul 7, 2014, at 12:35 PM, karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET wrote:

 

Noah and all:

Other than the pale appearance, which may be a result of slightly sun-bleached 
juvenile feathers, this is a perfectly fine juvenile female Western Sandpiper. 
An early second cycle bird that goes into its first adult basic molt in July to 
mid-August would not show the contrasting rusty scapular lines that this bird 
shows, and would instead have uniformly pale upperpart feathers with no rust 
markings. The neatly arranged worn wing coverts are fine for a late August 
juvenile Western, which could have hatched as early as mid-to-late June. Kevin 
Karlson 


 


  _____  


 

Kevin and all

 

I agree that it is a female Western Sandpiper. I was back and forth a bit on 
its age. I don't recall ever seeing a juvenile that had progressed so far in 
its molt by late August though, and to me it looks to be a paler and cleaner 
plumage overall for a first winter bird with retained rufous scapular lines. 
The plumage overall (except for the scapulars) looks fine for a winter adult. I 
am speculating that it is an adult that just hasn't molted its scapulars, 
though they are very pretty bright and obvious for an adult that late in the 
summer. 


 

Jeff Gilligan

 

 

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

 

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


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: NM fall sandpiper
From: Noah Arthur <semirelicta AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 22:29:29 -0700
Yes, I agree the pale plumage is within range for juv Western. It's not the
plumage that was bothering me for Western -- it's the very long primary
projection. The wingtips project well past the tail tip, and cross over
each other, making the rear end look very Baird's-like. Is this still okay
for Western?

Thanks

Noah


On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 1:04 PM,  wrote:

> Jeff and all:
> An adult would never replace its wing coverts in perfect synchrony like
> this bird shows, which is a trait of juvenile birds who grow all their wing
> coverts concurrently. An adult bird would show a gradual replacement of
> wing coverts over a period of time, and would not show the incredibly
> neatly arranged wing panel. I also don't think that this juvenile has
> molted any of its juvenile feathers, but instead shows typical worn edges
> to the wing coverts and a typical juvenile upperpart pattern that includes
> prominent rusty scapular lines. While the feathers are paler than normal,
> it could be a factor of light reflection, camera exposure and sun
> bleaching. Kevin Karlson
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"Jeff Gilligan" 
> *To: *"karlson, kevin" 
> *Cc: *"Frontiers, ID" 
> *Sent: *Monday, July 7, 2014 8:02:03 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper
>
>
>
> On Jul 7, 2014, at 12:35 PM, karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET wrote:
>
> Noah and all:
> Other than the pale appearance, which may be a result of slightly
> sun-bleached juvenile feathers, this is a perfectly fine juvenile female
> Western Sandpiper. An early second cycle bird that goes into its first
> adult basic molt in July to mid-August would not show the contrasting rusty
> scapular lines that this bird shows, and would instead have uniformly pale
> upperpart feathers with no rust markings. The neatly arranged worn wing
> coverts are fine for a late August juvenile Western, which could have
> hatched as early as mid-to-late June. Kevin Karlson
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> Kevin and all
>
> I agree that it is a female Western Sandpiper.  I was back and forth a bit
> on its age.  I don't recall ever seeing a juvenile that had progressed so
> far in its molt by late August though, and to me  it looks to be a paler
> and cleaner plumage overall for a first winter bird with retained rufous
> scapular lines.  The plumage overall (except for the scapulars) looks fine
> for a winter adult.  I am speculating that it is an adult that just hasn't
> molted its scapulars, though they are very pretty bright and obvious for an
> adult that late in the summer.
>
> Jeff Gilligan
>
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: NM fall sandpiper
From: karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 20:04:48 +0000
Jeff and all: 
An adult would never replace its wing coverts in perfect synchrony like this 
bird shows, which is a trait of juvenile birds who grow all their wing coverts 
concurrently. An adult bird would show a gradual replacement of wing coverts 
over a period of time, and would not show the incredibly neatly arranged wing 
panel. I also don't think that this juvenile has molted any of its juvenile 
feathers, but instead shows typical worn edges to the wing coverts and a 
typical juvenile upperpart pattern that includes prominent rusty scapular 
lines. While the feathers are paler than normal, it could be a factor of light 
reflection, camera exposure and sun bleaching. Kevin Karlson 


----- Original Message -----

From: "Jeff Gilligan"  
To: "karlson, kevin"  
Cc: "Frontiers, ID"  
Sent: Monday, July 7, 2014 8:02:03 PM 
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper 


On Jul 7, 2014, at 12:35 PM, karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET wrote: 




Noah and all: 
Other than the pale appearance, which may be a result of slightly sun-bleached 
juvenile feathers, this is a perfectly fine juvenile female Western Sandpiper. 
An early second cycle bird that goes into its first adult basic molt in July to 
mid-August would not show the contrasting rusty scapular lines that this bird 
shows, and would instead have uniformly pale upperpart feathers with no rust 
markings. The neatly arranged worn wing coverts are fine for a late August 
juvenile Western, which could have hatched as early as mid-to-late June. Kevin 
Karlson 


----- Original Message -----




Kevin and all 

I agree that it is a female Western Sandpiper. I was back and forth a bit on 
its age. I don't recall ever seeing a juvenile that had progressed so far in 
its molt by late August though, and to me it looks to be a paler and cleaner 
plumage overall for a first winter bird with retained rufous scapular lines. 
The plumage overall (except for the scapulars) looks fine for a winter adult. I 
am speculating that it is an adult that just hasn't molted its scapulars, 
though they are very pretty bright and obvious for an adult that late in the 
summer. 


Jeff Gilligan 



Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: NM fall sandpiper
From: Jeff Gilligan <jeffgilligan10 AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2014 17:02:03 -0700
On Jul 7, 2014, at 12:35 PM, karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET wrote:

> Noah and all:
> Other than the pale appearance, which may be a result of slightly 
sun-bleached juvenile feathers, this is a perfectly fine juvenile female 
Western Sandpiper. An early second cycle bird that goes into its first adult 
basic molt in July to mid-August would not show the contrasting rusty scapular 
lines that this bird shows, and would instead have uniformly pale upperpart 
feathers with no rust markings. The neatly arranged worn wing coverts are fine 
for a late August juvenile Western, which could have hatched as early as 
mid-to-late June. Kevin Karlson 

> 

Kevin and all

I agree that it is a female Western Sandpiper. I was back and forth a bit on 
its age. I don't recall ever seeing a juvenile that had progressed so far in 
its molt by late August though, and to me it looks to be a paler and cleaner 
plumage overall for a first winter bird with retained rufous scapular lines. 
The plumage overall (except for the scapulars) looks fine for a winter adult. I 
am speculating that it is an adult that just hasn't molted its scapulars, 
though they are very pretty bright and obvious for an adult that late in the 
summer. 


Jeff Gilligan


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: NM fall sandpiper
From: karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2014 19:35:55 +0000
Noah and all: 
Other than the pale appearance, which may be a result of slightly sun-bleached 
juvenile feathers, this is a perfectly fine juvenile female Western Sandpiper. 
An early second cycle bird that goes into its first adult basic molt in July to 
mid-August would not show the contrasting rusty scapular lines that this bird 
shows, and would instead have uniformly pale upperpart feathers with no rust 
markings. The neatly arranged worn wing coverts are fine for a late August 
juvenile Western, which could have hatched as early as mid-to-late June. Kevin 
Karlson 


----- Original Message -----

From: "Noah Arthur"  
To: "Frontiers, ID"  
Sent: Sunday, July 6, 2014 12:59:59 AM 
Subject: [BIRDWG01] NM fall sandpiper 

Hi everyone. 

First off, I'm sorry if I've already posted this on here before... Anyway, I 
got point-blank views of this lone Calidris sandpiper at Leasburg Dam, Dona Ana 
Co., NM last year in late August: 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/73989529 AT N02/sets/72157645536904795/ 


Most characteristics line up with Western, but the plumage is very pale, the 
bill suspiciously long, and -- strangest of all -- the wingtips extend 
noticeably past the tail tip and cross over each other, reminding me of Baird's 
Sandpiper. Also, it seemed odd that this bird was all by itself with no other 
sandpipers around for miles -- although there were whole flocks of Westerns 
just a few miles down river... 


Thanks! 

Noah Arthur, Oakland, CA 
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html 


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: NM fall sandpiper
From: Jeff Gilligan <jeffgilligan10 AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2014 23:05:49 -0700
I think it looks like an adult female Western Sandpiper, mostly molted into 
winter (basic) plumage. By late August adults are typically very pale. 


Jeff Gilligan
Oregon



On Jul 5, 2014, at 9:59 PM, Noah Arthur  wrote:

> Hi everyone.
> 
> First off, I'm sorry if I've already posted this on here before... Anyway, I 
got point-blank views of this lone Calidris sandpiper at Leasburg Dam, Dona Ana 
Co., NM last year in late August: 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/73989529 AT N02/sets/72157645536904795/ 

> 
> Most characteristics line up with Western, but the plumage is very pale, the 
bill suspiciously long, and -- strangest of all -- the wingtips extend 
noticeably past the tail tip and cross over each other, reminding me of Baird's 
Sandpiper. Also, it seemed odd that this bird was all by itself with no other 
sandpipers around for miles -- although there were whole flocks of Westerns 
just a few miles down river... 

> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Noah Arthur, Oakland, CA
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: NM fall sandpiper
From: Noah Arthur <semirelicta AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2014 21:59:59 -0700
Hi everyone.

First off, I'm sorry if I've already posted this on here before... Anyway,
I got point-blank views of this lone Calidris sandpiper at Leasburg Dam,
Dona Ana Co., NM last year in late August:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/73989529 AT N02/sets/72157645536904795/

Most characteristics line up with Western, but the plumage is very pale,
the bill suspiciously long, and -- strangest of all -- the wingtips extend
noticeably past the tail tip and cross over each other, reminding me of
Baird's Sandpiper. Also, it seemed odd that this bird was all by itself
with no other sandpipers around for miles -- although there were whole
flocks of Westerns just a few miles down river...

Thanks!

Noah Arthur, Oakland, CA

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: RFI: Dark-eyed Junco identification
From: Bill Pranty <billpranty AT HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 16:45:52 -0400
Good afternoon,
 
On 30 June 2014, I was in a group of three birders who discovered a
Dark-eyed Junco at North Anclote Bar, a barrier island along the central
Florida Gulf coast off the Pasco County coastline. We saw the junco fly past
us and then land in a mangrove; it seems possible that we witnessed the
junco make landfall -- possibly following a flight across the Gulf of
Mexico. The junco was very heat-stressed and reluctant to fly. We were
reluctant to pursue it but we knew that we needed photos (see below).
 
Gail Deterra and I obtained some fairly good (Gail) to fair (me) images of
the junco. The temperature was around 92 degrees and the sunlight was
extremely bright. The images have been cropped and renamed but not otherwise 
edited. 

Unfortunately, neither Gail nor I obtained any clear images showing the frontal 
or 

side views of the junco.

 
The junco seems to be of the "Oregon" group, but I am aware that definitive
identification from "Cassiar," "Pink-sided," even some "Slate-colored"
juncos cannot always be made.
 
Our photos represent the first summer record of any junco in Florida, and
will also represent the first Florida record of an "Oregon" Junco if the ID
can be confirmed.
 
Images have been posted to 
 
https://drive.google.com/#folders/0B-jn8DL_4JmrQjVxNHp1NXByTEE
 
(My apologies in advance if some -- or all! -- of you cannot view the
images; I've never used Google Drive before).
 
 
All comments are welcome.
 
 
Thank you.
 
 
Best regards,
 
Bill Pranty
Bayonet Point, Florida
 		 	   		  
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Fw: Gull - Western or Western X Glaucous-winged?
From: Chuck Carlson <chuckcmt AT NEMONT.NET>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 18:54:44 -0600
In “Gulls of North America, Europe and Asia” by Olsen and Larsson on page 
177, photo 204 shows a Western with a narrow white edge to P10. The text below 
says on P9, but it looks more like P10. This would seem to fit this gull. The 
photo was taken in San Diego. 


Chuck Carlson

From: Peter Pyle 
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 2:59 PM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU 
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Fw: Gull - Western or Western X Glaucous-winged?

Hi Chuck and all -

Size/shape, bill size and color, back color, and wing pattern all seem to fit 
male Western Gulls that breed between central California and the Washington 
border, being a lighter shade than more-southern breeding birds (including 
"wymani"), but still considered Westerns over hybrids. However, I'm concerned 
about the pattern to the underside of p10. I'm not sure if there is light 
artifact on this feather, but it appears extensively white tipped with a thin 
dark band near the tip. If this is true than it does not fit either Western or 
Glaucous-winged Gull very well, although perhaps extremes of these species 
might show this pattern. It better fits Herring Gull, but I agree it seems on 
the dark side (back, eye, bill) for Herring. 


The Slater open-wing collection is a good resource for gull wing tip patterns 
in western North America: 

http://digitalcollections.pugetsound.edu/cdm/search/collection/slaterwing 
(enter the species name in the search bar)

Peter

At 12:19 PM 6/27/2014, Chuck Carlson wrote:

  Hello larophiles
   
 This gull was seen at Ft. Peck, MT on June 13 on the Missouri River at the Ft. 
Peck powerplants. It was soon noticed that the bill was large ad bulbous and 
bright yellow/orange with a red gonydial spot. the apparent size was larger 
than a California. The upper parts were had about the same shade of gray as a 
California Gull. The iris is not black like a California, nor is it yellow as a 
Herring. The photos were taken at a distance of about 150 m. with 700 mm lens, 
and there was some air turbulence. Therefore the photos are blurry. The gull 
was a one day stay, and the rest of the photos I got were even worse than this 
and none showed any different angles. 

   
 I have had two comments that suggest that it is indeed a Western Gull. A third 
thought it was more likely a Western X Glaucous-winged. There are no previous 
records of Westerns in Montana. 

   
  Any help on this would be appreciated.
   
  https://www.flickr.com/photos/prairie_shots/14334745449/
   
  Chuck Carlson
  Ft. Peck, MT
  Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html 
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html 
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Fw: Gull - Western or Western X Glaucous-winged?
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao AT COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 15:34:47 -0700
Sadly I think the bird is just not identifiable with certainty without an
open wing shot. Most of the reported Western Gulls (albeit that is in the
Great Lakes) are hybrid Great Black-backed x Herring. That is another
possibility you could throw into the mix here. 

 

Alvaro 

 

Alvaro Jaramillo

alvaro AT alvarosadventures.com

www.alvarosadventures.com

 

From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Peter Pyle
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 2:22 PM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Fw: Gull - Western or Western X Glaucous-winged?

 

Come to think of it, the p10 pattern, back color, and all could fit a paler
Slaty-backed Gull. The bird in the dorsal-flight shot about half way down
this page seems similar:
http://www.birdingetc.com/2011/01/more-musings-on-slaty-backed-gull.html 

But then I would expect the eye color to be paler than how it was described.

Peter

At 01:59 PM 6/27/2014, Peter Pyle wrote:



Hi Chuck and all -

Size/shape, bill size and color, back color, and wing pattern all seem to
fit male Western Gulls that breed between central California and the
Washington border, being a lighter shade than more-southern breeding birds
(including "wymani"), but still considered Westerns over hybrids. However,
I'm concerned about the pattern to the underside of p10. I'm not sure if
there is light artifact on this feather, but it appears extensively white
tipped with a thin dark band near the tip. If this is true than it does not
fit either Western or Glaucous-winged Gull very well, although perhaps
extremes of these species might show this pattern. It better fits Herring
Gull, but I agree it seems on the dark side (back, eye, bill) for Herring. 

The Slater open-wing collection is a good resource for gull wing tip
patterns in western North America:
http://digitalcollections.pugetsound.edu/cdm/search/collection/slaterwing 
(enter the species name in the search bar)

Peter

At 12:19 PM 6/27/2014, Chuck Carlson wrote:



Hello larophiles
 
This gull was seen at Ft. Peck, MT on June 13 on the Missouri River at the
Ft. Peck powerplants. It was soon noticed that the bill was large ad bulbous
and bright yellow/orange with a red gonydial spot. the apparent size was
larger than a California. The upper parts were had about the same shade of
gray as a California Gull. The iris is not black like a California, nor is
it yellow as a Herring. The photos were taken at a distance of about 150 m.
with 700 mm lens, and there was some air turbulence. Therefore the photos
are blurry. The gull was a one day stay, and the rest of the photos I got
were even worse than this and none showed any different angles.
 
I have had two comments that suggest that it is indeed a Western Gull. A
third thought it was more likely a Western X Glaucous-winged. There are no
previous records of Westerns in Montana.
 
Any help on this would be appreciated.
 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/prairie_shots/14334745449/
 
Chuck Carlson
Ft. Peck, MT
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html 

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

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


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Fw: Gull - Western or Western X Glaucous-winged?
From: Peter Pyle <ppyle AT BIRDPOP.ORG>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 14:21:59 -0700
Come to think of it, the p10 pattern, back color, and all could fit a 
paler Slaty-backed Gull. The bird in the dorsal-flight shot about 
half way down this page seems similar:
http://www.birdingetc.com/2011/01/more-musings-on-slaty-backed-gull.html

But then I would expect the eye color to be paler than how it was described.

Peter

At 01:59 PM 6/27/2014, Peter Pyle wrote:
>Hi Chuck and all -
>
>Size/shape, bill size and color, back color, and wing pattern all 
>seem to fit male Western Gulls that breed between central California 
>and the Washington border, being a lighter shade than more-southern 
>breeding birds (including "wymani"), but still considered Westerns 
>over hybrids. However, I'm concerned about the pattern to the 
>underside of p10. I'm not sure if there is light artifact on this 
>feather, but it appears extensively white tipped with a thin dark 
>band near the tip. If this is true than it does not fit either 
>Western or Glaucous-winged Gull very well, although perhaps extremes 
>of these species might show this pattern. It better fits Herring 
>Gull, but I agree it seems on the dark side (back, eye, bill) for Herring.
>
>The Slater open-wing collection is a good resource for gull wing tip 
>patterns in western North America:
>http://digitalcollections.pugetsound.edu/cdm/search/collection/slaterwing
>(enter the species name in the search bar)
>
>Peter
>
>At 12:19 PM 6/27/2014, Chuck Carlson wrote:
>>Hello larophiles
>>
>>This gull was seen at Ft. Peck, MT on June 13 on the Missouri River 
>>at the Ft. Peck powerplants. It was soon noticed that the bill was 
>>large ad bulbous and bright yellow/orange with a red gonydial spot. 
>>the apparent size was larger than a California. The upper parts 
>>were had about the same shade of gray as a California Gull. The 
>>iris is not black like a California, nor is it yellow as a Herring. 
>>The photos were taken at a distance of about 150 m. with 700 mm 
>>lens, and there was some air turbulence. Therefore the photos are 
>>blurry. The gull was a one day stay, and the rest of the photos I 
>>got were even worse than this and none showed any different angles.
>>
>>I have had two comments that suggest that it is indeed a Western 
>>Gull. A third thought it was more likely a Western X 
>>Glaucous-winged. There are no previous records of Westerns in Montana.
>>
>>Any help on this would be appreciated.
>>

>>https://www.flickr.com/photos/prairie_shots/14334745449/ 

>>
>>Chuck Carlson
>>Ft. Peck, MT
>>Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Fw: Gull - Western or Western X Glaucous-winged?
From: Peter Pyle <ppyle AT BIRDPOP.ORG>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 13:59:34 -0700
Hi Chuck and all -

Size/shape, bill size and color, back color, and wing pattern all 
seem to fit male Western Gulls that breed between central California 
and the Washington border, being a lighter shade than more-southern 
breeding birds (including "wymani"), but still considered Westerns 
over hybrids. However, I'm concerned about the pattern to the 
underside of p10. I'm not sure if there is light artifact on this 
feather, but it appears extensively white tipped with a thin dark 
band near the tip. If this is true than it does not fit either 
Western or Glaucous-winged Gull very well, although perhaps extremes 
of these species might show this pattern. It better fits Herring 
Gull, but I agree it seems on the dark side (back, eye, bill) for Herring.

The Slater open-wing collection is a good resource for gull wing tip 
patterns in western North America:
http://digitalcollections.pugetsound.edu/cdm/search/collection/slaterwing
(enter the species name in the search bar)

Peter

At 12:19 PM 6/27/2014, Chuck Carlson wrote:
>Hello larophiles
>
>This gull was seen at Ft. Peck, MT on June 13 on the Missouri River 
>at the Ft. Peck powerplants. It was soon noticed that the bill was 
>large ad bulbous and bright yellow/orange with a red gonydial spot. 
>the apparent size was larger than a California. The upper parts were 
>had about the same shade of gray as a California Gull. The iris is 
>not black like a California, nor is it yellow as a Herring. The 
>photos were taken at a distance of about 150 m. with 700 mm lens, 
>and there was some air turbulence. Therefore the photos are blurry. 
>The gull was a one day stay, and the rest of the photos I got were 
>even worse than this and none showed any different angles.
>
>I have had two comments that suggest that it is indeed a Western 
>Gull. A third thought it was more likely a Western X 
>Glaucous-winged. There are no previous records of Westerns in Montana.
>
>Any help on this would be appreciated.
>

>https://www.flickr.com/photos/prairie_shots/14334745449/ 

>
>Chuck Carlson
>Ft. Peck, MT
>Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Fw: Gull - Western or Western X Glaucous-winged?
From: Chuck Carlson <chuckcmt AT NEMONT.NET>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 13:19:15 -0600
Hello larophiles

This gull was seen at Ft. Peck, MT on June 13 on the Missouri River at the Ft. 
Peck powerplants. It was soon noticed that the bill was large ad bulbous and 
bright yellow/orange with a red gonydial spot. the apparent size was larger 
than a California. The upper parts were had about the same shade of gray as a 
California Gull. The iris is not black like a California, nor is it yellow as a 
Herring. The photos were taken at a distance of about 150 m. with 700 mm lens, 
and there was some air turbulence. Therefore the photos are blurry. The gull 
was a one day stay, and the rest of the photos I got were even worse than this 
and none showed any different angles. 


I have had two comments that suggest that it is indeed a Western Gull. A third 
thought it was more likely a Western X Glaucous-winged. There are no previous 
records of Westerns in Montana. 


Any help on this would be appreciated.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/prairie_shots/14334745449/

Chuck Carlson
Ft. Peck, MT
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Birds and UV Light
From: "Kevin J. McGowan" <kjm2 AT CORNELL.EDU>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 20:04:51 +0000
There have been a number of papers on this topic.  Start with
The ubiquity of avian ultraviolet plumage reflectance
Muir D. Eaton and Scott M. Lanyon
Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B (2003) 270, 1721–1726
DOI 10.1098/rspb.2003.2431


Best,

Kevin

From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification 
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Mike O'Keeffe 

Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2014 3:04 PM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Birds and UV Light

Hi,

I hope there are birders out there with some insight into the following 
questions. 


Have any birders on this forum taken the plunge and modified or purchased 
specialist camera or video equipment to try and capture UV patterning in birds? 


Does anyone know if there has been any systematic investigation of UV 
patterning in the total avifauna of a region? 


In particular I am wondering if anyone has taken a UV camera and lamp into a 
large museum collection and viewed or photographed large quantities of skins in 
search for new and unexpected UV reflectance or absorbance plumage patterning? 


Lastly, has anyone tried to capture UV and/or full spectrum images of birds in 
the field as opposed to in a more controlled setting like a museum skin 
collection or of birds in captivity, and if so what were the results like? 


If anyone has any particular insights into these questions I would love to hear 
from you. 


For more thoughts and discussion on this please see 
http://birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2014/06/birds-and-uv-light.html 


Regards

Mike O’Keeffe
Ireland



Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Birds and UV Light
From: "Mike O'Keeffe" <okeeffeml AT EIRCOM.NET>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 20:04:15 +0100
Hi,

 

I hope there are birders out there with some insight into the following 
questions. 


 

Have any birders on this forum taken the plunge and modified or purchased 
specialist camera or video equipment to try and capture UV patterning in birds? 


 

Does anyone know if there has been any systematic investigation of UV 
patterning in the total avifauna of a region? 


 

In particular I am wondering if anyone has taken a UV camera and lamp into a 
large museum collection and viewed or photographed large quantities of skins in 
search for new and unexpected UV reflectance or absorbance plumage patterning? 


 

Lastly, has anyone tried to capture UV and/or full spectrum images of birds in 
the field as opposed to in a more controlled setting like a museum skin 
collection or of birds in captivity, and if so what were the results like? 


 

If anyone has any particular insights into these questions I would love to hear 
from you. 


 

For more thoughts and discussion on this please see 
http://birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2014/06/birds-and-uv-light.html 


 

Regards

 

Mike O’Keeffe

Ireland

 

 

 


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery sparrow (or Emberiza bunting?) at Pt. Reyes
From: "Lethaby, Nick" <nlethaby AT TI.COM>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 21:01:39 +0000
The prominent greater-covert wing-bar and lack of obvious yellow anywhere on 
the underparts would rule out the two asian buntings. Chestnut Bunting has much 
blanker lores than this bird as well. 


From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification 
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Noah Arthur 

Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 11:11 PM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Mystery sparrow (or Emberiza bunting?) at Pt. Reyes

Yesterday Albert Linkowski and I birded Pt. Reyes (Marin Co., CA), and near the 
Fish Docks we spotted an unusual bronzy-yellowish colored sparrow. The overall 
coloration and pattern strongly recalled a female Bobolink, with the brightest 
part of the bird being the nape. It's a very close match to several Emberiza 
buntings (the closest being Yellow-breasted and Chestnut-headed), but I don't 
know much about juvenile Savannah Sparrow variation so juvenile Savannah is a 
strong contender... Here are some photos: 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/73989529 AT N02/sets/72157645095772406/ 


Any ideas, anyone?

Thanks!

Noah Arthur, Oakland, CA
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Mystery sparrow (or Emberiza bunting?) at Pt. Reyes
From: Noah Arthur <semirelicta AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 23:11:17 -0700
Yesterday Albert Linkowski and I birded Pt. Reyes (Marin Co., CA), and near
the Fish Docks we spotted an unusual bronzy-yellowish colored sparrow. The
overall coloration and pattern strongly recalled a female Bobolink, with
the brightest part of the bird being the nape. It's a very close match to
several Emberiza buntings (the closest being Yellow-breasted and
Chestnut-headed), but I don't know much about juvenile Savannah Sparrow
variation so juvenile Savannah is a strong contender... Here are some
photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/73989529 AT N02/sets/72157645095772406/

Any ideas, anyone?

Thanks!

Noah Arthur, Oakland, CA

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Fwd: [BIRDWG01] Large White-headed Gull ID
From: Tony leukering <greatgrayowl AT AOL.COM>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 10:56:14 -0400
Oops.

Tony Leukering
currently Caro, MI
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering/
http://www.aba.org/photoquiz/

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Tony leukering 
> Date: June 11, 2014 at 10:25:28 AM EDT
> To: Kirk Zufelt 
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Large White-headed Gull ID
> 
> Amar et al.:
> 
> I'll write more when I get back to my computer, but my memory holds an 
impression of Ringer-like pattern to the underparts (dark chevrons on sides of 
mostly-white underparts). The pp were quite pointed (if I recall correctly), 
thus it's a 1st-cyc bird (as noted by Amar). Any yellow tones in the legs could 
be supplied by a Ringer parent. Finally, the plumage progression is more like 
that of a 3-year gull than a 4-year gull. Of course, I'm just working from a 
memory of Amar's pix, a memory that is occasionally not to be trusted. 

> 
> Tony
> 
> Tony Leukering
> currently Caro, MI
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering/
> http://www.aba.org/photoquiz/
> 
>> On Jun 10, 2014, at 8:23 PM, Kirk Zufelt  wrote:
>> 
>> Amar- I suspect this is a second cycle American Herring x Lesser 
Black-backed. It has an in between 

>> mantle shade, is smallish and rakish compared to the Herrings and has a 
Herring Gull-like primary 

>> pattern. Couldn't be sure it isn't a second cycle Vega but the eye is 
lightening already which favours 

>> the Herrring x LBB and of course the odds are 100: 1 for the hybrid combo. 
Kirk 

>> 
>> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: odd gull
From: John Sterling <jsterling AT WAVECABLE.COM>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 23:30:06 -0700
Alvaro and Todd Easterla set me straight...not a Cal Gull

John Sterling
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV

26 Palm Ave
Woodland, CA 95695
530 908-3836
jsterling AT wavecable.com
www.sterlingbirds.com


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Large White-headed Gull ID
From: John Sterling <jsterling AT WAVECABLE.COM>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 21:33:48 -0700
I believe that I see green on the upper part of the leg and pink below, so I 
think this is a California Gull as Alan Wormington suggests. I'll take a hard 
look later tonight and talk it over with Todd Easterla before I comment 
further. 


John Sterling
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV

26 Palm Ave
Woodland, CA 95695
530 908-3836
jsterling AT wavecable.com
www.sterlingbirds.com

On Jun 10, 2014, at 4:55 PM, Tony Leukering  wrote:

> Amar:
> 
> Quit it! In the future, when you find something like this, turn around and 
walk away. 

> 
> My first-glance thoughts included Ring-billed (Ringer) x Lesser Black-backed 
(LessBack), but the thing seems on the small side for Ringer. The bill pattern 
is perfect for Smithsonian Gull, but it's certainly not that. 

> 
> I'm not sure how you get darker mantle color into something that looks at 
least fairly Ringer-like, unless you introduce either Mew/Common, Cal, or 
LessBack into its ancestry. But, it seems to me that only the last of these 
could help explain the bill pattern -- except that there are darned few 
one-year-old LessBacks with so little dark in the bill. 

> 
> I'd be very interested in your thoughts.
> 
> Tony
> 
> 
> Tony Leukering
> currently Caro, MI
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering/
> http://aba.org/photoquiz/
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Amar Ayyash 
> To: BIRDWG01 
> Sent: Tue, Jun 10, 2014 6:27 pm
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Large White-headed Gull ID
> 
> Hi, all. I photographed an interesting 1st summer gull on the Wisconsin, Lake 
Michigan, lakefront on Sunday, 08 June 2014. I have a few ideas of what it may 
be, but would appreciate any comments or insights on its identification. 

> 
> You'll find a set of photos below. The only aspect of the bird not accurately 
represented in the images is the leg color. The leg color in photo #4 is, 
however, true to life. 

> 
> http://goo.gl/5KlBNb
> 
> Thanks,
> Amar Ayyash
> Frankfort IL, USA
> 
> 
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Large White-headed Gull ID
From: Kevin McLaughlin <kam50 AT SHAW.CA>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 21:00:06 -0400
Hi Amar.

 

The best I can do with this thing is a very small Lesser Black-backed Gull in 
second prebasic molt. I am troubled somewhat by the pale look to the large 
lower scapulars, which I am presuming to be retained first basic feathers. 
Their pattern is good however and the thin “anchor shaped” effect works. I 
am assuming that the white bases to these feathers were gray before wear and 
fading set in. The general appearance of the tail/uppertail and rump seems OK 
for LBBG, although four juvenal rectrices have been replaced by fresh white 
feathers, possibly during second prealternate molt. This seems to be an 
uncommon characteristic for a year old. Interesting to see that the white R6 on 
the left side also has the proper structure for second cycle and beyond, while 
the same feather on the right, which is juvenal, has the narrow rounded shape 
befitting that age class. As you suggest, leg colour in photo #4 is accurate 
(yellowish) and points to LBBG as does the thin structure of the legs which I 
don’t see a small American Herring Gull possessing. 


 

Kevin McLaughlin

Hamilton, Ontario.

 

From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification 
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Amar Ayyash 

Sent: June-10-14 6:23 PM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Large White-headed Gull ID

 

Hi, all. I photographed an interesting 1st summer gull on the Wisconsin, Lake 
Michigan, lakefront on Sunday, 08 June 2014. I have a few ideas of what it may 
be, but would appreciate any comments or insights on its identification. 


 

You'll find a set of photos below. The only aspect of the bird not accurately 
represented in the images is the leg color. The leg color in photo #4 is, 
however, true to life. 


 

http://goo.gl/5KlBNb

Thanks,

Amar Ayyash

Frankfort IL, USA

 

 

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


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Large White-headed Gull ID
From: Kirk Zufelt <zufelt_k AT SHAW.CA>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 20:14:54 -0400
Amar- I suspect this is a second cycle American Herring x Lesser Black-backed. 
It has an in between mantle shade, is smallish and rakish compared to the 
Herrings and has a Herring Gull-like primary pattern. Couldn't be sure it isn't 
a second cycle Vega but the eye is lightening already which favours the 
Herrring x LBB and of course the odds are 100: 1 for the hybrid combo. Kirk 

On 2014-06-10, at 6:52 PM, Amar Attach wrote:

> I think the bill pattern rules out the possibility of this being a 1 year old 
CAGU. 

> 
> Regards,
> Amar Ayyash
> 
> Amar Ayyash
> www.anythinglarus.com
> 
>> On Jun 10, 2014, at 5:45 PM, "Alan Wormington"  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> A California Gull born last year (2013) should be the answer.
>> 
>> Alan Wormington
>> Leamington, Ontario
>> 
>> 
> 
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Large White-headed Gull ID
From: Kirk Zufelt <zufelt_k AT SHAW.CA>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 19:23:03 -0500
Amar- I suspect this is a second cycle American Herring x Lesser Black-backed. 
It has an in between 

mantle shade, is smallish and rakish compared to the Herrings and has a Herring 
Gull-like primary 

pattern. Couldn't be sure it isn't a second cycle Vega but the eye is 
lightening already which favours 

the Herrring x LBB and of course the odds are 100: 1 for the hybrid combo. Kirk

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Large White-headed Gull ID
From: Tony Leukering <greatgrayowl AT AOL.COM>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 19:55:52 -0400
Amar:

Quit it! In the future, when you find something like this, turn around and walk 
away. 


My first-glance thoughts included Ring-billed (Ringer) x Lesser Black-backed 
(LessBack), but the thing seems on the small side for Ringer. The bill pattern 
is perfect for Smithsonian Gull, but it's certainly not that. 


I'm not sure how you get darker mantle color into something that looks at least 
fairly Ringer-like, unless you introduce either Mew/Common, Cal, or LessBack 
into its ancestry. But, it seems to me that only the last of these could help 
explain the bill pattern -- except that there are darned few one-year-old 
LessBacks with so little dark in the bill. 


I'd be very interested in your thoughts.

Tony

 

 


Tony Leukering
currently Caro, MI

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering/

http://aba.org/photoquiz/

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Amar Ayyash 
To: BIRDWG01 
Sent: Tue, Jun 10, 2014 6:27 pm
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Large White-headed Gull ID



Hi, all. I photographed an interesting 1st summer gull on the Wisconsin, Lake 
Michigan, lakefront on Sunday, 08 June 2014. I have a few ideas of what it may 
be, but would appreciate any comments or insights on its identification. 



You'll find a set of photos below. The only aspect of the bird not accurately 
represented in the images is the leg color. The leg color in photo #4 is, 
however, true to life. 



http://goo.gl/5KlBNb

Thanks,
Amar Ayyash
Frankfort IL, USA




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

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Fw: Re: [BIRDWG01] Large White-headed Gull ID
From: Alan Wormington <wormington AT JUNO.COM>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 22:58:47 +0000
You're probably correct, I forgot to look at the bill!

Alan




---------- Forwarded Message ----------
From: Amar Attach 
To: Alan Wormington 
Cc: "BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU" 
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Large White-headed Gull ID
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 17:52:32 -0500

I think the bill pattern rules out the possibility of this being a 1 year old 
CAGU. 


Regards,
Amar Ayyash

Amar Ayyash
www.anythinglarus.com

> On Jun 10, 2014, at 5:45 PM, "Alan Wormington"  wrote:
> 
> 
> A California Gull born last year (2013) should be the answer.
> 
> Alan Wormington
> Leamington, Ontario
> 
>

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Large White-headed Gull ID
From: Amar Attach <amarayyash AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 17:52:32 -0500
I think the bill pattern rules out the possibility of this being a 1 year old 
CAGU. 


Regards,
Amar Ayyash

Amar Ayyash
www.anythinglarus.com

> On Jun 10, 2014, at 5:45 PM, "Alan Wormington"  wrote:
> 
> 
> A California Gull born last year (2013) should be the answer.
> 
> Alan Wormington
> Leamington, Ontario
> 
> 

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Large White-headed Gull ID
From: Alan Wormington <wormington AT JUNO.COM>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 22:45:19 +0000
A California Gull born last year (2013) should be the answer.

Alan Wormington
Leamington, Ontario

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Large White-headed Gull ID
From: Amar Ayyash <amarayyash AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 17:22:43 -0500
Hi, all. I photographed an interesting 1st summer gull on the Wisconsin,
Lake Michigan, lakefront on Sunday, 08 June 2014. I have a few ideas of
what it may be, but would appreciate any comments or insights on its
identification.

You'll find a set of photos below. The only aspect of the bird not
accurately represented in the images is the leg color. The leg color in
photo #4 is, however, true to life.

http://goo.gl/5KlBNb

Thanks,
Amar Ayyash
Frankfort IL, USA

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Unidentified Empidonax flycatcher, Larimer County, Colorado, USA
From: Jay K <azure.jay AT EARTHLINK.NET>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 21:41:27 -0700




Subject: Re: Unidentified Empidonax flycatcher, Larimer County, Colorado, USA
From: Ted Floyd <tedfloyd57 AT HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 21:34:36 -0700
Thanks, Jay.
Spot-on about the spectrographic signature of these birds' call notes. This 
spectrogram shows an up-slurred note (like Willow, Dusky, or Gray), not the 
upside-down cup shape of Alder (or Hammond's). But it's so high-pitched, about 
an octave above normal for Willow. If this is a Willow, why is the main call 
note so consistently high? 

I'm not saying it's not a Willow. I honestly don't know what it is!
Here's a link to a sound spectrogram of one of the call notes:
http://tinyurl.com/RMNP-Empid-03
The call note is the up-slurred note at 5.30 sec. Can anybody interpret the 
song beginning at 5.15 sec.? Compare it with--oh, what the heck--these songs: 

http://www.xeno-canto.org/31224
http://www.xeno-canto.org/178214
http://www.xeno-canto.org/137858
I'm not saying that's what it is. But I'm struck by the similarities, both 
spectrographically and aurally. 

Thanks again, Jay, for the good feedback. This has been a fun learning 
experience for me. Not that ID-by-consensus is the way to put names on birds, 
but I've received the following "votes" for this Empid: Willow, Dusky, 
Hammond's, Acadian, and Acadian/Alder. 

Ted Floyd
Lafayette, Boulder County, Colorado








Ted,

 

I listened to the recordings and can offer that is much more of a "wheek" or a 
"wick" (WIFL) than a "pip" (ALFL), so I believe it is a Willow. The Alder's 
call in my mind's eye forms a sort of upside-down cup shape which probably 
shows up on a spectrogram as such. 


 

Jay Keller,

San Diego, CA

 




-----Original Message----- 
From: Ted Floyd 
Sent: Jun 9, 2014 5:52 PM 
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU 
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Unidentified Empidonax flycatcher, Larimer County, 
Colorado, USA 





Hi, everybody.


I digibinned and audio-recorded an Empidonax Flycatcher in Larimer County, 
Colorado, USA, on Saturday morning, June 7th. In the field, I thought it was a 
"Traill's" Flycatcher, although not necessarily a Willow (the expected 
"Traill's" in Colorado). Having reviewed the images and audio, I am not certain 
of the bird's identity. 



Here are two poor digibinned images of the bird:


http://tinyurl.com/RMNP-Empid-01


http://tinyurl.com/RMNP-Empid-02


Audio of the bird is much better. Here is a link:


http://www.xeno-canto.org/181520


Be aware that a second Empidonax flycatcher--likely not the same species as the 
bird of the interest--joins the fray at around the 7 sec. mark. I believe a few 
of the vocalizations heard after the 7 sec. mark are given by the 2nd bird. 



My field notes, made at the time of observation, indicate a large Empid, 
greenish above and paler below; wings long and wing bars prominent; bill long 
and largely fleshy-orange below; eye-ring thin; throat pale/whitish; lores 
pale/whitish. 



Anybody know what it is?


Ted Floyd


Lafayette, Boulder County, Colorado, USAArchives: 
http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html 

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Unidentified Empidonax flycatcher, Larimer County, Colorado, USA
From: Jay K <azure.jay AT EARTHLINK.NET>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 21:01:54 -0700




Subject: Unidentified Empidonax flycatcher, Larimer County, Colorado, USA
From: Ted Floyd <tedfloyd57 AT HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 17:52:09 -0700
Hi, everybody.
I digibinned and audio-recorded an Empidonax Flycatcher in Larimer County, 
Colorado, USA, on Saturday morning, June 7th. In the field, I thought it was a 
"Traill's" Flycatcher, although not necessarily a Willow (the expected 
"Traill's" in Colorado). Having reviewed the images and audio, I am not certain 
of the bird's identity. 

Here are two poor digibinned images of the bird:
http://tinyurl.com/RMNP-Empid-01
http://tinyurl.com/RMNP-Empid-02
Audio of the bird is much better. Here is a link:
http://www.xeno-canto.org/181520
Be aware that a second Empidonax flycatcher--likely not the same species as the 
bird of the interest--joins the fray at around the 7 sec. mark. I believe a few 
of the vocalizations heard after the 7 sec. mark are given by the 2nd bird. 

My field notes, made at the time of observation, indicate a large Empid, 
greenish above and paler below; wings long and wing bars prominent; bill long 
and largely fleshy-orange below; eye-ring thin; throat pale/whitish; lores 
pale/whitish. 

Anybody know what it is?
Ted Floyd
Lafayette, Boulder County, Colorado, USA 		 	   		  
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Featured Photo, Gnatcatcher, Birding magazine
From: Ted Floyd <tedfloyd57 AT HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 12:15:55 -0700
Hello, Birders.
Here's a sneak preview of the "Featured Photo" in the May/June 2014 issue of 
Birding magazine: 

http://blog.aba.org/2014/05/featured-photo-may-june-2014-birding.html
It will just be a little while longer until Tom Johnson's definitive analysis 
appears in print. In the meantime, I thought it would be fun to tackle the 
challenge of gnatcatchers not in breeding/adult/male plumages. 

Enjoy!
Ted Floyd
Lafayette, Boulder County, Colorado, USA 		 	   		  
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Help with Catharus species seen in Northern Arizona
From: "Mike O'Keeffe" <okeeffeml AT EIRCOM.NET>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 19:14:20 +0100
Jason,

 

Thanks for confirming that the same bird was indeed involved in all the
shots.  I have just been testing out the use of a Grey Card for white
balancing in a forest setting.  So a possible solution to help eliminate
those dull forest images (and two bird theories) linked below.

 

http://birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2014/05/grey-card-test-foliage-ca
nopy.html

 

Regards

 

Mike O'Keeffe

Ireland

 

From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Jason A Wilder
Sent: 27 May 2014 23:26
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Help with Catharus species seen in Northern Arizona

 

Hi all,

  I just wanted to send my appreciation to all those who chimed in on the
Catharus thrush that I sent along last week - the consensus is very strong
that it is a Swainson's Thrush. Many wondered if the photos were all of the
same bird. I am very confident that they are, in fact, all one bird. We
watched the individual move from dense understory (typical thrush lighting)
to mid canopy (brighter dappled light), to long looks at the bird on an
exposed perch in full sun.  I suspect that many of the apparent differences
between photos are caused by the very different lighting conditions as the
bird moved from place to place. I learned a lot from this bird and the
comments on this forum, so thanks much to all.

 

Best,

Jason Wilder

Flagstaff, AZ

 

From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Lethaby, Nick
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 9:20 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Help with Catharus species seen in Northern Arizona

 

I get to see quite a few russet-backed Swainson's Thrushes in fall and I
have noted a fair amount of variation in upperparts tone with some birds
being noticeably colder-toned than others. Olive-backed Thrushes are very
rare on the Farallones so it's highly unlikely that these duller birds are
Olive-backed.
 
 
Reid Martin <  upupa AT AIRMAIL.NET> wrote:
 

Dear Jason/All,

I agree with Tony that lighting is misleading us on some of the pics of this
bird, and that if they are all of the same bird, then it is a Swainson's.
In fact, if you zoom-in on the following pic you can see that P6 (the first
visible P-tip back well back from the wing apex, which is P7+P8 about the
same length) completely lacks any emargination.  Only Swainson's lacks
emargination on P6:

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14240001544/in/set-72157644729623
426

 

Cheers,

Martin

 

---

Martin Reid

San Antonio

  www.martinreid.com

 

 

 

 

On May 21, 2014, at May 21, 7:04 PM, Jason A Wilder wrote:

 

Hello all,

  I am seeking help with a Catharus thrush seen in Pasture Canyon, near Tuba
City Arizona today, May 21 2014. The bird appears to be a candidate for
Gray-cheeked Thrush based on its plain gray face, thin white eyering, lack
of buffy lores, and evenly gray upperparts. The bird was seen well in
multiple lights and photographed extensively, and seemed quite different
than two nearby Swainson's Thrushes.

  A link to discussion of the bird is here:

http://azbird.net/sightings/showthread.php?tid=7287

  And a Flickr album with 10 photos is here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/sets/72157644729623426

  Any thoughts on the identity of this bird would be greatly appreciated.
Additional photos are available if needed.

 

Thanks,

Jason Wilder

Flagstaff, AZ

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


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

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

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


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Paul R Wood/UK/TLS/PwC is out of the office.
From: Paul Wood <paul.r.wood AT UK.PWC.COM>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 06:21:55 +0100
I will be out of the office from 27/05/2014 until 02/06/2014.

I will respond to your message when I return.




Note: This is an automated response to your message BIRDWG01 Digest - 23
May 2014 to 27 May 2014 (#2014-85) sent on 28/05/2014 06:00:41. This is the
only notification you will receive while this person is away.

______________________________________________________________________


-------------------- End of message text --------------------
PwC is proud to support the UK Government's GREAT Festivals of Creativity, 
helping drive growth and investment for British business. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you are 
not the addressee, please delete the email and do not use it in any way. 
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP does not accept or assume responsibility for any use 
of or reliance on this email by anyone, other than the intended addressee to 
the extent agreed in the relevant contract for the matter to which this email 
relates (if any). PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP is a limited liability partnership 
registered in England under registered number OC303525, with its registered 
address at 1 Embankment Place, London WC2N 6RH. It is authorised and regulated 
by the Financial Conduct Authority for designated investment business. PwC may 
monitor outgoing and incoming emails and other telecommunications on its email 
and telecommunications systems; by replying to this email you give your consent 
to such monitoring. 

----------------------------------------------------------------
Visit our website http://www.pwc.com/uk




Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Help with Catharus species seen in Northern Arizona
From: Jason A Wilder <Jason.Wilder AT NAU.EDU>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 22:26:05 +0000
Hi all,
 I just wanted to send my appreciation to all those who chimed in on the 
Catharus thrush that I sent along last week - the consensus is very strong that 
it is a Swainson's Thrush. Many wondered if the photos were all of the same 
bird. I am very confident that they are, in fact, all one bird. We watched the 
individual move from dense understory (typical thrush lighting) to mid canopy 
(brighter dappled light), to long looks at the bird on an exposed perch in full 
sun. I suspect that many of the apparent differences between photos are caused 
by the very different lighting conditions as the bird moved from place to 
place. I learned a lot from this bird and the comments on this forum, so thanks 
much to all. 


Best,
Jason Wilder
Flagstaff, AZ

From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification 
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Lethaby, Nick 

Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 9:20 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Help with Catharus species seen in Northern Arizona


I get to see quite a few russet-backed Swainson's Thrushes in fall and I have 
noted a fair amount of variation in upperparts tone with some birds being 
noticeably colder-toned than others. Olive-backed Thrushes are very rare on the 
Farallones so it's highly unlikely that these duller birds are Olive-backed. 






Reid Martin > wrote:


Dear Jason/All,
I agree with Tony that lighting is misleading us on some of the pics of this 
bird, and that if they are all of the same bird, then it is a Swainson's. In 
fact, if you zoom-in on the following pic you can see that P6 (the first 
visible P-tip back well back from the wing apex, which is P7+P8 about the same 
length) completely lacks any emargination. Only Swainson's lacks emargination 
on P6: 


https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14240001544/in/set-72157644729623426

Cheers,
Martin

---
Martin Reid
San Antonio
www.martinreid.com




On May 21, 2014, at May 21, 7:04 PM, Jason A Wilder wrote:


Hello all,
 I am seeking help with a Catharus thrush seen in Pasture Canyon, near Tuba 
City Arizona today, May 21 2014. The bird appears to be a candidate for 
Gray-cheeked Thrush based on its plain gray face, thin white eyering, lack of 
buffy lores, and evenly gray upperparts. The bird was seen well in multiple 
lights and photographed extensively, and seemed quite different than two nearby 
Swainson's Thrushes. 

 A link to discussion of the bird is here: 
http://azbird.net/sightings/showthread.php?tid=7287 

 And a Flickr album with 10 photos is here: 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/sets/72157644729623426 

 Any thoughts on the identity of this bird would be greatly appreciated. 
Additional photos are available if needed. 


Thanks,
Jason Wilder
Flagstaff, AZ
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

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

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Thoughts on an unknown gull, SE Michigan
From: Steve Hampton <stevechampton AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 15:58:01 -0700
The icy blue scaps are fresh, not faded (like the coverts and primaries).
 This bird seems fine for Herring Gull to me.  Gull ID in late spring is
generally a bad idea, though!




On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Jerry Jourdan wrote:

> I digiscoped this gull on 21 May 2014 at Pt. Mouillee SGA in Monroe Co.,
> MI. Given the prevalence for Herring Gulls and Ring-billed Gulls, and the
> occasional Greater Black-backed Gull or Lesser Black-backed Gull, I'm
> stumped as to a possible origin for this guy. Closest I can come to is a
> possible 2nd-cycle Slaty-backed Gull - bleached individual with pale gray
> back, relatively heavy, dark bill.  Possible Glaucous X Herring hybrid?
> I'd appreciate any thoughts.
>
> http://www.pbase.com/jourdaj/image/155774553/original
>
> Jerry
> http://jerryjourdan.blogspot.com
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html




-- 
Steve Hampton
Davis, CA

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Thoughts on an unknown gull, SE Michigan
From: Jerry Jourdan <jerry.jourdan AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 12:39:21 -0400
I digiscoped this gull on 21 May 2014 at Pt. Mouillee SGA in Monroe Co.,
MI. Given the prevalence for Herring Gulls and Ring-billed Gulls, and the
occasional Greater Black-backed Gull or Lesser Black-backed Gull, I'm
stumped as to a possible origin for this guy. Closest I can come to is a
possible 2nd-cycle Slaty-backed Gull - bleached individual with pale gray
back, relatively heavy, dark bill.  Possible Glaucous X Herring hybrid?
I'd appreciate any thoughts.

http://www.pbase.com/jourdaj/image/155774553/original

Jerry
http://jerryjourdan.blogspot.com

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Help with Catharus species seen in Northern Arizona
From: "Lethaby, Nick" <nlethaby AT TI.COM>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 16:20:19 +0000
I get to see quite a few russet-backed Swainson's Thrushes in fall and I have 
noted a fair amount of variation in upperparts tone with some birds being 
noticeably colder-toned than others. Olive-backed Thrushes are very rare on the 
Farallones so it's highly unlikely that these duller birds are Olive-backed. 



Reid Martin  wrote:



Dear Jason/All,
I agree with Tony that lighting is misleading us on some of the pics of this 
bird, and that if they are all of the same bird, then it is a Swainson's. In 
fact, if you zoom-in on the following pic you can see that P6 (the first 
visible P-tip back well back from the wing apex, which is P7+P8 about the same 
length) completely lacks any emargination. Only Swainson's lacks emargination 
on P6: 


https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14240001544/in/set-72157644729623426

Cheers,
Martin

---
Martin Reid
San Antonio
www.martinreid.com





On May 21, 2014, at May 21, 7:04 PM, Jason A Wilder wrote:

Hello all,
 I am seeking help with a Catharus thrush seen in Pasture Canyon, near Tuba 
City Arizona today, May 21 2014. The bird appears to be a candidate for 
Gray-cheeked Thrush based on its plain gray face, thin white eyering, lack of 
buffy lores, and evenly gray upperparts. The bird was seen well in multiple 
lights and photographed extensively, and seemed quite different than two nearby 
Swainsons Thrushes. 

 A link to discussion of the bird is here: 
http://azbird.net/sightings/showthread.php?tid=7287 

 And a Flickr album with 10 photos is here: 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/sets/72157644729623426 

 Any thoughts on the identity of this bird would be greatly appreciated. 
Additional photos are available if needed. 


Thanks,
Jason Wilder
Flagstaff, AZ
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

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

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Help with Catharus species seen in Northern Arizona
From: Reid Martin <upupa AT AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 09:52:51 -0500
Dear Jason/All,
I agree with Tony that lighting is misleading us on some of the pics of this 
bird, and that if they are all of the same bird, then it is a Swainson's. In 
fact, if you zoom-in on the following pic you can see that P6 (the first 
visible P-tip back well back from the wing apex, which is P7+P8 about the same 
length) completely lacks any emargination. Only Swainson's lacks emargination 
on P6: 


https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14240001544/in/set-72157644729623426

Cheers,
Martin

---
Martin Reid
San Antonio
www.martinreid.com





On May 21, 2014, at May 21, 7:04 PM, Jason A Wilder wrote:

> Hello all,
> I am seeking help with a Catharus thrush seen in Pasture Canyon, near Tuba 
City Arizona today, May 21 2014. The bird appears to be a candidate for 
Gray-cheeked Thrush based on its plain gray face, thin white eyering, lack of 
buffy lores, and evenly gray upperparts. The bird was seen well in multiple 
lights and photographed extensively, and seemed quite different than two nearby 
Swainsons Thrushes. 

> A link to discussion of the bird is here: 
http://azbird.net/sightings/showthread.php?tid=7287 

> And a Flickr album with 10 photos is here: 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/sets/72157644729623426 

> Any thoughts on the identity of this bird would be greatly appreciated. 
Additional photos are available if needed. 

>  
> Thanks,
> Jason Wilder
> Flagstaff, AZ
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Catharus species question
From: "Mike O'Keeffe" <okeeffeml AT EIRCOM.NET>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 14:23:48 +0100
Hi,

 

I would agree with Tony Leukering that, based on the details evident in the 
brighter images this looks fine for SWTH. I could also see why the duller 
images might appear as though there could be a different bird involved - If we 
only had thOse images to go on, the task of identifying the bird would be more 
difficult. Assuming they are of the same bird the dull, greyish appearance can 
easily be accounted for by underexposure (which de-saturates colour) and the 
natural blue and green colour casts created by shade and foliage respectively. 


 

I’d like to develop the discussion on this and difficult Catharus thrushes 
generally with a couple of questions. 


 

(1) Is it possible to identify the majority of Catharus thrushes in the hand 
based on colour tones? 


(2) Would there be a benefit in having a colour profile (CP) created for 
Catharus thrushes to be able to characterise and profile difficult individuals 
along the lines of what I have proposed for Chiffchaffs here in Europe? If 
there were, I would be more than happy to create one with input from those 
familiar with the subject. 


 

Regards

 

Mike

 

Link to Summary of Colour Profile Method


http://birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2014/05/colour-profiling-from-digital-images_13.html 


 

 

 

From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification 
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Tony Leukering 

Sent: 22 May 2014 02:35
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Catharus species question

 

Hi Jason: 

 

Are you sure that all pictures are of the same bird? To me, many of the pix 
show a bird that looks just fine for Swainson's (SWTH), while others are at 
least suggestive of Gray-cheeked (GCTH). 


 

Specifically, these pix are of a card-carrying SWTH:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14217147696

https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14240001544

https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14240298085

https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14240296435

 

On the third of these (...085), you can see that the lateral throat stripes are 
brown, not black. All four of these show an obvious buffy supraloral stripe 
that is typical of SWTH and lacking on GCTH. While some GCTHs show a paler 
supraloral area, those that do tend to show a gray wedge pointing forward from 
the eye 


 

(such as https://www.flickr.com/photos/earl_reinink/9677635354),

 

rather than a line parallel to the loral line. This bird's eye rings are a bit 
thin for Olive-backed Thrush, but would be fairly typical in width for 
Russet-backed Thrush. Though the upperparts coloration looks not russet enough 
for Russet-backed, upperparts coloration on Catharus is notoriously changeable 
in even slight changes in lighting (as I noted on my essay in Colorado Birds; 


 


http://cfobirds.org/downloads/In%20the%20Scope/001%20In%20the%20Scope%20Jan%2007.pdf), 


 

so I would not be comfortable IDing this bird to subspecies.

 

I find it interesting that the three pix of a thrush that suggests GCTH are all 
in heavy shade, different from the dappled light on the bird(s) in the other 
pix. However, at least one of those -- 


 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14053688090

 

shows a pale supraloral bar much like that of SWTH. So, if you're convinced 
that all pictures are of the same bird, I'd go with SWTH. 


 

Sincerely,

 

Tony

Tony Leukering

currently Bad Axe, MI

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering/

http://aba.org/photoquiz/

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jason A Wilder 
To: quizmaster 
Sent: Wed, May 21, 2014 6:32 pm
Subject: Catharus species question

Dear Tony,

 I’m writing because I saw your article on Catharus thrushes of Colorado and 
wondered if you had thoughts on a bird seen by me and Chuck LaRue today (May 21 
2014) in Northern Arizona. The bird appears to be a candidate for Gray-cheeked 
Thrush based on its plain gray face, thin white eyering, lack of buffy lores, 
and evenly gray upperparts. The bird was seen well and photographed 
extensively, and seemed quite different than two nearby Swainson’s Thrushes. 


 A link to discussion of the bird is here: 
http://azbird.net/sightings/showthread.php?tid=7287 


 And a Flickr album with 10 photos is here: 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/sets/72157644729623426 


 Any thoughts you have on the identity of this bird would be greatly 
appreciated. 


 

Thanks,

Jason Wilder

 

 

--

Jason Wilder

Associate Professor

Director, Biomedical Science Program

Department of Biological Sciences

Northern Arizona University             928-523-5286 (phone)

Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5640                928-523-7500 (FAX)

 

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


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Catharus species question
From: Tony Leukering <greatgrayowl AT AOL.COM>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 21:34:33 -0400
Hi Jason:


Are you sure that all pictures are of the same bird? To me, many of the pix 
show a bird that looks just fine for Swainson's (SWTH), while others are at 
least suggestive of Gray-cheeked (GCTH). 



Specifically, these pix are of a card-carrying SWTH:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14217147696
https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14240001544
https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14240298085
https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14240296435


On the third of these (...085), you can see that the lateral throat stripes are 
brown, not black. All four of these show an obvious buffy supraloral stripe 
that is typical of SWTH and lacking on GCTH. While some GCTHs show a paler 
supraloral area, those that do tend to show a gray wedge pointing forward from 
the eye 



(such as https://www.flickr.com/photos/earl_reinink/9677635354),


rather than a line parallel to the loral line. This bird's eye rings are a bit 
thin for Olive-backed Thrush, but would be fairly typical in width for 
Russet-backed Thrush. Though the upperparts coloration looks not russet enough 
for Russet-backed, upperparts coloration on Catharus is notoriously changeable 
in even slight changes in lighting (as I noted on my essay in Colorado Birds; 




http://cfobirds.org/downloads/In%20the%20Scope/001%20In%20the%20Scope%20Jan%2007.pdf), 



so I would not be comfortable IDing this bird to subspecies.


I find it interesting that the three pix of a thrush that suggests GCTH are all 
in heavy shade, different from the dappled light on the bird(s) in the other 
pix. However, at least one of those -- 



https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/14053688090


shows a pale supraloral bar much like that of SWTH. So, if you're convinced 
that all pictures are of the same bird, I'd go with SWTH. 



Sincerely,


Tony


Tony Leukering
currently Bad Axe, MI

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering/

http://aba.org/photoquiz/



-----Original Message-----
From: Jason A Wilder 
To: quizmaster 
Sent: Wed, May 21, 2014 6:32 pm
Subject: Catharus species question



Dear Tony,
 I’m writing because I saw your article on Catharus thrushes of Colorado and 
wondered if you had thoughts on a bird seen by me and Chuck LaRue today (May 21 
2014) in Northern Arizona. The bird appears to be a candidate for Gray-cheeked 
Thrush based on its plain gray face, thin white eyering, lack of buffy lores, 
and evenly gray upperparts. The bird was seen well and photographed 
extensively, and seemed quite different than two nearby Swainson’s Thrushes. 

 A link to discussion of the bird is here: 
http://azbird.net/sightings/showthread.php?tid=7287 

 And a Flickr album with 10 photos is here: 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/sets/72157644729623426 

 Any thoughts you have on the identity of this bird would be greatly 
appreciated. 

 
Thanks,
Jason Wilder
 
 
--
Jason Wilder
Associate Professor
Director, Biomedical Science Program
Department of Biological Sciences
Northern Arizona University             928-523-5286 (phone)
Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5640                928-523-7500 (FAX)
 




Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Help with Catharus species seen in Northern Arizona
From: Jason A Wilder <Jason.Wilder AT NAU.EDU>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 00:04:52 +0000
Hello all,
 I am seeking help with a Catharus thrush seen in Pasture Canyon, near Tuba 
City Arizona today, May 21 2014. The bird appears to be a candidate for 
Gray-cheeked Thrush based on its plain gray face, thin white eyering, lack of 
buffy lores, and evenly gray upperparts. The bird was seen well in multiple 
lights and photographed extensively, and seemed quite different than two nearby 
Swainson's Thrushes. 

 A link to discussion of the bird is here: 
http://azbird.net/sightings/showthread.php?tid=7287 

 And a Flickr album with 10 photos is here: 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/37893733 AT N06/sets/72157644729623426 

 Any thoughts on the identity of this bird would be greatly appreciated. 
Additional photos are available if needed. 


Thanks,
Jason Wilder
Flagstaff, AZ

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: On Colour Standards and Colour Nomenclature
From: "Mike O'Keeffe" <okeeffeml AT EIRCOM.NET>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 21:22:39 +0100
Hi,

Undeterred by earlier fails I had another go.  I think this is a better
approach and hopefully will be of use to this forum.  Comments both on and
off the forum as always welcome.
 
http://birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2014/05/birders-colour-pallet.htm
l 

Regards

Mike O'Keeffe
Ireland

www.birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: David Sibley <sibleyguides AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 14:51:22 -0400
Continuing the discussion of pigments:

Yes, an absence of red-brown can account for the white covert edges, and an 
increase in black-gray can account for the darker gray breast and head, and 
even the gray rear supercilum and smooth gradation from gray rear malar to 
white near the bill. 


But having a few gray feathers at the back of the eye, which are normally 
white, so that the pale lower eye arc is shorter than normal, is a much more 
precise and subtle kind of melanism than usual. 


And on the back the dark streaks are too narrow, and the pale areas are too 
uniform and brown (two pale stripes should be whitish). This requires a slight 
increase in brown and a slight reduction in black, while the wing coverts and 
neck and breast seem to show the opposite! And the subtle shading and normal 
look of it is just not the way pigment abnormalities usually show up. 


Im not saying that it is a hybrid, I agree that it looks generally 
Dickcissel-like and I cant see any other species in it. Pigments may be the 
answer, but the pigment issues are very unusual and complex, and still make me 
shake my head and search for some other explanation. 


David Sibley
Concord, MA


On May 17, 2014, at 1:05 PM, Peter Pyle  wrote:

> Hi Tony -
> 
> I agree first-cycle (SY) based on the worn brown primary coverts and molt
> limit. The retained outer 5 greater coverts are juvenal and I see no signs
> of a prealternate molt. The median coverts have all been replaced
> (formative), along with the inner greater coverts. IF a Dickcissel, it
> would not surprise me too much to see molt limits like this in a few
> birds, as occurs in some Setophaga warblers in which the great majority of
> individuals replace all coverts but some (<5%) will retain up to half or
> more of the outer feathers. The teritials and rectrices were all retained,
> which would equate with fewer greaters replaced in a Dickcissel.
> 
> I can't add to the species ID, except that Dickcissel was also my
> immediate first thought.
> 
> Peter
> 
>> All:
>> 
>> I've looked at this thing some more, with field guides and Pyle (1997) in
>> hand, and I just don't see this thing being anything but the freakiest
>> Dickcissel that I can imagine, though I couldn't have imagined such prior
>> to these pix!  I just don't see Blue Grosbeak (or any other species)
>> providing all of the odd bits on this bird.  Certainly, Blue Grosbeak
>> should not provide a white upper wing bar!  As I believe that this is a
>> first-cycle bird (see below), I don't think that we can claim that an
>> adult male Dickcissel's blue-gray coloration just got out of hand.
>> 
>> First off, the picture referenced by Suzanne looks to me to be a fairly
>> typical female Dickcissel; it certainly does not show the extensive
>> blue-gray or gray-blue coloration on head, chest, sides/flanks, and rump
>> that is the oddest thing about the Ontario bird.  However, that coloration
>> is not the only odd thing about this bird.  While the pattern of the
>> median coverts is fairly typical, the coloration is just wrong, being
>> extensively white tipped, and with the outermost couple having that same
>> blue-gray aspect that is so weird on the body plumage.
>> 
>> So, if this thing is "just" a Dickcissel, it has, possibly, two
>> pigment-deposition problems: 1) the typical carotenoids producing the
>> yellow on the chest and head are missing and 2) an excess of melanin
>> deposition.  Granted, the carotenoids may have been produced and
>> deposited, but, if so, have been masked by the excess melanin deposition.
>> Then, there's that upper wing bar, which should be, at best, pale buff,
>> not bright white -- a third pigment-deposition problem?
>> 
>> Though Pyle (1997) suggests that all of the greater coverts are replaced
>> in the preformative molt and (apparently) not in the prealternate molt,
>> this bird seems to have a molt limit in that tract, with the inners being
>> fresher than the outers (though Pyle does also state that more work is
>> needed on this species' molt).  (Note that the term used in Pyle [1997] is
>> "first prebasic;" the book was published before the great alteration of
>> the HP plumage/molt system -- Howell et al. 2003.)   In addition to a
>> possible molt limit, the lack of any rufous lesser coverts strongly
>> suggests that this bird is a second-calendar-year individual.
>> 
>> I'd be very interested to read Pyle's take on this beastie!
>> 
>> Literature Cited
>> 
>> Howell, S. N. G., C. Corben, P. Pyle, and D. I. Rogers. 2003. The first
>> basic problem: A review of molt and plumage homologies. Condor
>> 105:635-653. [abstract here --
>> 
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1370569?uid=3739728&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21103773990281). 

>> 
>> Pyle, P. 1997. Identification Guide to North American Birds, part I. Slate
>> Creek Press, Bolinas, CA.
>> 
>> 
>> Tony
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Tony Leukering
>> currently Bad Axe, MI
>> 
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering/
>> 
>> http://aba.org/photoquiz/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Suzanne Sullivan 
>> To: BIRDWG01 
>> Sent: Fri, May 16, 2014 6:13 am
>> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Mystery Passerine in Ontario
>> 
>> 
>> I think it is a female maybe a 1st year Dickcissel . If you enlarge photo
>> number three you can see slight yellow on the breast. I agree the gray is
>> a bit dark and maybe there is something else in the genes somewhere, but
>> it also seems like a pretty big leap. I don't have to many of my own
>> photos but in a quick google search I found several very close to this
>> bird. Here is a link to one photo
>> http://www.ohiobirds.org/news.php?News_ID=206
>> If considering hybrid, I might suggest adding Bobolink to the mix.
>> Suzanne Sullivan
>> Wilmington ma
>> Swampy1060 AT gmail.com
>> 
>> On Thursday, May 15, 2014, Alan Wormington  wrote:
>> 
>> Kyle Blaney found and photographed this very strange passerine at Prince
>> Edward Point, Ontario, on May 14, 2014:
>> 
>> http://tinyurl.com/mmjk8v8
>> 
>> It has been suggested that it might be a "Townsend's Bunting (Spiza
>> townsendi)" one of five of Audubon's mystery birds that have never been
>> confirmed.  But for this entity a specimen actually exists (now at the
>> Smithsonian).  The specimen's true identity is still not confirmed, but
>> suggested IDs include Blue Grosbeak X Dickcissel, or simply a Dickcissel
>> lacking the usual normal carotenoid pigments.
>> 
>> Any ideas on the bird at Prince Edward Point are most welcome.
>> 
>> Alan Wormington
>> Leamington, Ontario
>> 
>> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Suzanne M. Sullivan
>> Wilmington, MA
>> swampy435 AT gmail.com
>> 
>> Be the Voice of the River
>> http://www.ipswichriver.org
>> 
>> Please support me in Buzz for a Cure
>> http://my.e2rm.com/PersonalPage.aspx?registrationID=2319868&langPref=en-CA
>> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>> 
>> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>> 
> 
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: Peter Pyle <ppyle AT BIRDPOP.ORG>
Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 13:05:39 -0400
Hi Tony -

I agree first-cycle (SY) based on the worn brown primary coverts and molt
limit. The retained outer 5 greater coverts are juvenal and I see no signs
of a prealternate molt. The median coverts have all been replaced
(formative), along with the inner greater coverts. IF a Dickcissel, it
would not surprise me too much to see molt limits like this in a few
birds, as occurs in some Setophaga warblers in which the great majority of
individuals replace all coverts but some (<5%) will retain up to half or
more of the outer feathers. The teritials and rectrices were all retained,
which would equate with fewer greaters replaced in a Dickcissel.

I can't add to the species ID, except that Dickcissel was also my
immediate first thought.

Peter

> All:
>
> I've looked at this thing some more, with field guides and Pyle (1997) in
> hand, and I just don't see this thing being anything but the freakiest
> Dickcissel that I can imagine, though I couldn't have imagined such prior
> to these pix!  I just don't see Blue Grosbeak (or any other species)
> providing all of the odd bits on this bird.  Certainly, Blue Grosbeak
> should not provide a white upper wing bar!  As I believe that this is a
> first-cycle bird (see below), I don't think that we can claim that an
> adult male Dickcissel's blue-gray coloration just got out of hand.
>
> First off, the picture referenced by Suzanne looks to me to be a fairly
> typical female Dickcissel; it certainly does not show the extensive
> blue-gray or gray-blue coloration on head, chest, sides/flanks, and rump
> that is the oddest thing about the Ontario bird.  However, that coloration
> is not the only odd thing about this bird.  While the pattern of the
> median coverts is fairly typical, the coloration is just wrong, being
> extensively white tipped, and with the outermost couple having that same
> blue-gray aspect that is so weird on the body plumage.
>
> So, if this thing is "just" a Dickcissel, it has, possibly, two
> pigment-deposition problems: 1) the typical carotenoids producing the
> yellow on the chest and head are missing and 2) an excess of melanin
> deposition.  Granted, the carotenoids may have been produced and
> deposited, but, if so, have been masked by the excess melanin deposition.
> Then, there's that upper wing bar, which should be, at best, pale buff,
> not bright white -- a third pigment-deposition problem?
>
> Though Pyle (1997) suggests that all of the greater coverts are replaced
> in the preformative molt and (apparently) not in the prealternate molt,
> this bird seems to have a molt limit in that tract, with the inners being
> fresher than the outers (though Pyle does also state that more work is
> needed on this species' molt).  (Note that the term used in Pyle [1997] is
> "first prebasic;" the book was published before the great alteration of
> the HP plumage/molt system -- Howell et al. 2003.)   In addition to a
> possible molt limit, the lack of any rufous lesser coverts strongly
> suggests that this bird is a second-calendar-year individual.
>
> I'd be very interested to read Pyle's take on this beastie!
>
> Literature Cited
>
> Howell, S. N. G., C. Corben, P. Pyle, and D. I. Rogers. 2003. The first
> basic problem: A review of molt and plumage homologies. Condor
> 105:635-653. [abstract here --
> 
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1370569?uid=3739728&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21103773990281). 

>
> Pyle, P. 1997. Identification Guide to North American Birds, part I. Slate
> Creek Press, Bolinas, CA.
>
>
> Tony
>
>
>
> Tony Leukering
> currently Bad Axe, MI
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering/
>
> http://aba.org/photoquiz/
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Suzanne Sullivan 
> To: BIRDWG01 
> Sent: Fri, May 16, 2014 6:13 am
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Mystery Passerine in Ontario
>
>
> I think it is a female maybe a 1st year Dickcissel . If you enlarge photo
> number three you can see slight yellow on the breast. I agree the gray is
> a bit dark and maybe there is something else in the genes somewhere, but
> it also seems like a pretty big leap. I don't have to many of my own
> photos but in a quick google search I found several very close to this
> bird. Here is a link to one photo
> http://www.ohiobirds.org/news.php?News_ID=206
> If considering hybrid, I might suggest adding Bobolink to the mix.
> Suzanne Sullivan
> Wilmington ma
> Swampy1060 AT gmail.com
>
> On Thursday, May 15, 2014, Alan Wormington  wrote:
>
> Kyle Blaney found and photographed this very strange passerine at Prince
> Edward Point, Ontario, on May 14, 2014:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/mmjk8v8
>
> It has been suggested that it might be a "Townsend's Bunting (Spiza
> townsendi)" one of five of Audubon's mystery birds that have never been
> confirmed.  But for this entity a specimen actually exists (now at the
> Smithsonian).  The specimen's true identity is still not confirmed, but
> suggested IDs include Blue Grosbeak X Dickcissel, or simply a Dickcissel
> lacking the usual normal carotenoid pigments.
>
> Any ideas on the bird at Prince Edward Point are most welcome.
>
> Alan Wormington
> Leamington, Ontario
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>
>
>
> --
> Suzanne M. Sullivan
> Wilmington, MA
> swampy435 AT gmail.com
>
> Be the Voice of the River
> http://www.ipswichriver.org
>
> Please support me in Buzz for a Cure
> http://my.e2rm.com/PersonalPage.aspx?registrationID=2319868&langPref=en-CA
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: Jeff Davis <jndavis AT UCSC.EDU>
Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 08:53:19 -0700
Structurally, this bird appears to match Dickcissel perfectly. So we are left 
having to account only for the plumage differences that David outlined. All 
those plumage anomalies can be accounted for by two mechanisms: an increase in 
gray pigments (eumelanins) and a decrease in rufous pigments (phaeomelanins). 
In other words, hypereumelanism and hypophaeomelanism. I think I see hints of 
rufous in the plumage, which is why Im not suggesting theres a complete 
absence of phaeomelanins. 


See explanations below.

On May 17, 2014, at 6:17 AM, David Sibley  wrote:

> Hi all, 
> 
> What an interesting bird! It definitely suggests Dickcissel, but there are so 
many things off in the plumage: 

> - wing covert edges whitish rather than rufous [loss of rufous pigments in an 
area with few gray pigments; hypophaeomelanism] 

> - head and especially breast too dark gray [increase in gray pigments; 
hypereumelanism] 

> - rear part of malar grayish, not white [as above]
> - scapulars not reddish enough and not streaked enough [loss of rufous 
pigments in an area where rufous and gray pigments normally comprise the 
streaks; hypophaeomelanism] 

> - streaks on back too narrow [as above]
> - flanks too dark [increase in gray pigments; hypereumelanism]
> - white arc below eye does not extend as far back as typical [as above]
> - pale supercilium too short [as above]
> - not enough yellow on throat and breast [increase in gray pigments mask the 
yellow pigments (carotenoids); hypereumelanism] 

> - dark line on lores too distinct [increase in gray pigments; 
hypereumelanism] 

> 
> The mixture of pigment abnormalities that would be required to produce this 
is just so complex, with too much melanin in some places and too little in 
others, changes in details of pattern, etc., I think a hybrid has to be in 
consideration as the simpler explanation. [The mixture of pigment abnormalities 
is not that complex; see this article, for example.] 

> 
> I cant think of a combination that fits. Dickcissel X Indigo Bunting seems 
possible, but I would expect a smaller bill. But I think its just as hard to 
explain this as a Dickcissel with pigment issues. The fact that it is so 
reminiscent of "Townsends Bunting adds to the mystery, and that both of these 
records are from places where Dickcissel is not expected A DNA test of the 
Townsends Bunting specimen could be very enlightening. 

> 
> Good Birding, 
> 
> David Sibley
> Concord, MA
> 
> On May 15, 2014, at 9:15 AM, Alan Wormington  wrote:
> 
>> Kyle Blaney found and photographed this very strange passerine at Prince 
Edward Point, Ontario, on May 14, 2014: 

>> 
>> http://tinyurl.com/mmjk8v8
>> 
>> It has been suggested that it might be a "Townsend's Bunting (Spiza 
townsendi)" one of five of Audubon's mystery birds that have never been 
confirmed. But for this entity a specimen actually exists (now at the 
Smithsonian). The specimen's true identity is still not confirmed, but 
suggested IDs include Blue Grosbeak X Dickcissel, or simply a Dickcissel 
lacking the usual normal carotenoid pigments. 

>> 
>> Any ideas on the bird at Prince Edward Point are most welcome.
>> 
>> Alan Wormington
>> Leamington, Ontario
>> 

I dont see anything about this bird that would suggest a hybrid.

Jeff Davis
Fresno, CA
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: David Sibley <sibleyguides AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 09:17:05 -0400
Hi all, 

What an interesting bird! It definitely suggests Dickcissel, but there are so 
many things off in the plumage: 

- wing covert edges whitish rather than rufous
- head and especially breast too dark gray
- rear part of malar grayish, not white
- scapulars not reddish enough and not streaked enough
- streaks on back too narrow
- flanks too dark
- white arc below eye does not extend as far back as typical
- pale supercilium too short
- not enough yellow on throat and breast
- dark line on lores too distinct

The mixture of pigment abnormalities that would be required to produce this is 
just so complex, with too much melanin in some places and too little in others, 
changes in details of pattern, etc., I think a hybrid has to be in 
consideration as the simpler explanation. 


I cant think of a combination that fits. Dickcissel X Indigo Bunting seems 
possible, but I would expect a smaller bill. But I think its just as hard to 
explain this as a Dickcissel with pigment issues. The fact that it is so 
reminiscent of "Townsends Bunting adds to the mystery, and that both of these 
records are from places where Dickcissel is not expected A DNA test of the 
Townsends Bunting specimen could be very enlightening. 


Good Birding, 

David Sibley
Concord, MA

On May 15, 2014, at 9:15 AM, Alan Wormington  wrote:

> Kyle Blaney found and photographed this very strange passerine at Prince 
Edward Point, Ontario, on May 14, 2014: 

> 
> http://tinyurl.com/mmjk8v8
> 
> It has been suggested that it might be a "Townsend's Bunting (Spiza 
townsendi)" one of five of Audubon's mystery birds that have never been 
confirmed. But for this entity a specimen actually exists (now at the 
Smithsonian). The specimen's true identity is still not confirmed, but 
suggested IDs include Blue Grosbeak X Dickcissel, or simply a Dickcissel 
lacking the usual normal carotenoid pigments. 

> 
> Any ideas on the bird at Prince Edward Point are most welcome.
> 
> Alan Wormington
> Leamington, Ontario
> 
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: Tony Leukering <greatgrayowl AT AOL.COM>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 18:23:19 -0400
All:

I've looked at this thing some more, with field guides and Pyle (1997) in hand, 
and I just don't see this thing being anything but the freakiest Dickcissel 
that I can imagine, though I couldn't have imagined such prior to these pix! I 
just don't see Blue Grosbeak (or any other species) providing all of the odd 
bits on this bird. Certainly, Blue Grosbeak should not provide a white upper 
wing bar! As I believe that this is a first-cycle bird (see below), I don't 
think that we can claim that an adult male Dickcissel's blue-gray coloration 
just got out of hand. 


First off, the picture referenced by Suzanne looks to me to be a fairly typical 
female Dickcissel; it certainly does not show the extensive blue-gray or 
gray-blue coloration on head, chest, sides/flanks, and rump that is the oddest 
thing about the Ontario bird. However, that coloration is not the only odd 
thing about this bird. While the pattern of the median coverts is fairly 
typical, the coloration is just wrong, being extensively white tipped, and with 
the outermost couple having that same blue-gray aspect that is so weird on the 
body plumage. 


So, if this thing is "just" a Dickcissel, it has, possibly, two 
pigment-deposition problems: 1) the typical carotenoids producing the yellow on 
the chest and head are missing and 2) an excess of melanin deposition. Granted, 
the carotenoids may have been produced and deposited, but, if so, have been 
masked by the excess melanin deposition. Then, there's that upper wing bar, 
which should be, at best, pale buff, not bright white -- a third 
pigment-deposition problem? 


Though Pyle (1997) suggests that all of the greater coverts are replaced in the 
preformative molt and (apparently) not in the prealternate molt, this bird 
seems to have a molt limit in that tract, with the inners being fresher than 
the outers (though Pyle does also state that more work is needed on this 
species' molt). (Note that the term used in Pyle [1997] is "first prebasic;" 
the book was published before the great alteration of the HP plumage/molt 
system -- Howell et al. 2003.) In addition to a possible molt limit, the lack 
of any rufous lesser coverts strongly suggests that this bird is a 
second-calendar-year individual. 


I'd be very interested to read Pyle's take on this beastie!

Literature Cited

Howell, S. N. G., C. Corben, P. Pyle, and D. I. Rogers. 2003. The first basic 
problem: A review of molt and plumage homologies. Condor 105:635-653. [abstract 
here -- 
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1370569?uid=3739728&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21103773990281). 


Pyle, P. 1997. Identification Guide to North American Birds, part I. Slate 
Creek Press, Bolinas, CA. 



Tony
 


Tony Leukering
currently Bad Axe, MI

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering/

http://aba.org/photoquiz/

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Suzanne Sullivan 
To: BIRDWG01 
Sent: Fri, May 16, 2014 6:13 am
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Mystery Passerine in Ontario


I think it is a female maybe a 1st year Dickcissel . If you enlarge photo 
number three you can see slight yellow on the breast. I agree the gray is a bit 
dark and maybe there is something else in the genes somewhere, but it also 
seems like a pretty big leap. I don't have to many of my own photos but in a 
quick google search I found several very close to this bird. Here is a link to 
one photo http://www.ohiobirds.org/news.php?News_ID=206 

If considering hybrid, I might suggest adding Bobolink to the mix. 
Suzanne Sullivan
Wilmington ma
Swampy1060 AT gmail.com

On Thursday, May 15, 2014, Alan Wormington  wrote:

Kyle Blaney found and photographed this very strange passerine at Prince Edward 
Point, Ontario, on May 14, 2014: 


http://tinyurl.com/mmjk8v8

It has been suggested that it might be a "Townsend's Bunting (Spiza townsendi)" 
one of five of Audubon's mystery birds that have never been confirmed. But for 
this entity a specimen actually exists (now at the Smithsonian). The specimen's 
true identity is still not confirmed, but suggested IDs include Blue Grosbeak X 
Dickcissel, or simply a Dickcissel lacking the usual normal carotenoid 
pigments. 


Any ideas on the bird at Prince Edward Point are most welcome.

Alan Wormington
Leamington, Ontario

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



-- 
Suzanne M. Sullivan
Wilmington, MA
swampy435 AT gmail.com

Be the Voice of the River
http://www.ipswichriver.org

Please support me in Buzz for a Cure
http://my.e2rm.com/PersonalPage.aspx?registrationID=2319868&langPref=en-CA
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: Jan Jorgensen <birds.jorgensen AT BLIXTMAIL.SE>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 15:29:45 -0500
Alvaro,
as you noticed the link I provided wasent really helpful at all, so 
heres a better one, if you like:

http://www.netfugl.dk/pictures.php?id=listpictures&species_id=799

JanJ

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao AT COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 12:21:02 -0700
Jan, 

 Thank you, Killian Mullarney also confirmed that it was a crazy idea. Pays
to have a crazy idea once in a while, but not this time. 

Regards, 

Alvaro

Alvaro Jaramillo
alvaro AT alvarosadventures.com
www.alvarosadventures.com

-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Jan J rgensen
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 11:49 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Mystery Passerine in Ontario

It is crazy Alvaro :-)


http://www.tarsiger.com/gallery/index.php?
lista=ok&species=88060&family=&sp=search&lang=eng&manner=&sel=3&sex=0&age=0&
year=&photo=&pic_method=0&pic_type=0&country=&place=&order=lisays_paiva+
DESC
&sel=3

JanJ

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

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: Jan Jrgensen <birds.jorgensen AT BLIXTMAIL.SE>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 13:49:13 -0500
It is crazy Alvaro :-)


http://www.tarsiger.com/gallery/index.php?
lista=ok&species=88060&family=&sp=search&lang=eng&manner=&sel=3&sex=0&age=0&

year=&photo=&pic_method=0&pic_type=0&country=&place=&order=lisays_paiva+DESC 

&sel=3

JanJ

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: Suzanne Sullivan <swampy435 AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 06:11:34 -0400
I think it is a female maybe a 1st year Dickcissel . If you enlarge photo
number three you can see slight yellow on the breast. I agree the gray is a
bit dark and maybe there is something else in the genes somewhere, but it
also seems like a pretty big leap. I don't have to many of my own photos
but in a quick google search I found several very close to this bird. Here
is a link to one photo http://www.ohiobirds.org/news.php?News_ID=206
If considering hybrid, I might suggest adding Bobolink to the mix.
Suzanne Sullivan
Wilmington ma
Swampy1060 AT gmail.com

On Thursday, May 15, 2014, Alan Wormington  wrote:

> Kyle Blaney found and photographed this very strange passerine at Prince
> Edward Point, Ontario, on May 14, 2014:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/mmjk8v8
>
> It has been suggested that it might be a "Townsend's Bunting (Spiza
> townsendi)" one of five of Audubon's mystery birds that have never been
> confirmed.  But for this entity a specimen actually exists (now at the
> Smithsonian).  The specimen's true identity is still not confirmed, but
> suggested IDs include Blue Grosbeak X Dickcissel, or simply a Dickcissel
> lacking the usual normal carotenoid pigments.
>
> Any ideas on the bird at Prince Edward Point are most welcome.
>
> Alan Wormington
> Leamington, Ontario
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>


-- 
Suzanne M. Sullivan
Wilmington, MA
swampy435 AT gmail.com

Be the Voice of the River
http://www.ipswichriver.org

Please support me in Buzz for a Cure
http://my.e2rm.com/PersonalPage.aspx?registrationID=2319868&langPref=en-CA

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Spizella sparrow in Central Park NYC May 12, 2014.
From: "dallenyc AT earthlink.net" <dallenyc@EARTHLINK.NET>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 20:47:11 -0500
Hi All,

The consensus both on and off list for the Spizella sparrow I posted about
is Clay-colored Sparrow. 

Thanks to everyone who shared their knowledge of the species with me: Nick
Lethaby, Larry DeMarch, Alvaro Jaramillo and Hugh MacGuinness. 

Until next time,

Deb Allen


Date:         Fri, 16 May 2014 00:20:30 +0000
Reply-To:     "Lethaby, Nick" 
Sender:       NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
              
From:         "Lethaby, Nick" 
Subject:      Re: Spizella sparrow in Central Park NYC May 12, 2014.
Comments: To: "dallenyc AT earthlink.net" 
In-Reply-To:  
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Deborah: While I admittedly see pretty much all my spizellas in fall, if I
saw this bird I would be pretty comfortable calling it a Clay-colored. The
main issue is the face pattern, where the combination of the strong eye-line
and very weak moustachial stripe is definitely a pro-Chipping feature. To
address a couple of the other supposed pro-Chipping feature, I would argue
the grayish-brown rump is supportive of Clay-colored. Chipping should show
an obvious contrasting, clear gray rump. The warm brown/rust in the lateral
crown stripes look fine for a Clay-colored to me and would be at the dull
extreme for Chipping. I don't see anything about the dark on the anterior of
the lateral crown stripes that looks wrong for a Clay-colored. I feel the
bird is a Clay-colored with an unusually weak moustachial stripe. One could
make an argument it's a hybrid with a Chipping based on that feature but I
see little else to support that notion. I don't see this bird at all as any
plumage of Chipping. Nick Lethaby 

-----Original Message----- From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field
Identification [mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of
dallenyc AT earthlink.net Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 3:34 PM To:
BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU Subject: [BIRDWG01] Spizella sparrow in Central
Park NYC May 12, 2014. 

--- On May 12, 2014 a bird observed at Summit Rock in Central Park, NYC was
identified as a Clay-colored Sparrow. Another sparrow present the same day
at Strawberry Fields (not observed or photographed by me) was also
identified as a Clay-colored Sparrow and there may also have been a third
report. After examining my photos of the bird at Summit Rock, I noticed that
some of the field marks contradicted the identification of Clay-colored
Sparrow, while others corroborated it. The dark eye line doesn't extend to
the lore (favors Clay-colored Sparrow). The supercilium and submoustachial
stripe are bright white (favors Clay-colored Sparrow). The median crown
stripe is white (favors Clay-colored Sparrow). The sides of the breast and
flanks are washed warm buff (favors Clay-colored Sparrow). The rump is gray,
not brown (favors Chipping Sparrow). The lateral crown stripes show a
considerable amount of rust (favors Chipping Sparrow). The anterior portion
of the lateral crown stripes appears blackish (favors Chipping Sparrow). The
moustachial stripe is weak, at best (favors Chipping Sparrow). The lower
mandible appears dusky on the distal half (favors Chipping Sparrow). The
dark malar stripe is OK for both species. Is it possible for a Chipping
Sparrow on spring migration to be in basic plumage? Could these
contradictory features indicate some degree of hybridization between
Clay-colored Sparrow and Chipping Sparrow? I'd be grateful for any comments.
Clay-colored Sparrow is very rare in spring in NYC and Long Island. Here are
the photos in a folder at photo.net:

 http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=1069376 

Click on each to enlarge. 

With thanks, Deborah Allen

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao AT COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 18:32:18 -0700
All, 

  When I saw the photos the first thing that came to my mind was Blue
Chaffinch. Not only due to color but that funky bill. I have no experience
with Blue Chaffinch, and I realize it is crazy (although I assume people
keep them) so I have no way to know if this can or cannot be a female or
immature of that species. Obviously a lot of Europeans are looking at this
list and can see clear reasons why that identification is crazy - but I just
wanted to make sure. It is crazy right? 

Alvaro

Alvaro Jaramillo
alvaro AT alvarosadventures.com
www.alvarosadventures.com

-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Chuck Sexton
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 6:17 PM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Mystery Passerine in Ontario

Rob, Tony et al.

I concur that the structure of this mystery bird is a close match to a
Dickcissel.  Before we go throwing the "H" word around, I'll have to ask:
What type of pigment aberration might cause yellows to disappear?  The
overall pattern of this bird is not too far off of a female Dickcissel and
rather further removed from a male (at least in Alternate plumage).  So this
bird is missing yellow in the head and breast region and the would-be
black-centered chestnut median coverts appear to be black-centered and
white.  I've tried to absorb all the nuances that Dave Sibley has posted
regarding the proper terminology for various color maladies but I can't yet
sort it all out.

What kind of color lack or aberration might morph a female Dickcissel into
the pattern seen in the Ontario bird?

Chuck Sexton
Austin, TX

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

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: Chuck Sexton <gcwarbler AT AUSTIN.RR.COM>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 20:16:32 -0500
Rob, Tony et al.

I concur that the structure of this mystery bird is a close match to a 
Dickcissel. Before we go throwing the H word around, Ill have to ask: What 
type of pigment aberration might cause yellows to disappear? The overall 
pattern of this bird is not too far off of a female Dickcissel and rather 
further removed from a male (at least in Alternate plumage). So this bird is 
missing yellow in the head and breast region and the would-be black-centered 
chestnut median coverts appear to be black-centered and white. Ive tried to 
absorb all the nuances that Dave Sibley has posted regarding the proper 
terminology for various color maladies but I cant yet sort it all out. 


What kind of color lack or aberration might morph a female Dickcissel into the 
pattern seen in the Ontario bird? 


Chuck Sexton
Austin, TX

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Spizella sparrow in Central Park NYC May 12, 2014.
From: "Lethaby, Nick" <nlethaby AT TI.COM>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 00:20:30 +0000
Deborah:

While I admittedly see pretty much all my spizellas in fall, if I saw this bird 
I would be pretty comfortable calling it a Clay-colored. The main issue is the 
face pattern, where the combination of the strong eye-line and very weak 
moustachial stripe is definitely a pro-Chipping feature. 


To address a couple of the other supposed pro-Chipping feature, I would argue 
the grayish-brown rump is supportive of Clay-colored. Chipping should show an 
obvious contrasting, clear gray rump. The warm brown/rust in the lateral crown 
stripes look fine for a Clay-colored to me and would be at the dull extreme for 
Chipping. I don't see anything about the dark on the anterior of the lateral 
crown stripes that looks wrong for a Clay-colored. 


I feel the bird is a Clay-colored with an unusually weak moustachial stripe. 
One could make an argument it's a hybrid with a Chipping based on that feature 
but I see little else to support that notion. I don't see this bird at all as 
any plumage of Chipping. 


Nick Lethaby

-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification 
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of dallenyc AT earthlink.net 

Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 3:34 PM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Spizella sparrow in Central Park NYC May 12, 2014.

---
On May 12, 2014 a bird observed at Summit Rock in Central Park, NYC was 
identified as a Clay-colored Sparrow. Another sparrow present the same day at 
Strawberry Fields (not observed or photographed by me) was also identified as a 
Clay-colored Sparrow and there may also have been a third report. 


After examining my photos of the bird at Summit Rock, I noticed that some of 
the field marks contradicted the identification of Clay-colored Sparrow, while 
others corroborated it. 


The dark eye line doesn't extend to the lore (favors Clay-colored Sparrow).

The supercilium and submoustachial stripe are bright white (favors Clay-colored 
Sparrow). 


The median crown stripe is white (favors Clay-colored Sparrow).

The sides of the breast and flanks are washed warm buff (favors Clay-colored 
Sparrow). 


The rump is gray, not brown (favors Chipping Sparrow). 

The lateral crown stripes show a considerable amount of rust (favors Chipping 
Sparrow). 

 
The anterior portion of the lateral crown stripes appears blackish (favors 
Chipping Sparrow). 


The moustachial stripe is weak, at best (favors Chipping Sparrow). 

The lower mandible appears dusky on the distal half (favors Chipping Sparrow). 

The dark malar stripe is OK for both species.

Is it possible for a Chipping Sparrow on spring migration to be in basic 
plumage? Could these contradictory features indicate some degree of 
hybridization between Clay-colored Sparrow and Chipping Sparrow? 


I'd be grateful for any comments. Clay-colored Sparrow is very rare in spring 
in NYC and Long Island. 


Here are the photos in a folder at photo.net:

http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=1069376

Click on each to enlarge.

With thanks,

Deborah Allen

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

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: Tony Leukering <greatgrayowl AT AOL.COM>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 20:07:51 -0400
Actually, as noted by Alan, Blue Grosbeak is a reasonable habitat candidate; 
it's in the same family; and it would provide blue, presumably. I'm not at all 
saying that that's the right answer, but it's a reasonable answer. 


Tony

 

 


Tony Leukering
currently Bad Axe, MI

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering/

http://aba.org/photoquiz/

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Parsons 
To: BIRDWG01 
Sent: Thu, May 15, 2014 8:02 pm
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Mystery Passerine in Ontario


Hi all,

The plumage is not bad for Sagebrush Sparrow, but isn't the bill too large 
and heavy for this or just about any other North American sparrow?  If for 
no other reason, the bill makes me think either odd-plumaged Dickcissel or 
Dickcissel hybrid.  If a hybrid, I wonder what species might share the 
habitat preferences to make such a hybrid possible.

Cheers,


Rob Parsons
Winnipeg, MB
CANADA
parsons8 AT mts.net

-----Original Message----- 
From: Wayne Hoffman
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 10:29 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Mystery Passerine in Ontario

Hi -

At first glance this bird seems to have quite a bit in common with Sagebrush
Sparrow.

More so than Townsend's Bunting.

Wayne Hoffman

-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Alan Wormington
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 6:16 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Mystery Passerine in Ontario

Kyle Blaney found and photographed this very strange passerine at Prince
Edward Point, Ontario, on May 14, 2014:

http://tinyurl.com/mmjk8v8

It has been suggested that it might be a "Townsend's Bunting (Spiza
townsendi)" one of five of Audubon's mystery birds that have never been
confirmed.  But for this entity a specimen actually exists (now at the
Smithsonian).  The specimen's true identity is still not confirmed, but
suggested IDs include Blue Grosbeak X Dickcissel, or simply a Dickcissel
lacking the usual normal carotenoid pigments.

Any ideas on the bird at Prince Edward Point are most welcome.

Alan Wormington
Leamington, Ontario

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

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

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

 

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: Rob Parsons <parsons8 AT MYMTS.NET>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 18:50:20 -0500
Hi all,

The plumage is not bad for Sagebrush Sparrow, but isn't the bill too large 
and heavy for this or just about any other North American sparrow?  If for 
no other reason, the bill makes me think either odd-plumaged Dickcissel or 
Dickcissel hybrid.  If a hybrid, I wonder what species might share the 
habitat preferences to make such a hybrid possible.

Cheers,


Rob Parsons
Winnipeg, MB
CANADA
parsons8 AT mts.net

-----Original Message----- 
From: Wayne Hoffman
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 10:29 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Mystery Passerine in Ontario

Hi -

At first glance this bird seems to have quite a bit in common with Sagebrush
Sparrow.

More so than Townsend's Bunting.

Wayne Hoffman

-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Alan Wormington
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 6:16 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Mystery Passerine in Ontario

Kyle Blaney found and photographed this very strange passerine at Prince
Edward Point, Ontario, on May 14, 2014:

http://tinyurl.com/mmjk8v8

It has been suggested that it might be a "Townsend's Bunting (Spiza
townsendi)" one of five of Audubon's mystery birds that have never been
confirmed.  But for this entity a specimen actually exists (now at the
Smithsonian).  The specimen's true identity is still not confirmed, but
suggested IDs include Blue Grosbeak X Dickcissel, or simply a Dickcissel
lacking the usual normal carotenoid pigments.

Any ideas on the bird at Prince Edward Point are most welcome.

Alan Wormington
Leamington, Ontario

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

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

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Spizella sparrow in Central Park NYC May 12, 2014.
From: "dallenyc AT earthlink.net" <dallenyc@EARTHLINK.NET>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 17:33:36 -0500
---
On May 12, 2014 a bird observed at Summit Rock in Central Park, NYC was
identified as a Clay-colored Sparrow. Another sparrow present the same day
at Strawberry Fields (not observed or photographed by me) was also
identified as a Clay-colored Sparrow and there may also have been a third
report. 

After examining my photos of the bird at Summit Rock, I noticed that some of
the field marks contradicted the identification of Clay-colored Sparrow,
while others corroborated it. 

The dark eye line doesn't extend to the lore (favors Clay-colored Sparrow).

The supercilium and submoustachial stripe are bright white (favors
Clay-colored Sparrow). 

The median crown stripe is white (favors Clay-colored Sparrow).

The sides of the breast and flanks are washed warm buff (favors Clay-colored
Sparrow).

The rump is gray, not brown (favors Chipping Sparrow). 

The lateral crown stripes show a considerable amount of rust (favors
Chipping Sparrow). 
 
The anterior portion of the lateral crown stripes appears blackish (favors
Chipping Sparrow). 

The moustachial stripe is weak, at best (favors Chipping Sparrow). 

The lower mandible appears dusky on the distal half (favors Chipping Sparrow). 

The dark malar stripe is OK for both species.

Is it possible for a Chipping Sparrow on spring migration to be in basic
plumage? Could these contradictory features indicate some degree of
hybridization between Clay-colored Sparrow and Chipping Sparrow?

I'd be grateful for any comments. Clay-colored Sparrow is very rare in
spring in NYC and Long Island. 

Here are the photos in a folder at photo.net:

http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=1069376

Click on each to enlarge.

With thanks,

Deborah Allen

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: Wayne Hoffman <whoffman AT PEAK.ORG>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 08:29:12 -0700
Hi - 

At first glance this bird seems to have quite a bit in common with Sagebrush
Sparrow.

More so than Townsend's Bunting.

Wayne Hoffman

-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Alan Wormington
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 6:16 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Mystery Passerine in Ontario

Kyle Blaney found and photographed this very strange passerine at Prince
Edward Point, Ontario, on May 14, 2014:

http://tinyurl.com/mmjk8v8

It has been suggested that it might be a "Townsend's Bunting (Spiza
townsendi)" one of five of Audubon's mystery birds that have never been
confirmed.  But for this entity a specimen actually exists (now at the
Smithsonian).  The specimen's true identity is still not confirmed, but
suggested IDs include Blue Grosbeak X Dickcissel, or simply a Dickcissel
lacking the usual normal carotenoid pigments.

Any ideas on the bird at Prince Edward Point are most welcome.

Alan Wormington
Leamington, Ontario

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

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Mystery Passerine in Ontario
From: Alan Wormington <wormington AT JUNO.COM>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 13:15:46 +0000
Kyle Blaney found and photographed this very strange passerine at Prince Edward 
Point, Ontario, on May 14, 2014: 


http://tinyurl.com/mmjk8v8

It has been suggested that it might be a "Townsend's Bunting (Spiza townsendi)" 
one of five of Audubon's mystery birds that have never been confirmed. But for 
this entity a specimen actually exists (now at the Smithsonian). The specimen's 
true identity is still not confirmed, but suggested IDs include Blue Grosbeak X 
Dickcissel, or simply a Dickcissel lacking the usual normal carotenoid 
pigments. 


Any ideas on the bird at Prince Edward Point are most welcome.

Alan Wormington
Leamington, Ontario

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Swifts finally sort themselves out
From: "Robert O'Brien" <baro AT PDX.EDU>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 22:57:21 -0700
A week or so ago I cooked up a Contextual Bird Quiz
based upon a bird inside my house one night/morning.
My answer/identification, gotten by others, was Black Swift.

I should have said black Swift, as pointed out by
Alvaro Jaramillo who said it looked small.  I then
actually checked a field guide to see that Black Swift
was 7 inches, too large for my 'bird in the hand',
since its wings/tail didn't extend outside my closed hand..
But, it was big, just not BIG as I stated.  And it was
black, but not Black.

So, then it seemed possible that it was a Chimney
Swift.  (One prior Oregon state record I believe).
My photo didn't show much of the body but it
did show the bill.

Now Sibley and others mention bill as one means
of differentiation.  I didn't find any really good
bill photos to compare.   But the problem was
apparently solved this afternoon when a Vaux Swift
came down the chimney, showing off his/her bill.

Actually, there are two different chimneys in my house
One for Vaux Swifts and one for Chimney Swifts, it seems.

Vaux nested in their chimney last summer.  Chimney
(if they had used their chimney before last week) were very
quiet about it.

So, these two House Birds are pleased to present their
bills at http://www2.rdrop.com/users/green/house-bird/
What do you think?

Bob OBrien

PS  The 3rd Oregon State Record for Chimney Swift happened in a large
Vaux Swift flock at a Chimney in Eugene a few days ago.

http://oschmidt.net/OwenLSchmidtLLC/CHSW.html

All covered with soot in my house, they're getting to be trash birds.

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: A New Colour Profiling Method
From: "Mike O'Keeffe" <okeeffeml AT EIRCOM.NET>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 18:13:02 +0100
Hi,

 

I am sure that if I carried out a survey most birders would consider any
meaningful colour comparisons from digital images to be impossible. I have
been reviewing the challenges involved and have come up with a methodology
which I think will work.

http://birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2014/05/colour-profiling-from-dig
ital-images.html

 

Here is an example of the method applied to Chiffchaff colour variation,
which is a particularly interesting area of study in Western Europe.  

http://birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2014/05/chiffchaff-colour-profile
-cp.html

 

I could see this method being useful for Lesser Whitethroats, Subalpine
Warblers, Reed Warblers and other similar complex groupings over here.
There is possibly a far greater number of uses for this technique in the
North American context given all the racial and clinal variation.

 

Comments as always welcome.

 

Regards

 

Mike O'Keeffe

Ireland


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Archives have returned!
From: Chuck & Jaye Otte <otte2 AT COX.NET>
Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 07:34:32 -0500
Good morning Birdxxxx subscribers!

Here in Kansas migration continues and other than needing rain, it's a 
beautiful day 

to be out birding.

Issues with the archives of the Birdxxxx lists appears to be resolved and all 
archives are again accessible. If we had set your account from NOMAIL to some 
version of mail and wish to be returned to your previous status, plese just 
drop me 

a note and let me know!!

Thank you for your patience while this issue was resolved!

Chuck Otte
Birdxxxx co-listowner

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chuck & Jaye Otte      mailto:otte2 AT cox.net
613 Tamerisk
Junction City Kansas USA 66441
785-238-8800

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: ADMIN: Archive issues and Yahoo DMARC
From: Chuck & Jaye Otte <otte2 AT COX.NET>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 21:37:57 -0500
Good evening subscribers to the NBHC family of lists!
(BirdChat, BirdEast, BirdWest, BirdCntr, BirdBand and ID Frontiers)

As you all know, these lists reside in the computers at Kansas State 
University, 

having moved there from their original home at the University of Arizona almost 
two 

years ago. Last weekend an issue developed around the web access to the 
archives. 

All the lists are still functioning, all the archives are still being kept and 
intact, they are simply temporarily unavailable through the web interface.

The KSU ListServ admins are feverishly working on this problem as are the tech 
support folks at ListServ's parent company, LSoft. Somehow a glitch has 
developed in 

the the web interface preventing anyone from accessing individual messages. I 
was 

hoping that the problem would be fixed by now, but as of yet it hasn't so 
please 

bear with us. Naturally, the folks who really need to see this message are 
those who 

are set to NOMAIL and routinely read the messages on the web interface! I take 
care 

of those messages as they come in. If you want to read the archives you can 
always 

follow along on the ABA's mirror site found at http://birding.aba.org/

On another front, many of you may be aware of some issues that have been raised 
with 

listserv messages by Yahoo and now AOL switching to DMARC protocol. This causes 
a 

whole host of problems resulting in many lists setting Yahoo and AOL 
subscribers to 

NOPOST. There are a series of possible solutions circulating around and 
hopefully 

this issue will clear up soon. 

If you have any questions about any of these issues, please drop me a note 
personally - no need to take this stuff to the list! - at this address or 
cotte AT ksu.edu

Thank you for your attention and you may now return to migration!

Chuck Otte
BirdXXXX co-listowner

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chuck & Jaye Otte      mailto:otte2 AT cox.net
613 Tamerisk
Junction City Kansas USA 66441
785-238-8800

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Molt Nomenclature with 1st Cycle Ring-billeds
From: Amar Ayyash <amarayyash AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 15:03:57 -0500
Thanks for your thorough reply, Peter. For now, I'll suppose the tertials
on the May birds are via PA1. This does seem like the best explanation.
These 1st cycles with replaced tertials (roughtly 8 out of 50 at a site
that I monitor daily) seemed to all move in together, overnight. This may
support your thought that they've come from farther south.

But I wonder if the September bird could in fact have undergone a
preformative molt.
I do think some of our Ring-billeds replace some scaps and upperwing
coverts twice in 1st cycle. I say this because some 1st cycles are now
showing very fresh gray scaps and upperwing coverts mixed in with what
appear to be older, post-juvenile, scapulars and upperwing coverts. I'll
post photos of this when I get a better set.

In any case, I wanted to share this set of 1st cycle Ring-billeds showing
various aspects to their folded primaries (late April). Some are fresh and
black, and some are very worn and faded brown - but all 1st generation:

http://goo.gl/pm8n7K

Best,
Amar Ayyash


On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Peter Pyle  wrote:

>  Thanks for this, Peter.
>
> Having done a bit more research I now agree that it is best considered an
> HY (1cy) having undergone an extensive post-juvenile molt (PF/PA1) by 27
> September. In particular, there's an open-wing specimen at the Slater site
> taken on 9 September that has already replaced many wing coverts,
> approaching Amar's bird on molt and otherwise resembling the wing pattern:
> 
http://digitalcollections.pugetsound.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/slaterwing/id/14159/rec/16 

>
> I agree that the outer primaries are juvenile, I was just thinking that
> they could have been abnormally fresh-looking on a September 2cy, but I
> also agree that this would not be usual. Some of the May birds at Amar's
> site (e.g., the second down on the right: http://goo.gl/uN5w9w) seem to
> have retained fresher juvenile primaries but, yes, it's doubtful that they
> would remain this fresh through late September.
>
> Peter
>
> At 09:27 AM 5/7/2014, Peter Adriaens wrote:
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> I think I can no longer post to the list as I have a Yahoo address, so
> here is a quick private reply on that September Ring-billed Gull 
(https://plus.google.com/photos/103465823166118508417/albums/5805641748365374961/5797867273596879858?pid=5797867273596879858&oid=103465823166118508417): 

>
> Note that this bird has juvenile primaries. In Ring-billed and Common
> Gulls, non-juvenile primaries never show such a neatly pointed tip
> ("spike"), even when heavily worn. But the primaries of this bird are not
> worn, they are actually very fresh. The shape at the tips somewhat reminds
> me of the "spikes" seen on fresh Phylloscopus  warblers in autumn, like
> Arctic Warbler, for example. In addition, the scattered brown lesser wing
> coverts are also juvenile feathers, and are not too excessively worn nor
> bleached.
> Therefore, this bird must have hatched not too long ago when the photo was
> taken. It cannot be a 2nd calendar year, as in that case its remaining
> juvenile feathers would have been a complete mess.
>
> Kind regards,
> Peter
>
>
> At 08:30 AM 5/7/2014, Peter Pyle wrote:
>
> Hello Amar and all -
>
> The May birds have replaced the tertials during the inserted first-cycle
> molt(s). Although tertials are among the earliest feathers replaced during
> prebasic molts, at earliest the single middle tertial should have been
> growing or replaced by the time p1 drops. That 3-4 replaced tertials are
> fully grown before p1 has dropped (in at least the one bird with open
> wings) indicates that they had been replaced previously during the winter.
>
> In gulls and shorebirds, the extent of inserted first-cycle molts
> correlates well with how far south an individual bird goes for winter, and
> a possibility is that these May birds had wintered near the southern end
> of the winter range in Mexico or the Caribbean, farther south than occurs
> in most other North American gulls. Most birds wintering in the U.S.
> appear not to replace tertials. This might explain why first-cycle tertial
> replacement had not been detected before or documented in the literature.
> Good discovery!
>
> We don't have enough information yet to resolve first-cycle nomenclature
> in gulls. Originally (Howell et al. 2003), we presumed that in birds with
> a single first-cycle molt but also prealternate molts in adults (species
> undergoing the "Simple Alternate Strategy") that the first-cycle molt
> should be considered the first prealternate rather than a preformative
> molt. But in actuality what we name it should depend on how it evolved
> from ancestral taxa. I suspect in Ring-billed and other LWH gulls this
> molt has evolved from a merging of ancestral preformative and prealternate
> molts. It is also possible that some feathers are replaced twice,
> indicating that both preformative and prealternate molts are still
> occurring. The 2nd, 3rd, and definitive prealternate molt in gulls can
> begin in fall, so based on comparisons between ages, it does seem that
> considering these replaced tertials as first-alternate feathers may be the
> best we can do for now.
>
> The September bird cannot be explained as a longer-distant migrant that
> had undergone a more-extensive first-cycle molt on the winter grounds. It
> seems very far advanced for an HY (1cy), and I would give some
> consideration to it being an SY (2cy) undergoing the second prebasic molt.
> It may have wintered farther north, explaining the relatively fresh
> juvenal primaries at this age and later timing to a PB2, and I think the
> bill color can also be matched by some birds undergoing the PB2. The
> secondaries seem too bleached for an HY and there appears to be two
> generations of gray upperpart feathers, more worn gray wing coverts
> (inserted first-cycle) and fresher gray back feathers and tertials
> (new/incoming second-basic). If you have additional images of this bird
> I'd be interested in considering its molt and plumage further.
>
> Peter
>
>
> At 06:47 PM 5/6/2014, Amar Ayyash wrote:
> Hi, all. Back in September 2012, I photographed a 1st cycle Ring-billed
> Gull (HY) that had replaced several upper tertials. The post-juvenile molt
> was rather advanced in this bird, evidenced by complete scapular
> replacement and a considerable amount of upperwing covert replacement.
> Here's that bird again:
>
>   http://goo.gl/uei2Xu
>
> At the time, it was suggested by several individuals that the tertials
>
> were replaced in the first prealternate molt (or perhaps the preformative
> molt...more study needed in this regard). Although not unheard of, the
> molt stage was somewhat exceptional as Ring-billeds, reportedly, don't
> replace tertials in this molt (=PA1/PF).
>
> My inquiry is with regards to 1st cycle (SY) Ring-billeds that are showing
> renewed upperwing coverts and tertials, now, in early May. Below you'll
> find photos of very fresh and recently grown tertials (and upperwing
> coverts); You'll notice these feathers show sub-adult-like brown wash in
> their centers, but are edged with neat white edges.
>
> Picasa Web Albums - Amar Ayyash - 1st Cycle RBG...
> image
> Picasa Web Albums - Amar Ayyash - 1st Cycle RBG...
> Photos by Amar Ayyash, May 6, 2014
> View on picasaweb.google.com
> Preview by Yahoo
>
> Seeing that these individuals still have all of their juvenile primaries
> (first basic), what molt produced the newer tertials and upperwing
> coverts? Is this the result of a late first prealternate molt (PA1), or is
> this the result of an early second prebasic molt (PB2)? Or neither? Are
> both molts overlapping? I'm particularly interested in learning of any
> explanation for the renewed tertials. Thanks in advance!
>
> Amar Ayyash
> Frankfort, IL. USA
>  http://www.anythinglarus.com/
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>
>
>  Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Molt Nomenclature with 1st Cycle Ring-billeds
From: Peter Pyle <ppyle AT BIRDPOP.ORG>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 11:01:12 -0700
Thanks for this, Peter.

Having done a bit more research I now agree that it is best 
considered an HY (1cy) having undergone an extensive post-juvenile 
molt (PF/PA1) by 27 September. In particular, there's an open-wing 
specimen at the Slater site taken on 9 September that has already 
replaced many wing coverts, approaching Amar's bird on molt and 
otherwise resembling the wing pattern:

http://digitalcollections.pugetsound.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/slaterwing/id/14159/rec/16 


I agree that the outer primaries are juvenile, I was just thinking 
that they could have been abnormally fresh-looking on a September 
2cy, but I also agree that this would not be usual. Some of the May 
birds at Amar's site (e.g., the second down on the right: 
http://goo.gl/uN5w9w) seem to have retained 
fresher juvenile primaries but, yes, it's doubtful that they would 
remain this fresh through late September.

Peter

At 09:27 AM 5/7/2014, Peter Adriaens wrote:
>Hi Peter,
>
>I think I can no longer post to the list as I have a Yahoo address, 
>so here is a quick private reply on that September Ring-billed Gull 

>(https://plus.google.com/photos/103465823166118508417/albums/5805641748365374961/5797867273596879858?pid=5797867273596879858&oid=103465823166118508417): 

>
>
>Note that this bird has juvenile primaries. In Ring-billed and 
>Common Gulls, non-juvenile primaries never show such a neatly 
>pointed tip ("spike"), even when heavily worn. But the primaries of 
>this bird are not worn, they are actually very fresh. The shape at 
>the tips somewhat reminds me of the "spikes" seen on fresh 
>Phylloscopus  warblers in autumn, like Arctic Warbler, for example. 
>In addition, the scattered brown lesser wing coverts are also 
>juvenile feathers, and are not too excessively worn nor bleached.
>Therefore, this bird must have hatched not too long ago when the 
>photo was taken. It cannot be a 2nd calendar year, as in that case 
>its remaining juvenile feathers would have been a complete mess.
>
>Kind regards,
>Peter

At 08:30 AM 5/7/2014, Peter Pyle wrote:
>Hello Amar and all -
>
>The May birds have replaced the tertials during the inserted first-cycle
>molt(s). Although tertials are among the earliest feathers replaced during
>prebasic molts, at earliest the single middle tertial should have been
>growing or replaced by the time p1 drops. That 3-4 replaced tertials are
>fully grown before p1 has dropped (in at least the one bird with open
>wings) indicates that they had been replaced previously during the winter.
>
>In gulls and shorebirds, the extent of inserted first-cycle molts
>correlates well with how far south an individual bird goes for winter, and
>a possibility is that these May birds had wintered near the southern end
>of the winter range in Mexico or the Caribbean, farther south than occurs
>in most other North American gulls. Most birds wintering in the U.S.
>appear not to replace tertials. This might explain why first-cycle tertial
>replacement had not been detected before or documented in the literature.
>Good discovery!
>
>We don't have enough information yet to resolve first-cycle nomenclature
>in gulls. Originally (Howell et al. 2003), we presumed that in birds with
>a single first-cycle molt but also prealternate molts in adults (species
>undergoing the "Simple Alternate Strategy") that the first-cycle molt
>should be considered the first prealternate rather than a preformative
>molt. But in actuality what we name it should depend on how it evolved
>from ancestral taxa. I suspect in Ring-billed and other LWH gulls this
>molt has evolved from a merging of ancestral preformative and prealternate
>molts. It is also possible that some feathers are replaced twice,
>indicating that both preformative and prealternate molts are still
>occurring. The 2nd, 3rd, and definitive prealternate molt in gulls can
>begin in fall, so based on comparisons between ages, it does seem that
>considering these replaced tertials as first-alternate feathers may be the
>best we can do for now.
>
>The September bird cannot be explained as a longer-distant migrant that
>had undergone a more-extensive first-cycle molt on the winter grounds. It
>seems very far advanced for an HY (1cy), and I would give some
>consideration to it being an SY (2cy) undergoing the second prebasic molt.
>It may have wintered farther north, explaining the relatively fresh
>juvenal primaries at this age and later timing to a PB2, and I think the
>bill color can also be matched by some birds undergoing the PB2. The
>secondaries seem too bleached for an HY and there appears to be two
>generations of gray upperpart feathers, more worn gray wing coverts
>(inserted first-cycle) and fresher gray back feathers and tertials
>(new/incoming second-basic). If you have additional images of this bird
>I'd be interested in considering its molt and plumage further.
>
>Peter
>
>
>At 06:47 PM 5/6/2014, Amar Ayyash wrote:
>Hi, all. Back in September 2012, I photographed a 1st cycle Ring-billed
>Gull (HY) that had replaced several upper tertials. The post-juvenile molt
>was rather advanced in this bird, evidenced by complete scapular
>replacement and a considerable amount of upperwing covert replacement.
>Here's that bird again:
>
>  http://goo.gl/uei2Xu
>
>At the time, it was suggested by several individuals that the tertials
>were replaced in the first prealternate molt (or perhaps the preformative
>molt...more study needed in this regard). Although not unheard of, the
>molt stage was somewhat exceptional as Ring-billeds, reportedly, don't
>replace tertials in this molt (=PA1/PF).
>
>My inquiry is with regards to 1st cycle (SY) Ring-billeds that are showing
>renewed upperwing coverts and tertials, now, in early May. Below you'll
>find photos of very fresh and recently grown tertials (and upperwing
>coverts); You'll notice these feathers show sub-adult-like brown wash in
>their centers, but are edged with neat white edges.
>
>Picasa Web Albums - Amar Ayyash - 1st Cycle RBG...
>image
>Picasa Web Albums - Amar Ayyash - 1st Cycle RBG...
>Photos by Amar Ayyash, May 6, 2014
>View on picasaweb.google.com
>Preview by Yahoo
>
>Seeing that these individuals still have all of their juvenile primaries
>(first basic), what molt produced the newer tertials and upperwing
>coverts? Is this the result of a late first prealternate molt (PA1), or is
>this the result of an early second prebasic molt (PB2)? Or neither? Are
>both molts overlapping? I'm particularly interested in learning of any
>explanation for the renewed tertials. Thanks in advance!
>
>Amar Ayyash
>Frankfort, IL. USA
>http://www.anythinglarus.com/
>
>Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Molt Nomenclature with 1st Cycle Ring-billeds
From: Amar Ayyash <amarayyash AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 10:27:53 -0500
Hi, all. Back in September 2012, I photographed a 1st cycle Ring-billed
Gull (HY) that had replaced several upper tertials. The post-juvenile molt
was rather advanced in this bird, evidenced by complete scapular
replacement and a considerable amount of upperwing covert replacement.
Here's that bird again:

goo.gl/uei2Xu

At the time, it was suggested by several people that the tertials were
replaced in the first prealternate molt (or perhaps the preformative
molt...more study needed in this regard). Although not unheard of, the molt
stage was somewhat exceptional as Ring-billeds, reportedly, don't replace
tertials in this molt (=PA1/PF).

My inquiry is with regards to 1st cycle (SY) Ring-billeds that are showing
renewed upperwing coverts and tertials, now, in early May. Below you'll
find photos of very fresh and recently grown tertials (and upperwing
coverts); You'll notice these feathers show sub-adult-like brown wash in
their centers, but are edged with neat white edges - very recently replaced!

http://goo.gl/uN5w9w

Seeing that these individuals still have all of their juvenile primaries
(first basic), what molt produced the newer tertials and upperwing coverts?
Is this the result of a late first prealternate molt (PA1), or is this the
result of an early second prebasic molt (PB2)? Or neither? Are both molts
overlapping? I'm particularly interested in learning of any explanation for
the renewed tertials. Thanks in advance.

Amar Ayyash
Frankfort IL, USA
www.anythinglarus.com

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Molt Nomenclature with 1st Cycle Ring-billeds
From: Peter Pyle <ppyle AT BIRDPOP.ORG>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 11:30:57 -0400
Hello Amar and all -

The May birds have replaced the tertials during the inserted first-cycle
molt(s). Although tertials are among the earliest feathers replaced during
prebasic molts, at earliest the single middle tertial should have been
growing or replaced by the time p1 drops. That 3-4 replaced tertials are
fully grown before p1 has dropped (in at least the one bird with open
wings) indicates that they had been replaced previously during the winter.

In gulls and shorebirds, the extent of inserted first-cycle molts
correlates well with how far south an individual bird goes for winter, and
a possibility is that these May birds had wintered near the southern end
of the winter range in Mexico or the Caribbean, farther south than occurs
in most other North American gulls. Most birds wintering in the U.S.
appear not to replace tertials. This might explain why first-cycle tertial
replacement had not been detected before or documented in the literature.
Good discovery!

We don't have enough information yet to resolve first-cycle nomenclature
in gulls. Originally (Howell et al. 2003), we presumed that in birds with
a single first-cycle molt but also prealternate molts in adults (species
undergoing the "Simple Alternate Strategy") that the first-cycle molt
should be considered the first prealternate rather than a preformative
molt. But in actuality what we name it should depend on how it evolved
from ancestral taxa. I suspect in Ring-billed and other LWH gulls this
molt has evolved from a merging of ancestral preformative and prealternate
molts. It is also possible that some feathers are replaced twice,
indicating that both preformative and prealternate molts are still
occurring. The 2nd, 3rd, and definitive prealternate molt in gulls can
begin in fall, so based on comparisons between ages, it does seem that
considering these replaced tertials as first-alternate feathers may be the
best we can do for now.

The September bird cannot be explained as a longer-distant migrant that
had undergone a more-extensive first-cycle molt on the winter grounds. It
seems very far advanced for an HY (1cy), and I would give some
consideration to it being an SY (2cy) undergoing the second prebasic molt.
It may have wintered farther north, explaining the relatively fresh
juvenal primaries at this age and later timing to a PB2, and I think the
bill color can also be matched by some birds undergoing the PB2. The
secondaries seem too bleached for an HY and there appears to be two
generations of gray upperpart feathers, more worn gray wing coverts
(inserted first-cycle) and fresher gray back feathers and tertials
(new/incoming second-basic). If you have additional images of this bird
I'd be interested in considering its molt and plumage further.

Peter


At 06:47 PM 5/6/2014, Amar Ayyash wrote:
Hi, all. Back in September 2012, I photographed a 1st cycle Ring-billed
Gull (HY) that had replaced several upper tertials. The post-juvenile molt
was rather advanced in this bird, evidenced by complete scapular
replacement and a considerable amount of upperwing covert replacement.
Here's that bird again:

 http://goo.gl/uei2Xu

At the time, it was suggested by several individuals that the tertials
were replaced in the first prealternate molt (or perhaps the preformative
molt...more study needed in this regard). Although not unheard of, the
molt stage was somewhat exceptional as Ring-billeds, reportedly, don't
replace tertials in this molt (=PA1/PF).

My inquiry is with regards to 1st cycle (SY) Ring-billeds that are showing
renewed upperwing coverts and tertials, now, in early May. Below you'll
find photos of very fresh and recently grown tertials (and upperwing
coverts); You'll notice these feathers show sub-adult-like brown wash in
their centers, but are edged with neat white edges.

Picasa Web Albums - Amar Ayyash - 1st Cycle RBG...
image
Picasa Web Albums - Amar Ayyash - 1st Cycle RBG...
Photos by Amar Ayyash, May 6, 2014
View on picasaweb.google.com
Preview by Yahoo

Seeing that these individuals still have all of their juvenile primaries
(first basic), what molt produced the newer tertials and upperwing
coverts? Is this the result of a late first prealternate molt (PA1), or is
this the result of an early second prebasic molt (PB2)? Or neither? Are
both molts overlapping? I'm particularly interested in learning of any
explanation for the renewed tertials. Thanks in advance!

Amar Ayyash
Frankfort, IL. USA
http://www.anythinglarus.com/

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