Birdingonthe.Net Recent Postings from Frontiers of Identification > Home > Mail > Alerts Updated on Monday, February 8 at 08:01 AM ET The most recently received Mail is at the top.	Hendersons Ground Jay,©Tony Disley

8 Feb Re: More Florida gulls ["Norman D.van Swelm" ] 8 Feb Re: Y-f or Western Gull? [Jim Pike ] 8 Feb More Florida gulls [John Puschock ] 7 Feb Re: Y-f or Western Gull? [] 7 Feb Y-f or Western Gull? [Terry Walsh ] 7 Feb gnatcatcher ? Quinta Mazlatan, McAllen, TX [Pat Reilly ] 6 Feb BIRDING ISRAEL [Daniel Roca ] 4 Feb address Austin Reed ["Norman D.van Swelm" ] 4 Feb Re: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia [Ryan Terrill ] 4 Feb Re: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia ["Norman D.van Swelm" ] 3 Feb sobering thoughts ["Kevin J. McGowan" ] 3 Feb Re: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia [Jesse Ellis ] 3 Feb Re: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia ["Geoffrey A. Williamson" ] 3 Feb Re: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia [Oscar Johnson ] 3 Feb Re: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia [vireo ] 3 Feb Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia [Nathan Farnau ] 2 Feb Re: Glaucous or Nelson's? [bill elrick ] 3 Feb Re: Glaucous or Nelson's? ["Norman D.van Swelm" ] 1 Feb Re: Kuala Lumpur bird? [Graham Etherington ] 31 Jan Kuala Lumpur bird? [Ian Paulsen ] 30 Jan Goshawk [Brush Freeman ] 30 Jan Accipiter response per Jerry Liguori [Julian Hough ] 30 Jan Re: An Accipiter the experts can not agree on! [Will Russell ] 30 Jan Two interesting gulls from Georgia, USA this week [Ken Blankenship ] 30 Jan Re: An Accipiter the experts can not agree on! [Brian Sullivan ] 30 Jan N. GA summer juvenile hawk on ground [Roy Brown ] 30 Jan Reminder [Brush Freeman ] 30 Jan DEJU, more pink than usual for a Georgia bird [Roy Brown ] 30 Jan An Accipiter the experts can not agree on! [Brush Freeman ] 28 Jan Re: Request for Mew (Common) Gull records from NA [Phil Davis ] 28 Jan Request for Mew (Common) Gull records from NA [Jim Pawlicki ] 28 Jan 1986-87 Winter Empidonax record from TN ["K. Dean Edwards" ] 28 Jan Possible Owl ID [Robbie LaCelle ] 28 Jan European-bred Glossy Ibis found in Trinidad and Tobago [Graham Etherington ] 28 Jan Re: Britain has a new birdlist ["Norman D.van Swelm" ] 26 Jan Glaucous or Nelson's? [bill elrick ] 26 Jan Re: Britain has a new birdlist [Peter Adriaens ] 26 Jan Re: Britain has a new birdlist and the 2nd ed.of Collins'Bird guide is out. At last! [Des McKenzie ] 25 Jan Re: Britain has a new birdlist and the 2nd ed.of Collins'Bird guide is out. At last! ["Norman D.van Swelm" ] 25 Jan Re: Britain has a new birdlist and the 2nd ed.of Collins'Bird guide is out. At last! [Des McKenzie ] 25 Jan Bird ID content in January 2010 issue of Birding [Ted Floyd ] 24 Jan Re: Britain has a new birdlist and the 2nd ed.ofCollins'Bird guide is out. At last! [Alan Dean ] 24 Jan Britain has a new birdlist and the 2nd ed.of Collins'Bird guide is out. At last! ["Norman D.van Swelm" ] 23 Jan Herring Gull gallery [Kevin McGowan ] 23 Jan Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ ["Norman D.van Swelm" ] 22 Jan Ole One-Foot ["hhorne AT earthlink.net" ] 21 Jan Re: ol one foot. [Rob Parsons ] 21 Jan ol one foot. [Alvaro Jaramillo ] 21 Jan possible adult european herring gull, [Alain cote ] 21 Jan Re: Clark's Grebe or not? [Steven Mlodinow ] 21 Jan Re: Clark's Grebe or not? [Kevin Karlson ] 21 Jan Re: Clark's Grebe or not? [Joseph Morlan ] 21 Jan Re: Clark's Grebe or not? [Kevin Karlson ] 20 Jan Possible Mew Gull or ? [Bill Boyle ] 20 Jan Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags [Andrew Kratter ] 19 Jan Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags [Kevin McGowan ] 19 Jan Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags ["Lethaby, Nick" ] 19 Jan Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags [Joseph Morlan ] 19 Jan Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags [Kevin McGowan ] 19 Jan Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags [Joseph Morlan ] 19 Jan Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags [Peter Pyle ] 19 Jan Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags [Peter Pyle ] 19 Jan Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags [Jean Iron ] 19 Jan Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags [Angus Wilson ] 19 Jan Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags ["Lethaby, Nick" ] 19 Jan Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags [Kevin McGowan ] 19 Jan Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags [Ned Keller ] 19 Jan Re: Northern Wheatear Specimen, Age and Sex? ["Norman D.van Swelm" ] 18 Jan Northern Wheatear Specimen, Age and Sex? [Walter M Szeliga ] 17 Jan Arctic Loon G.a.artica/Black-throated Loonr vs. G.a.viridularis in winter: Separable? ["Jim Barton" ] 17 Jan Arctic Loon G.a.artica/Black-throated Loonr vs. G.a.viridularis in winter: Separable? [Jim Barton ] 15 Jan Re: Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ [Jean Iron ] 15 Jan Re: Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ [Karl Bardon ] 15 Jan Re: Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ [] 15 Jan Re: Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ ["Lethaby, Nick" ] 15 Jan Re: Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ [Tony Leukering ] Subject: Re: More Florida gulls From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm AT WXS.NL> Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 15:01:03 +0100 Great pictures! Hereunder you'll find some links with some more tail-patterns. Some of your gulls may be Atlantic Gulls from the Iberian peninsula such as the one on Martin Reid's site. Cheers, Norman http://www.radioactiverobins.com/gulls/atlanticgulls/atlanticyellow-leggedgulls1.htm http://www.radioactiverobins.com/sterns/gibraltar-fuengirola-dec07-jan2007/larus%20atl%20gibraltar%20picks%20olives.htm http://www.radioactiverobins.com/gulls/indexyellow-leggedgulls.htm http://www.radioactiverobins.com/gulls/lessrblkbackedgull-gallery/index--Lesser%20Black-backed%20Gull.htm John Puschock wrote: >I recently did some gulling at Daytona Beach Shores and the Brevard Dump in central Florida. Unlike last year, I didn't find a bunch of pseudo-Euro Herring Gulls. This year it was a bunch of Lesser Black-backed-like gulls with a lot of white in their tails. Some look like they could possibly be Yellow-leggeds. I'm not saying they are. I'm just looking for some opinions. I've put together a page with 27 or so gulls for you to peruse and provide guesses as to what species some of these are: http://www.zbirdtours.com/brevard_gulls.htm. There are a lot of photos on this page, so if you have a slow connection it may take a while to load. Most of the photos have been reduced in size to speed up download times, but I can provide larger copies and additional photos of most gulls for those interested in torturing themselves. Not every gull on the page is a mystery gull. I've included more or less indisputable Lesser Black-backed Gulls as reference material. As I said, there were a lot of gulls with a lot of white in their tails. In other words, the black tail band is narrower than what may be regarded as typical for a Lesser Black-backed. On the other hand, a search of Lesser Black-backed photos on Flickr and PBase yields a few such gulls, though these appear to be a small minority. Gull E on my page has a narrow black tail band, but it also appears to have a small head and no inner primary window, so it seems unlikely to be something other than a Lesser Black-backed. On the other hand, there are some gulls, such as A and D, that do have inner primary windows and larger bills, and Gull M/O/V first caught my attention due to its apparent large size, about equal to nearby Herring Gulls. So how common are narrow black tail bands in Lesser Black-backeds? Gull S and the last gull on the page, the Daytona Beach Shores mystery gull, both have pale areas in the subterminal region on the outer webs of the inner primaries. I've seen this feature in photos of some Herring Gulls, including the Florida pseudo-Euros, and at least one gull labeled as a Yellow-legged http://www.flickr.com/photos/dominicmitchell/4057996310/, but does this ever occur on Lesser Black-backeds? Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Y-f or Western Gull? From: Jim Pike <jpike44 AT EARTHLINK.NET> Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 00:57:36 -0700 Hi, Based primarily on the size and shape of the bill on bird #2, I'd say it is a second-cycle Yellow-footed Gull. Jim Pike Huntington Beach, CA Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: More Florida gulls From: John Puschock <g_g_allin AT HOTMAIL.COM> Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 05:53:46 +0000 Howdy, I recently did some gulling at Daytona Beach Shores and the Brevard Dump in central Florida. Unlike last year, I didn't find a bunch of pseudo-Euro Herring Gulls. This year it was a bunch of Lesser Black-backed-like gulls with a lot of white in their tails. Some look like they could possibly be Yellow-leggeds. I'm not saying they are. I'm just looking for some opinions. I've put together a page with 27 or so gulls for you to peruse and provide guesses as to what species some of these are: http://www.zbirdtours.com/brevard_gulls.htm. There are a lot of photos on this page, so if you have a slow connection it may take a while to load. Most of the photos have been reduced in size to speed up download times, but I can provide larger copies and additional photos of most gulls for those interested in torturing themselves. Not every gull on the page is a mystery gull. I've included more or less indisputable Lesser Black-backed Gulls as reference material. As I said, there were a lot of gulls with a lot of white in their tails. In other words, the black tail band is narrower than what may be regarded as typical for a Lesser Black-backed. On the other hand, a search of Lesser Black-backed photos on Flickr and PBase yields a few such gulls, though these appear to be a small minority. Gull E on my page has a narrow black tail band, but it also appears to have a small head and no inner primary window, so it seems unlikely to be something other than a Lesser Black-backed. On the other hand, there are some gulls, such as A and D, that do have inner primary windows and larger bills, and Gull M/O/V first caught my attention due to its apparent large size, about equal to nearby Herring Gulls. So how common are narrow black tail bands in Lesser Black-backeds? Gull S and the last gull on the page, the Daytona Beach Shores mystery gull, both have pale areas in the subterminal region on the outer webs of the inner primaries. I've seen this feature in photos of some Herring Gulls, including the Florida pseudo-Euros, and at least one gull labeled as a Yellow-legged (http://www.flickr.com/photos/dominicmitchell/4057996310/), but does this ever occur on Lesser Black-backeds? John Puschock Seattle, WA g_g_allin AT hotmail.com Chuck Norris doesn't chase birds. He pursues them. _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469230/direct/01/ Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Y-f or Western Gull? From: greatgrayowl AT AOL.COM Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 17:46:46 -0500 Terry et al.: The first-cycle would almost have to be a Western, as a Yellow-footed of nearly a year in age should have most of a dark, adult-like mantle. The subadult bird, I need to study some more. Tony Leukering Villas, NJ -----Original Message----- From: Terry Walsh To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Sent: Sun, Feb 7, 2010 4:05 pm Subject: [BIRDWG01] Y-f or Western Gull? Can anyone hazard an opinion on whether these two gulls I photographed at San Jose del Cabo on the southern tip of Baja California last week are Yellow-footed or Western Gulls? Leg color of both was kinda flesh-colored. http://www.flickr.com/photos/47324581 AT N02/sets/72157623248630079/ Thanks, Terry Walsh Zionsville, IN, USA Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Y-f or Western Gull? From: Terry Walsh <taw327 AT ATT.NET> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 16:05:47 -0500 Can anyone hazard an opinion on whether these two gulls I photographed at San Jose del Cabo on the southern tip of Baja California last week are Yellow-footed or Western Gulls? Leg color of both was kinda flesh-colored. http://www.flickr.com/photos/47324581 AT N02/sets/72157623248630079/ Thanks, Terry Walsh Zionsville, IN, USA Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: gnatcatcher ? Quinta Mazlatan, McAllen, TX From: Pat Reilly <fridaysmum AT YAHOO.COM> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 10:31:08 -0700 http://albums.phanfare.com/4062156/4469165#imageID=87962978 Wondering which gnatcatcher this is seen Feb. 6, 2010 at QM. Very pale gray with little (no) white on tail feathers. Last year's blue-gray? Three pics may be seen at the above link. Sorry no good pics of the tail...he was moving quite fast. In the "Winter" album, last 3 pics. Thanks!!! Pat Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: BIRDING ISRAEL From: Daniel Roca <danielroca AT LIVE.COM> Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 21:12:50 +0100 Hi everyone, Certainly, many, many people have already been on a birding trip to Israel; others will be planning on it; not many countries like that to birdwatch in the WP. We were there last december. Now, if you feel like it, you can watch the short video BIRDING ISRAEL, following this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSSYiS0lGhc Or you can access the "Cldntstndthwthr" Youtube channel. This video is dedicated to all the people who know the thrill of a birding trip, those who, like us, have an unavoidable and everlasting interest for ornithology. HIGH VOLUME and nice quality sound is a must, as the music demands it. Enjoy. Comments welcome! Daniel Roca Barcelona _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969 Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: address Austin Reed From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm AT WXS.NL> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 19:36:54 +0100 Can anyone help me to contact Austin Reed, Canadian expert on Eiders. The address I have: Subject: Re: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia From: Ryan Terrill <enicurus AT YAHOO.COM> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 07:49:41 -0800 Here are the photos of the Santa Cruz RBGU that Oscar mentioned. http://toxostoma.com/RBGU010907.html Ryan S. Terrill Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm AT WXS.NL> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 10:30:35 +0100 These birds are no doubt soiled with coal dust. We have plenty Herring- and Lesser Black-backed Gulls like this in the Port of Rotterdam. Cheers, Norman Geoffrey A. Williamson wrote: > We see gray-washed Ring-billed Gulls along Lake Michigan near Chicago > on a fairly regular basis, typically in the summer months. See > http://home.comcast.net/~geoffrey.williamson/soiled_ribgul.html > > for some photographs. My text on this web page indicates oiling or > soiling as the "most likely" cause of the coloration, but I don't really > have any solid evidence of it. My opinion was based mostly on the fact > that although many of the birds are very evenly colored gray, some have a > blotchy appearance that in spots looks like a dollop of some substance, > and sometimes blobs of substance are present on the feet and legs. > > Some dates I have for these type of gulls are > 14 May 1997 > 2 July 2001 (3 of 235 on one Chicago beach showing the gray) > 19 June 2007 (4 of 288 "gray soiled" on another Chicago beach) > > Sincerely, > Geoff Williamson > Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. > > At 05:46 AM 2/3/2010, you wrote: >>I found an odd adult Ring-billed Gull at Gould's Inlet (St. Simons Island, >>GA) on 10-Jan-2010. >> >>Take a look at the images below. Melanistic? Physically stained? >> >>http://www.gos.org/sightings/Other/rbgu.htm >> >>Has anyone seen this kind of darkening in an otherwise typical adult RBGU >>(or other species for that >>matter)? >> >>Nathan Farnau >>East Atlanta (DeKalb County) Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: sobering thoughts From: "Kevin J. McGowan" <kjm2 AT CORNELL.EDU> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 17:29:23 -0500 As if gulls weren't tricky enough. My son, Jay, just posted photos of an interesting gull at http://picasaweb.google.com/jmcgowan57/Winter20092010#5433309088583694066 http://picasaweb.google.com/jmcgowan57/Winter20092010#5433309119654455154 Herring Gull, of course, but with totally asymmetrically marked wings. What would you have called it if you had only seen the right wing? Kevin **************************************************** Ithaca, NY 14850 kjm2 AT cornell.edu http://birds.cornell.edu/crows/ Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia From: Jesse Ellis <calocitta8 AT GMAIL.COM> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 14:16:30 -0600 Just on the basis of the linked photos, it doesn't seem to me that those birds are soiled. For all of them, even for the original post's darkish bird, the pattern of coloration seems extremely consistent from feather to feather, rather not what you would expect from a stain. Wouldn't a staining factor at least show some variation across the body, from feather to feather? It could be some kind of transient deposition in the plumage (ala shimp pink seen in small gulls) but I've not heard of anything causing grey. I'm not an expert on gulls by any means, just going on what's in the photos. Jesse Ellis Zoology University of Wisconsin - Madison On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Geoffrey A. Williamson < geoffrey.williamson AT comcast.net> wrote: > We see gray-washed Ring-billed Gulls along Lake Michigan near Chicago on a > fairly regular basis, typically in the summer months. See > http://home.comcast.net/~geoffrey.williamson/soiled_ribgul.html > > for some photographs. My text on this web page indicates oiling or soiling > as the "most likely" cause of the coloration, but I don't really have any > solid evidence of it. My opinion was based mostly on the fact that although > many of the birds are very evenly colored gray, some have a blotchy > appearance that in spots looks like a dollop of some substance, and > sometimes blobs of substance are present on the feet and legs. > > Some dates I have for these type of gulls are > 14 May 1997 > 2 July 2001 (3 of 235 on one Chicago beach showing the gray) > 19 June 2007 (4 of 288 "gray soiled" on another Chicago beach) > > Sincerely, > Geoff Williamson > Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. > > > At 05:46 AM 2/3/2010, you wrote: > >> I found an odd adult Ring-billed Gull at Gould's Inlet (St. Simons Island, >> GA) on 10-Jan-2010. >> >> Take a look at the images below. Melanistic? Physically stained? >> >> http://www.gos.org/sightings/Other/rbgu.htm >> >> Has anyone seen this kind of darkening in an otherwise typical adult RBGU >> (or other species for that >> matter)? >> >> Nathan Farnau >> East Atlanta (DeKalb County) >> >> >> Join or Leave BIRDWG01: >> http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 >> >> Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html >> > > Geoffrey A. Williamson > geoffrey.williamson AT comcast.net > > > > Join or Leave BIRDWG01: > http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > > Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html > -- Jesse Ellis Madison, Dane Co, WI Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia From: "Geoffrey A. Williamson" <geoffrey.williamson AT COMCAST.NET> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 10:16:54 -0600 We see gray-washed Ring-billed Gulls along Lake Michigan near Chicago on a fairly regular basis, typically in the summer months. See http://home.comcast.net/~geoffrey.williamson/soiled_ribgul.html for some photographs. My text on this web page indicates oiling or soiling as the "most likely" cause of the coloration, but I don't really have any solid evidence of it. My opinion was based mostly on the fact that although many of the birds are very evenly colored gray, some have a blotchy appearance that in spots looks like a dollop of some substance, and sometimes blobs of substance are present on the feet and legs. Some dates I have for these type of gulls are 14 May 1997 2 July 2001 (3 of 235 on one Chicago beach showing the gray) 19 June 2007 (4 of 288 "gray soiled" on another Chicago beach) Sincerely, Geoff Williamson Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. At 05:46 AM 2/3/2010, you wrote: >I found an odd adult Ring-billed Gull at Gould's Inlet (St. Simons >Island, GA) on 10-Jan-2010. > >Take a look at the images below. Melanistic? Physically stained? > >http://www.gos.org/sightings/Other/rbgu.htm > >Has anyone seen this kind of darkening in an otherwise typical adult >RBGU (or other species for that >matter)? > >Nathan Farnau >East Atlanta (DeKalb County) > > >Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > >Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Geoffrey A. Williamson geoffrey.williamson AT comcast.net Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia From: Oscar Johnson <henicorhina AT YAHOO.COM> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 07:39:47 -0800 There is a rather gray adult Ring-billed Gull that has been frequenting beaches in Santa Cruz for a few years now. It is not as dark as the Georgia bird, but has the under parts approximately the same shade of gray as the back of a typical Ring-billed. Other than the gray below it looks to be a typical Ring-billed. Good birding Oscar Johnson Santa Cruz, California ________________________________ From: vireo To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 5:00:22 AM Subject: Re: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia Many years ago (late 80s), Jim Granlund and I found a rich, dark gray adult Ring-billed Gull along the Lake Michigan shore in N Indiana. Unlike the Georgia bird, the gray was very even and only present in the plumage and was clearly not staining. The orbital ring was bright red and the legs and bill were intense yellow. I would describe the coloring of this bird as just overall more intense. We initially thought we had a Gray Gull, but other than the coloring, the bird was totally Ring-billed. Good birding, Dave David Powell Phoenix, AZ vireo AT vireos.com -----Original Message----- From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification [mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Nathan Farnau Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 4:46 AM To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: [BIRDWG01] Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia I found an odd adult Ring-billed Gull at Gould's Inlet (St. Simons Island, GA) on 10-Jan-2010. Take a look at the images below. Melanistic? Physically stained? http://www.gos.org/sightings/Other/rbgu.htm Has anyone seen this kind of darkening in an otherwise typical adult RBGU (or other species for that matter)? Nathan Farnau East Atlanta (DeKalb County) Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia From: vireo <vireo AT VIREOS.COM> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 06:00:22 -0700 Many years ago (late 80s), Jim Granlund and I found a rich, dark gray adult Ring-billed Gull along the Lake Michigan shore in N Indiana. Unlike the Georgia bird, the gray was very even and only present in the plumage and was clearly not staining. The orbital ring was bright red and the legs and bill were intense yellow. I would describe the coloring of this bird as just overall more intense. We initially thought we had a Gray Gull, but other than the coloring, the bird was totally Ring-billed. Good birding, Dave David Powell Phoenix, AZ vireo AT vireos.com -----Original Message----- From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification [mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Nathan Farnau Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 4:46 AM To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: [BIRDWG01] Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia I found an odd adult Ring-billed Gull at Gould's Inlet (St. Simons Island, GA) on 10-Jan-2010. Take a look at the images below. Melanistic? Physically stained? http://www.gos.org/sightings/Other/rbgu.htm Has anyone seen this kind of darkening in an otherwise typical adult RBGU (or other species for that matter)? Nathan Farnau East Atlanta (DeKalb County) Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Dark Ring-billed Gull, Glynn County, Georgia From: Nathan Farnau <natwan AT HOTMAIL.COM> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 04:46:06 -0700 I found an odd adult Ring-billed Gull at Gould's Inlet (St. Simons Island, GA) on 10-Jan-2010. Take a look at the images below. Melanistic? Physically stained? http://www.gos.org/sightings/Other/rbgu.htm Has anyone seen this kind of darkening in an otherwise typical adult RBGU (or other species for that matter)? Nathan Farnau East Atlanta (DeKalb County) Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Glaucous or Nelson's? From: bill elrick <belrick AT OPTONLINE.NET> Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 20:13:23 -0500 Norman, The second of your gulls on that page >>http://www.radioactiverobins.com/gulls/arcticgull/arcticgull.htm<< looks more like the one I saw but may be even a little darker than mine It's sort of funny but almost everyone who saw this very large gull, that was fierce enough to chase Greater black-backed off a carcass thought it was a Glaucous. On the other hand everyone who saw the photos decided it was a Nelson's type. I thank everyone for their thoughts but I never did get what I wanted. That being a cutoff point where we can say for sure it's not a dark Juv Glaucous gull. Bill Elrick Wyckoff NJ 07481 Skype me as " Bilbander " belrick AT NYNJBirdingGuide.com http://nynjbirdingguide.com/ From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification [mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Norman D.van Swelm Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 6:12 PM To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Glaucous or Nelson's? I wonder if the arrival of Bill's Nelson gull was associated with a specific kind of weather. I too had a gull like that again last week. It arrived while NW wind blew arctic air down into the North Sea area, if only we knew where they were born! Have a look here: http://www.radioactiverobins.com/gulls/arcticgull/arcticgull.htm Cheers, Norman Bill Elrick writes: >I observed a 1st winter Glaucous gull type bird in Northern NJ, USA, on the 19th of Jan 2010. I don't normally take photos of birds but did a few digi-scopes of this one through a kowa ts -884 and a hand held a Cannon Power shot sd1000 to the scope at about 100ft. The photos make the bird look a little darker than it did in real life. I watched the bird fly and the primaries were not dark but the tips had brownish spots. The question I have is, what would be a good rule of thumb to separate a dark 1st year Glaucous gull that makes it become a Hybrid "Nelson's type". I know this is not an easy question but would the bird have to be smaller, have darker primaries with buff spots, light primaries with dark spots or is there something else that could be definitive in this ID. Photos are here >> http://photos.nynjbirdingguide.com/GalleryThumbnails.aspx?gallery=307003 << though as I said I am not a photographer and only tried to take photos because it was a darker than a normal Glaucous gull. The photos make the bird even darker so please try and compensate. Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Glaucous or Nelson's? From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm AT WXS.NL> Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 00:12:06 +0100 I wonder if the arrival of Bill's Nelson gull was associated with a specific kind of weather. I too had a gull like that again last week. It arrived while NW wind blew arctic air down into the North Sea area, if only we knew where they were born! Have a look here: http://www.radioactiverobins.com/gulls/arcticgull/arcticgull.htm Cheers, Norman Bill Elrick writes: >I observed a 1st winter Glaucous gull type bird in Northern NJ, USA, on the 19th of Jan 2010. I don't normally take photos of birds but did a few digi-scopes of this one through a kowa ts -884 and a hand held a Cannon Power shot sd1000 to the scope at about 100ft. The photos make the bird look a little darker than it did in real life. I watched the bird fly and the primaries were not dark but the tips had brownish spots. The question I have is, what would be a good rule of thumb to separate a dark 1st year Glaucous gull that makes it become a Hybrid "Nelson's type". I know this is not an easy question but would the bird have to be smaller, have darker primaries with buff spots, light primaries with dark spots or is there something else that could be definitive in this ID. Photos are here >> http://photos.nynjbirdingguide.com/GalleryThumbnails.aspx?gallery=307003 << though as I said I am not a photographer and only tried to take photos because it was a darker than a normal Glaucous gull. The photos make the bird even darker so please try and compensate. Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Kuala Lumpur bird? From: Graham Etherington <britishbirder AT GMAIL.COM> Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 10:53:54 +0000 Hi Ian, This looks like Yellow-vented Bulbul, one of the most abundant birds in the Malaysian Peninsula and commonly found in built-up areas. http://www.flickr.com/photos/magforce/4303814868/ Best wishes, Graham Etherington On 1 February 2010 07:03, Ian Paulsen wrote: > HI ALL: >  A relative sent to me this photo of a bird from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: > > http://sites.google.com/site/birdbookerphotos/ > > I was wondering which species it is? > > sincerely > -- > > Ian Paulsen > Bainbridge Island, WA, USA > " Which just goes to show that a >  passion for books is extremely unhealthy." >  from Cornelia Funke's "Inkheart". > > > Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > > Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html > -- Dr. Graham Etherington Norwich, UK Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Kuala Lumpur bird? From: Ian Paulsen <birdbooker AT ZIPCON.NET> Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 23:03:26 -0800 HI ALL: A relative sent to me this photo of a bird from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: http://sites.google.com/site/birdbookerphotos/ I was wondering which species it is? sincerely -- Ian Paulsen Bainbridge Island, WA, USA " Which just goes to show that a passion for books is extremely unhealthy." from Cornelia Funke's "Inkheart". Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Goshawk From: Brush Freeman <brushf AT EARTHLINK.NET> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 15:31:05 -0600 Thanks for the comments so far...I just sincerely hope that those who are/were POSITIVE on the NOGO ID will come forward with their case as well, as I damn sure do not want this to be one sided with this one may tight group, , no offense of course, and as I said I can but hoped I definitely want the otherside who also "helped" confuse the issue for me/us come forward as well....You folks know I have your names :-)..and explain your points. ID is hard enough on large accipiters as it is and you should present what I consider your valid observations!....No one is going to eat you up, and I think some of your thoughts were highly valuable....I don't want to see the OPINIONs of the first responders derail yours. Brush Freeman brushf AT earthlink.net Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Accipiter response per Jerry Liguori From: Julian Hough <jrhough1 AT SNET.NET> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 15:57:23 -0500 Below is a response from Jerry Liguori, author of the excellent raptor id. guide, "Hawks from Every Angle", that he asked me to post on his behalf. An easy one....Coop for sure. The eye-line and upperwing can confuse people but it is often shown on Coops....especially when they are worn but even in fresh plumage. I attached a bunch of Coops showing this, some are my own pics but others are ones I pulled off the internet over the years. The head shape (round in front), narrow streaking to body, white (not buff) upperwing coverts and lack of grayish and buffy tones to upperside, lack of facial disk goshawks show, etc. When I originally saw this photo it was placed in between 2 goshawks at the same size, Which made the Cooper's look huge. In fact, I don't see one clear-cut goshawk trait on this bird, and Wheeler agrees completely. Also, I just sent you 2 photos of juvenile Red-shouldered Hawks with red on the outer tail at the base. Jerry I cannot add anything else to the above, or to the latest post by Will Russell that clearly state why the bird is a Cooper's and not a Goshawk Julian Hough New Haven, CT, USA jrhough1 AT snet.net www.naturescapeimages.net Jerry -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. Get it now. Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: An Accipiter the experts can not agree on! From: Will Russell <willrussell AT COMCAST.NET> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:38:18 -0700 I wonder why there is surprise that a single somewhat soft profile image of a large juv. accipiter should prove perplexing, but I see very little in the photo to suggest N. Goshawk. Having scheduled over the last decade and one-half annual late October trips to Duluth, MN (and having made most of them) specifically to look at goshawks, I have never seen one with such light and restricted underpart streaking. Having said that I know such birds exist (there is an image of one in Brian Wheeler's, Raptors of Western North America) but they must be extremely rare; the odds of one in the Coastal Bend of Texas where any N. Goshawk would be extraordinary seems vanishingly small. In addition I can see nothing solid that's atypical for Cooper's Hawk. The supercilium is on the bold side but at least in Arizona, I often see birds like thus. Other aspects that I might like to study are either hidden or subject to multiple interpretations. This bird looks unusually bulky but the lower belly feathers appear as if they've been in water suggesting that the bird might have been bathing, and large female Cooper's can be very large indeed. If any of the real N. Goshawk students - the likes of Frank Nicoletti, Brian Wheeler, Karl Barden, and Jerry Liguori for example - think this bird is a N. Goshawk I wish they would weigh in. Will Russell willrussell AT comcast.net Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Two interesting gulls from Georgia, USA this week From: Ken Blankenship <kenhblankenship AT COMCAST.NET> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:32:23 -0700 This photographs of a THAYER'S GULL were taken in Georgia, USA on 26 January 2010 at West Point Lake dam (the same location as the recently deceased Ivory Gull). The bird was well-photographed, but was not known to be such a rarity in the state by some observers. The only other documented record for GA was at the same location several years ago. Comments appreciated: confirmation, discussion, etc. Here is a gallery by Michael Todd featuring the best known photos of the bird: http://www.pbase.com/mctodd/ga_ivory_and_thayers_gull Yesterday, 29 January 2010, another interesting gull was located at Lake Walter F. George dam, about 2 hours south of the previous location (quite amazingly, by the same observer who found the Ivory Gull - Walt Chambers). Walt says: "When I first saw it from the parking area near the lock, it looked very much like a 1st winter California. But hard tell from way off. However, a worker named "Clyde" was kind enough to let me in and take some photos after it flew over the dam and below the dam. It does have many California characteristics, but it's certainly not a textbook bird... The big marker is the bill. It's hard to tell if it's deformed, broken, etc. but is a bit odd. I've gotten opinions form a couple of others so far, but will get more. Anyway, Jim Flynn has posted some of my pics on the GOS website at this link: http://www.gos.org/sightings/Other/WFGgull-20100129.htm Just throwing it out there, any other thoughts are certainly welcome!" As always, especially with gulls, all of the expert opinions from this ListServ are greatly appreciated! Ken Blankenship Marietta, GA (Cobb County) USA Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: An Accipiter the experts can not agree on! From: Brian Sullivan <heraldpetrel AT GMAIL.COM> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 11:27:57 -0800 Brush et al. To me this bird is a clear-cut Cooper's Hawk. It has a bolder than average supercilium for Cooper's, but many show this, however it is not bold enough or flaring behind the eye like most Northern Goshawks. The head pattern is wrong for Goshawk, which usually show a well-defined Harrier-like facial disk, often with distinct rusty "ear coverts". The underparts clearly favor Cooper's, being lightly marked overall with rufous-brown streaks, especially lacking on the belly. While a few Goshawks can approximate this pattern, it is highly atypical. The white spotting on the upperwing coverts is often shown by Coop; Goshawks usually have more bold buffy-edged (not narrow rufous fringed) upperwing coverts creating a notable tawny-buff wingbar, and a generally more 'spangled' appearance above. Structure looks fine for a big female Coop to me. Brian Sullivan On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Brush Freeman wrote: > Dear all: I hesitant to present this as I have done so repeatedly to > individuals across the US and Canada, but have reached the point I have > thrown my hand up and can not realistically respond to the myriad of > individual posts and thoughts or keep the datelines correct on those. I am > stunned and perplexed by the answers I have recd;Ed on this animal to the > point that I just do not who is correct given the HUGE expertise that has > weighed in so here is the bird with very little comment from me. > > I will say only the bird was quite large, quite tame and ate Collared > Doves mostly. It was present from Dec. 28 -Jan 8, 2010, in Port O'Connor > Texas. > > Not to bias anyone thoughts but I have rec'ed two ID from some the best > know North American authors and ornithologists whose names are common > household names, raptour experts and authors...and many others that have > worked with one or both of these species years over many years. I am not > going to provide their thoughts here as to not bias anyone. > > There are a number that are POSITIVE this is a Cooper's Hawk > There are even more that are POSITIVE this is a Goshawk > 2 calm perhaps a hybrid > There are a number more who ride the fence. > > My head is dizzy with the opinions so pass it on to someone else to take > a crack at. > > Here is the single photo that has been commented on. > *http://tiny.cc/xixQS* > If you have an opinion make it PUBLIC and accessible, I have already > seen my share from both sides. Good Luck if you wish to participate...This > have been a MEGA learning experience for me. > > confused still > Brush Freeman > brushf AT earthlink.net > > > Join or Leave BIRDWG01: > http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > > Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html > > -- =========== Brian L. Sullivan Pacific Grove, CA eBird/AKN Project Leader www.ebird.org www.avianknowledge.net Photographic Editor, Birds of North America Online http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/BNA Cornell Lab of Ornithology 159 Sapsucker Woods Rd. Ithaca, NY 14850 Photographic Editor, North American Birds American Birding Association www.americanbirding.org bls42 AT cornell.edu 609-694-3280 ------------------------------- Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: N. GA summer juvenile hawk on ground From: Roy Brown <RoyBrownPhotography AT GMAIL.COM> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:14:54 -0700 I have posted a clear photo of a hawk that was close and on the ground during August 2009 in the North Georgia Mountains: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rbinv/4297703406/ The hawk was likely a juvenile. The photo has been viewed many hundreds of times both on and off-line. Most have called it either a Red-shouldered or a Red-tailed, (as well as other species). Roy Brown Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Reminder From: Brush Freeman <brushf AT EARTHLINK.NET> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:14:08 -0600 Please all: Remember, my poor head is completely filled (and scrambled) with these accipiter back and forths to the point I can't track them anymore...This discussion is for the list ...I can read it there...I just don't want any personal replies. :-) Brush Freeman brushf AT earthlink.net Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: DEJU, more pink than usual for a Georgia bird From: Roy Brown <RoyBrownPhotography AT GMAIL.COM> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 11:43:53 -0700 I have posted 6 clear photos of an individual DEJU here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rbinv/sets/72157623162324712/ All 6 photos were taken on 27 December 2009 in Albany, (South West) Georgia. Characteristics include: some pinkish-brown on shoulders, back, and flank areas, and hints of pinkish-brown near the cheek area light shades of gray hints of darkness in the lores tip of bill has dark spot Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: An Accipiter the experts can not agree on! From: Brush Freeman <brushf AT EARTHLINK.NET> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 12:49:18 -0600 Dear all: I hesitant to present this as I have done so repeatedly to individuals across the US and Canada, but have reached the point I have thrown my hand up and can not realistically respond to the myriad of individual posts and thoughts or keep the datelines correct on those. I am stunned and perplexed by the answers I have recd;Ed on this animal to the point that I just do not who is correct given the HUGE expertise that has weighed in so here is the bird with very little comment from me. I will say only the bird was quite large, quite tame and ate Collared Doves mostly. It was present from Dec. 28 -Jan 8, 2010, in Port O'Connor Texas. Not to bias anyone thoughts but I have rec'ed two ID from some the best know North American authors and ornithologists whose names are common household names, raptour experts and authors...and many others that have worked with one or both of these species years over many years. I am not going to provide their thoughts here as to not bias anyone. There are a number that are POSITIVE this is a Cooper's Hawk There are even more that are POSITIVE this is a Goshawk 2 calm perhaps a hybrid There are a number more who ride the fence. My head is dizzy with the opinions so pass it on to someone else to take a crack at. Here is the single photo that has been commented on. http://tiny.cc/xixQS If you have an opinion make it PUBLIC and accessible, I have already seen my share from both sides. Good Luck if you wish to participate...This have been a MEGA learning experience for me. confused still Brush Freeman brushf AT earthlink.net Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Request for Mew (Common) Gull records from NA From: Phil Davis <pdavis AT IX.NETCOM.COM> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:13:35 -0500 Hi Jim: It's not an inland record, as you define it, but Maryland's only record of Common Gull was from 01/22/1994 from Conowingo Dam of a first-basic plumage bird. The record was published in ... Hoffman, Mark L., and Phil Davis. 1998. Second Report of the Maryland/DC Records Committee. Maryland Birdlife 54(1):1-26. Here is an online version of the decision report ... (do a search for Larus canus) ... http://www.mdbirds.org/mddcrc/pdf/rcdecision2.pdf MD has one other accepted record of an adult, basic Mew Gull, but neither the observer nor the committee could subspeciate it. There are no records for DC. Hope this helps ... Phil At 12:48 PM 01/28/2010, Jim Pawlicki wrote: >I just wanted to send out a request to the list asking if anyone >knows of or can potentially point me in the direction of any >published records/collected specimens of the Eurasian (sub)species >of Mew (Common) Gull (L.c. canus) from the interior of North >America. More specifically any records away from the Atlantic/Gulf >coast, roughly greater than 50-100 or more miles inland from the >immediate coastline and bays. =================================================== Phil Davis, Secretary MD/DC Records Committee 2549 Vale Court Davidsonville, Maryland 21035 USA 301-261-0184 mailto:PDavis AT ix.netcom.com MD/DCRC Web site: http://www.MDBirds.org/mddcrc/rcindex.html =================================================== Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Request for Mew (Common) Gull records from NA From: Jim Pawlicki <Jmpawli88 AT AOL.COM> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 12:48:32 EST I just wanted to send out a request to the list asking if anyone knows of or can potentially point me in the direction of any published records/collected specimens of the Eurasian (sub)species of Mew (Common) Gull (L.c. canus) from the interior of North America. More specifically any records away from the Atlantic/Gulf coast, roughly greater than 50-100 or more miles inland from the immediate coastline and bays. Thanks in advance. Jim Pawlicki Buffalo, NY Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: 1986-87 Winter Empidonax record from TN From: "K. Dean Edwards" <kde AT ANGST.ENGR.UTK.EDU> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 11:34:56 -0500 I wanted to solicit the group's thoughts on a record of a winter Empidonax flycatcher from Sumner Co, TN in Dec 1986 - Jan 1987. At the time, the ID was left as "Empidonax species". After a bit of detective work, we have dug up report forms and a single photo (print) of the bird which I have placed online here (note that the files are large): http://www-chaos.engr.utk.edu/~kde/TBRC/Empid/TBRC_Empid_Scan001.tif http://www-chaos.engr.utk.edu/~kde/TBRC/Empid/TBRC_Empid_report_1986.pdf http://www-chaos.engr.utk.edu/~kde/TBRC/Empid/TBRC_Empid_TNHPreport.pdf The photo isn't the best and I doubt that a conclusive ID can be made but wanted to see what folks thought anyway. Unfortunately, the bill is hidden in the photo by vegetation. No vocalizations were noted and no mention is made of tail-wagging. Note the apparent tear-drop shape of the eyering. Primary projection is also difficult to determine. One of the reports mentions that the bird allowed close study with scope and camera so I'm hoping additional photos can be found but, so far, this is it. Thanks, Dean Edwards Knoxville, TN Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Possible Owl ID From: Robbie LaCelle <thebooksearcher AT GMAIL.COM> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 10:33:46 -0500 I have a recording of what I believe is a Long-eared Owl (I can't find any similar recordings online but some of the literature mentions such a call). It was heard over the period of about 15 minutes and I was able to get the following unedited recording. Here is the recording: http://www.lfmbooks.com/possibleowl.mp3 I'm interested in what people's opinions are. Robbie LaCelle Camden, NY thebooksearcher AT gmail.com Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: European-bred Glossy Ibis found in Trinidad and Tobago From: Graham Etherington <britishbirder AT GMAIL.COM> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 12:34:09 +0000 Hi, I've just become aware of a rather amazing record of a Glossy Ibis ringed in Spain and then sighted in Trinidad and Tobago. The bird was ringed at the Fao colony in southern Spain on 3 June 2006 and then seen over 6,000km (~3,700 miles) away on 15 July 2008 at Oropouche Lagoon in Trinidad and Tobago! This is represented by the blue place-markers at: http://tinyurl.com/y8kcc75 There have been a number of 'eruptions' of Glossy Ibis from the Spanish breeding grounds into NW Europe over the recent years, but this is quite an amazing record. Just the genetic implications of this record alone makes one think! You can read more about the record on the British Trust for Ornithology demog-blog at: http://btoringing.blogspot.com/2009/12/spanish-glossy-ibis-in-trinidad-and.html All the best, Graham -- Dr. Graham Etherington Norwich, UK Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Britain has a new birdlist From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm AT WXS.NL> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 01:28:32 +0100 Taxonomic rearrangement? Well it depends how you look at it. Larus argentatus omissus "Sushkin"Pleske,1928, Mem.Boston Soc.Nat.His.,6,p.195! Not only did our studies confirm Pleske's omissus exists they also revealed that it is the one but oldest gull in Europe! Norman Peter Adriaens wrote: >Both papers are available online at http://www.gull-research.org/papers/paper.html. However, there is no mention of 'Marsh Gull' nor omissus in either of them. Indeed, the first paper (De Knijff et al 2001) warns against progressive taxonomic rearrangements based on phenotypic or behavioral aspects, even claiming some to be no more than "personal preference". It seems ironic that, in the e-mail below, this paper is used as scientific evidence for a taxonomic rearrangement that seems, essentially, personal preference... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Norman D.van Swelm To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Sent: Mon, January 25, 2010 8:29:36 PM Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Britain has a new birdlist and the 2nd ed.of Collins'Bird guide is out. At last!  You are absolutely right 'omissus' has long been disputed. From our DNA studies it became clear that the Caspian Gull L.cachinnans is the oldest large gull in Europe while the gulls from the Baltic and the Gulf of Finland 'omissus' come next. I think that when you're that old the qualification 'good species' is justifiable. There is still a zone where cachinnans and omissus hybridise. You may want to read: De Knijff, P.,Denkers,F., van Swelm, N.D. & Kuiper,M.: 2001. Genetic affinities within the Herring Gull Larus argentatus assemblage revealed by AFLP genotyping. J.Mol.Evol. 53:85-93. Liebers, D.,de Knijff, P. and Helbig, A.J. 2004. The Herring Gull complex is not a ring species. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 271: 893-901. Cheers, Norman Des McKenzie asks: >I'm intrigued by the fact you've referred to 'omissus' ('Marsh Gull') in terms of it being a good species (in fact I thought it was a disputed taxon). Could you kindly point me in the direction of any studies that show this to be the case. ---- "Norman D.van Swelm" wrote: > In 1971 the BOU published an avifaunal check-list under the name 'The Status of Birds in Britain and Ireland' (ISBN 0 632 08140 6) and now in 2010 after forty years Christopher Helm cq A & C Black publishers ltd. have published a new list under the same name (ISBN 978-1-4081-2500-7) written by David T.Parkin and Alan G.Knox. > The decay of the British landscape as a result of over-population and modern agriculture was already apparent in 1970 but forty years later unlimited human immigration, huge over-fishing and EC agriculture subsidies have had a mind boggling destructive effect on NW Europe's nature and Britain is no exception. Hundred's of thousands km's of hedges have been cut down and burned, paid for by the European taxpayer and for what? Crazy! Crazy and criminal! A long list of songbirds went into decline since and the results of BTO censuses are included in the book. > Unhindered Intensive farming has diminished biodiversity to a minimum, fields once full of all kinds of life forms are now more or less dead. Only one bird has benefited: the Mediterranean Gull which thrives on fields 'drowned' in manure. After settling in large colonies near the Dutch-Belgian 'manure' belt from the late 1980's onwards ca 500 pairs breed in Britain at present. > No line drawings such as the ones which illustrated the 1971 list have been included in the new book which is a pity. On the other hand the new book contains photographs which illustrate typical scenery and even some endemics such as Hebridean Songthrush. > Parkin and Knox have done an impressive job and no one interested in faunistics can do without their monumental work. The weakness however is the urge to implement the most recent developments and publications at all cost. > The new list is said to follow the sequence of K.H.Voous' 1977 BOU 'List of Recent Holarctic Bird Species' yet the authors saw it fit to modernise Voous' list which is confusing and unpractical as now the list begins with ducks instead of grebes which in turn are now placed before the raptors. There are more such shifts and this gives a rather messy impression. > The late Kenneth Williamson explained already in the 1950's which weather systems were responsible for the arrival of south-eastern rarities at Fair Isle. Not only rarities arrive under these specific circumstances. They displace common species as well among them Blackcaps. Yet the authors seem overwhelmed by nonsense tales that Blackcaps have changed their migratory habits and are now even developing into a new form! > It is rather surprising that an important British bird such as the Scottish Dunlin is lumped with the Baltic Dunlin despite their obvious differences. > In the 1971 list all large white-headed gulls with grey mantles were called Herring Gull Larus argentatus of which only two subspecies were recorded in Britain & Ireland: L.a.argenteus the breeding stock and nominate L.a.argentatus from the Murmansk area immigrating from July onwards in order to winter. Other Herring Gull subspecies mentioned as possible visitors but not recorded with certainty were L.a.taimyrensis,L.a.michahellis and L.a.heuglini. L.a.cachinnans wasn't even mentioned! > How the world of gulls changed! > Before 1995 very few people knew the Caspian Gull L.cachinnans existed nor that it is a European breeding bird let alone what it looked like! From our colour-ring studies in the Ukraine it became clear that Caspian Gulls dispersed to W.Europe and an excellent study by Garner & Quinn in British Birds (1997) showed that Caspians spend the winter in England. Curiously enough Parkin & Knox do not even mention this important British study of a new British bird! Whatever, I wonder, became of this splendid artist David Quinn? > Parkin & Knox go to extreme length to introduce new genetic studies and translate them into modern taxonomy, very brave but also very risky as these are new unchartered waters which may change rapidly as new results are being published almost on a monthly basis. Mixing old and new taxonomy may lead to strange conclusions. Parkin & Knox state: "The nominate race (argentatus) breeds in Germany and Fennoscandia, and is dispersive rather than migratory." Fact is that nominate argentatus which is recognizable by it's dark grey mantle does not breed in Germany nor Fennoscandia but breeds rather exclusively along the North Russian coast near Murmansk and the adjacent part of N.Norway and as for their migratory behaviour they fly thousands of km's to winter along the southern North Sea. Indeed one of the birds colour-ringed in our Norwegian project dispersed from N.Norway to Agadir in Morocco! The Dutch Herring Gull L.a.argenteus enters the Baltic in the West and then grades into the world of the Marsh Gull L.omissus, an old species which disperses westwards and sometimes reaches Britain as has been shown by ringing in the Baltic states! > Another unhappy mix of old and new taxonomy which leads to almost comic results is the way Parkin & Knox deal with the Yellow-legged Gull L.michahellis. Michahellis is the name given to the Adriatic Yellow-legged Gull and thefore all yellow-legged gulls must be given that name in classic taxonomic thinking. The reality however is that the Atlantic yellow-legs and Mediterranean yellow-legs form two distinct groups whereby the Alantic yellow-legs are small, short-legged birds with dark grey mantles while the Mediterranean yellow-legs are larger (the birds from the Camarque and NE Spain are truly colossal!), long-legged gulls with light to dark grey mantles.Historically the Atlantic gulls are the oldest so naming them michahellis seems a bit far-fetched and confuses an already complicated case without need. The result is that Parkin & Knox paint a vague picture for the British situation which hampers progression unnecessary since quite a bit of knowledge on the subject has been gained over the last 20 years see f.i. the sections on Yellow-legged and Atlantic Gulls here: > > > > http://home.planet.nl/~swelm001/navigationindex.htm > > > The other newcomer among gulls is ofcourse the American Herring Gull first as subspecies of L.argentatus and now as species L.smithonianus. It wasn't even mentioned in 1971 let alone expected to turn up in Europe! Now it has. > > There is one more thing that deserves more detailed clarification in my opinion and that is the geographic origin of the small breeding population of Snow Buntings in Scotland, they are said to be both the nominate Plectrophenax n.nivalis as well as the Icelandic subspecies insulae. It would be interesting to see this phenomenon illustrated. > All in all a great book and whole-heartedly recommended. > > The Collins Bird Guide 2e edition > Also just out and eagerly awaited. When I opened the book for the first time I thought I had a misprint as the first birds on show were DUCKS! Just imagine since the first Peterson Guides way back in the 1950's any decent fieldguide opened with DIVERS, GREBES, PELICANS and so on and so on but now DUCKS! Mind you I like ducks that's not the question but to begin with ducks is many steps to far! I know a recent study has shown that ducks are the oldest amongst equals but still this is a fieldguide and not a scientific guide! And a fieldguide opens with DIVERS! > My interest went out to the implementation of recent knowledge about gulls of course! In the first edition Caspian Gull Larus cachinnans was non-existant, now it has three quarters of a page with all ages illustrated, very well done. Even Heuglin's and Baraba Gull are illusrated allbeit rather reluctantly and Baraba of similar size as Heuglin's wheras in my opinion the latter is larger. Even the Marsh Gull L.omissus is mentioned in the text where it is mentions as having yellow legs just as in the old days was said for cachinnans. I believe in both species yellow legs are rather unusual. > On the other hand the treatment of Atlantic and Yellow-legged Gull is very disappointing indeed with f.i. one juv. shown only. Just imagine the Iberian peninsula alone has 4 subspecies with different juvenal plumages! Surely with 700,000 copies sold an artist can be asigned to go out there and paint the little buggers, the climate is good, the peoples are nice and the beaches great? > A recent addition to the list is the Kelp Gull Larus dominicanus which now breeds near Agadir, Morocco and has already been seen twice in Europe is also missed. > I am also still surprised that a good series of pictures of Eskimo Curlew Numenius borealis is missing. Some people will argue that it is extinct but may I remind them that some people consider the Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris as extinct as well yet it is included in the guide! If you don't know what to look for any species becomes extinct! Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Glaucous or Nelson's? From: bill elrick <belrick AT OPTONLINE.NET> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:39:35 -0500 I observed a 1st winter Glaucous gull type bird in Northern NJ, USA, on the 19th of Jan 2010. I don't normally take photos of birds but did a few digi-scopes of this one through a kowa ts -884 and a hand held a Cannon Power shot sd1000 to the scope at about 100ft. The photos make the bird look a little darker than it did in real life. I watched the bird fly and the primaries were not dark but the tips had brownish spots. The question I have is, what would be a good rule of thumb to separate a dark 1st year Glaucous gull that makes it become a Hybrid "Nelson's type". I know this is not an easy question but would the bird have to be smaller, have darker primaries with buff spots, light primaries with dark spots or is there something else that could be definitive in this ID. Photos are here >>http://photos.nynjbirdingguide.com/GalleryThumbnails.aspx?gallery=307003<< though as I said I am not a photographer and only tried to take photos because it was a darker than a normal Glaucous gull. The photos make the bird even darker so please try and compensate. Thanks to all who have comments. Bill Elrick Wyckoff NJ 07481 Skype me as " Bilbander " belrick AT NYNJBirdingGuide.com http://nynjbirdingguide.com/ Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Britain has a new birdlist From: Peter Adriaens <p_adriaens AT YAHOO.COM> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 06:21:07 -0800 Both papers are available online at http://www.gull-research.org/papers/paper.html. However, there is no mention of 'Marsh Gull' nor omissus in either of them. Indeed, the first paper (De Knijff et al 2001) warns against progressive taxonomic rearrangements based on phenotypic or behavioral aspects, even claiming some to be no more than "personal preference". It seems ironic that, in the e-mail below, this paper is used as scientific evidence for a taxonomic rearrangement that seems, essentially, personal preference... Peter ________________________________ From: Norman D.van Swelm To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Sent: Mon, January 25, 2010 8:29:36 PM Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Britain has a new birdlist and the 2nd ed.of Collins'Bird guide is out. At last!  You are absolutely right 'omissus' has long been disputed. From our DNA studies it became clear that the Caspian Gull L.cachinnans is the oldest large gull in Europe while the gulls from the Baltic and the Gulf of Finland 'omissus' come next. I think that when you're that old the qualification 'good species' is justifiable. There is still a zone where cachinnans and omissus hybridise. You may want to read: De Knijff, P.,Denkers,F., van Swelm, N.D. & Kuiper,M.: 2001. Genetic affinities within the Herring Gull Larus argentatus assemblage revealed by AFLP genotyping. J.Mol.Evol. 53:85-93. Liebers, D.,de Knijff, P. and Helbig, A.J. 2004. The Herring Gull complex is not a ring species. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 271: 893-901. Cheers, Norman Des McKenzie asks: >I'm intrigued by the fact you've referred to 'omissus' ('Marsh Gull') in terms of it being a good species (in fact I thought it was a disputed taxon). Could you kindly point me in the direction of any studies that show this to be the case. ---- "Norman D.van Swelm" wrote: > In 1971 the BOU published an avifaunal check-list under the name 'The Status of Birds in Britain and Ireland' (ISBN 0 632 08140 6) and now in 2010 after forty years Christopher Helm cq A & C Black publishers ltd. have published a new list under the same name (ISBN 978-1-4081-2500-7) written by David T.Parkin and Alan G.Knox. > The decay of the British landscape as a result of over-population and modern agriculture was already apparent in 1970 but forty years later unlimited human immigration, huge over-fishing and EC agriculture subsidies have had a mind boggling destructive effect on NW Europe's nature and Britain is no exception. Hundred's of thousands km's of hedges have been cut down and burned, paid for by the European taxpayer and for what? Crazy! Crazy and criminal! A long list of songbirds went into decline since and the results of BTO censuses are included in the book. > Unhindered Intensive farming has diminished biodiversity to a minimum, fields once full of all kinds of life forms are now more or less dead. Only one bird has benefited: the Mediterranean Gull which thrives on fields 'drowned' in manure. After settling in large colonies near the Dutch-Belgian 'manure' belt from the late 1980's onwards ca 500 pairs breed in Britain at present. > No line drawings such as the ones which illustrated the 1971 list have been included in the new book which is a pity. On the other hand the new book contains photographs which illustrate typical scenery and even some endemics such as Hebridean Songthrush. > Parkin and Knox have done an impressive job and no one interested in faunistics can do without their monumental work. The weakness however is the urge to implement the most recent developments and publications at all cost. > The new list is said to follow the sequence of K.H.Voous' 1977 BOU 'List of Recent Holarctic Bird Species' yet the authors saw it fit to modernise Voous' list which is confusing and unpractical as now the list begins with ducks instead of grebes which in turn are now placed before the raptors. There are more such shifts and this gives a rather messy impression. > The late Kenneth Williamson explained already in the 1950's which weather systems were responsible for the arrival of south-eastern rarities at Fair Isle. Not only rarities arrive under these specific circumstances. They displace common species as well among them Blackcaps. Yet the authors seem overwhelmed by nonsense tales that Blackcaps have changed their migratory habits and are now even developing into a new form! > It is rather surprising that an important British bird such as the Scottish Dunlin is lumped with the Baltic Dunlin despite their obvious differences. > In the 1971 list all large white-headed gulls with grey mantles were called Herring Gull Larus argentatus of which only two subspecies were recorded in Britain & Ireland: L.a.argenteus the breeding stock and nominate L.a.argentatus from the Murmansk area immigrating from July onwards in order to winter. Other Herring Gull subspecies mentioned as possible visitors but not recorded with certainty were L.a.taimyrensis,L.a.michahellis and L.a.heuglini. L.a.cachinnans wasn't even mentioned! > How the world of gulls changed! > Before 1995 very few people knew the Caspian Gull L.cachinnans existed nor that it is a European breeding bird let alone what it looked like! From our colour-ring studies in the Ukraine it became clear that Caspian Gulls dispersed to W.Europe and an excellent study by Garner & Quinn in British Birds (1997) showed that Caspians spend the winter in England. Curiously enough Parkin & Knox do not even mention this important British study of a new British bird! Whatever, I wonder, became of this splendid artist David Quinn? > Parkin & Knox go to extreme length to introduce new genetic studies and translate them into modern taxonomy, very brave but also very risky as these are new unchartered waters which may change rapidly as new results are being published almost on a monthly basis. Mixing old and new taxonomy may lead to strange conclusions. Parkin & Knox state: "The nominate race (argentatus) breeds in Germany and Fennoscandia, and is dispersive rather than migratory." Fact is that nominate argentatus which is recognizable by it's dark grey mantle does not breed in Germany nor Fennoscandia but breeds rather exclusively along the North Russian coast near Murmansk and the adjacent part of N.Norway and as for their migratory behaviour they fly thousands of km's to winter along the southern North Sea. Indeed one of the birds colour-ringed in our Norwegian project dispersed from N.Norway to Agadir in Morocco! The Dutch Herring Gull L.a.argenteus enters the Baltic in the West and then grades into the world of the Marsh Gull L.omissus, an old species which disperses westwards and sometimes reaches Britain as has been shown by ringing in the Baltic states! > Another unhappy mix of old and new taxonomy which leads to almost comic results is the way Parkin & Knox deal with the Yellow-legged Gull L.michahellis. Michahellis is the name given to the Adriatic Yellow-legged Gull and thefore all yellow-legged gulls must be given that name in classic taxonomic thinking. The reality however is that the Atlantic yellow-legs and Mediterranean yellow-legs form two distinct groups whereby the Alantic yellow-legs are small, short-legged birds with dark grey mantles while the Mediterranean yellow-legs are larger (the birds from the Camarque and NE Spain are truly colossal!), long-legged gulls with light to dark grey mantles.Historically the Atlantic gulls are the oldest so naming them michahellis seems a bit far-fetched and confuses an already complicated case without need. The result is that Parkin & Knox paint a vague picture for the British situation which hampers progression unnecessary since quite a bit of knowledge on the subject has been gained over the last 20 years see f.i. the sections on Yellow-legged and Atlantic Gulls here: > > > > http://home.planet.nl/~swelm001/navigationindex.htm > > > The other newcomer among gulls is ofcourse the American Herring Gull first as subspecies of L.argentatus and now as species L.smithonianus. It wasn't even mentioned in 1971 let alone expected to turn up in Europe! Now it has. > > There is one more thing that deserves more detailed clarification in my opinion and that is the geographic origin of the small breeding population of Snow Buntings in Scotland, they are said to be both the nominate Plectrophenax n.nivalis as well as the Icelandic subspecies insulae. It would be interesting to see this phenomenon illustrated. > All in all a great book and whole-heartedly recommended. > > The Collins Bird Guide 2e edition > Also just out and eagerly awaited. When I opened the book for the first time I thought I had a misprint as the first birds on show were DUCKS! Just imagine since the first Peterson Guides way back in the 1950's any decent fieldguide opened with DIVERS, GREBES, PELICANS and so on and so on but now DUCKS! Mind you I like ducks that's not the question but to begin with ducks is many steps to far! I know a recent study has shown that ducks are the oldest amongst equals but still this is a fieldguide and not a scientific guide! And a fieldguide opens with DIVERS! > My interest went out to the implementation of recent knowledge about gulls of course! In the first edition Caspian Gull Larus cachinnans was non-existant, now it has three quarters of a page with all ages illustrated, very well done. Even Heuglin's and Baraba Gull are illusrated allbeit rather reluctantly and Baraba of similar size as Heuglin's wheras in my opinion the latter is larger. Even the Marsh Gull L.omissus is mentioned in the text where it is mentions as having yellow legs just as in the old days was said for cachinnans. I believe in both species yellow legs are rather unusual. > On the other hand the treatment of Atlantic and Yellow-legged Gull is very disappointing indeed with f.i. one juv. shown only. Just imagine the Iberian peninsula alone has 4 subspecies with different juvenal plumages! Surely with 700,000 copies sold an artist can be asigned to go out there and paint the little buggers, the climate is good, the peoples are nice and the beaches great? > A recent addition to the list is the Kelp Gull Larus dominicanus which now breeds near Agadir, Morocco and has already been seen twice in Europe is also missed. > I am also still surprised that a good series of pictures of Eskimo Curlew Numenius borealis is missing. Some people will argue that it is extinct but may I remind them that some people consider the Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris as extinct as well yet it is included in the guide! If you don't know what to look for any species becomes extinct! Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Britain has a new birdlist and the 2nd ed.of Collins'Bird guide is out. At last! From: Des McKenzie <desmond.mckenzie AT NTLWORLD.COM> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 00:36:50 +0000 Thank you Norman, I'll be sure to follow up your references. Many thanks, Des McKenzie London. ---- "Norman D.van Swelm" wrote: > You are absolutely right 'omissus' has long been disputed. From our DNA studies it became clear that the Caspian Gull L.cachinnans is the oldest large gull in Europe while the gulls from the Baltic and the Gulf of Finland 'omissus' come next. I think that when you're that old the qualification 'good species' is justifiable. There is still a zone where cachinnans and omissus hybridise. > > You may want to read: > > De Knijff, P.,Denkers,F., van Swelm, N.D. & Kuiper,M.: 2001. Genetic affinities within the Herring Gull Larus argentatus assemblage revealed by AFLP genotyping. J.Mol.Evol. 53:85-93. > > Liebers, D.,de Knijff, P. and Helbig, A.J. 2004. The Herring Gull complex is not a ring species. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 271: 893-901. > > Cheers, Norman > > Des McKenzie asks: >I'm intrigued by the fact you've referred to 'omissus' ('Marsh Gull') in terms of it being a good species (in fact I thought it was a disputed taxon). > Could you kindly point me in the direction of any studies that show this to be the case. > > > ---- "Norman D.van Swelm" wrote: > > In 1971 the BOU published an avifaunal check-list under the name 'The Status of Birds in Britain and Ireland' (ISBN 0 632 08140 6) and now in 2010 after forty years Christopher Helm cq A & C Black publishers ltd. have published a new list under the same name (ISBN 978-1-4081-2500-7) written by David T.Parkin and Alan G.Knox. > > The decay of the British landscape as a result of over-population and modern agriculture was already apparent in 1970 but forty years later unlimited human immigration, huge over-fishing and EC agriculture subsidies have had a mind boggling destructive effect on NW Europe's nature and Britain is no exception. Hundred's of thousands km's of hedges have been cut down and burned, paid for by the European taxpayer and for what? Crazy! Crazy and criminal! A long list of songbirds went into decline since and the results of BTO censuses are included in the book. > > Unhindered Intensive farming has diminished biodiversity to a minimum, fields once full of all kinds of life forms are now more or less dead. Only one bird has benefited: the Mediterranean Gull which thrives on fields 'drowned' in manure. After settling in large colonies near the Dutch-Belgian 'manure' belt from the late 1980's onwards ca 500 pairs breed in Britain at present. > > No line drawings such as the ones which illustrated the 1971 list have been included in the new book which is a pity. On the other hand the new book contains photographs which illustrate typical scenery and even some endemics such as Hebridean Songthrush. > > Parkin and Knox have done an impressive job and no one interested in faunistics can do without their monumental work. The weakness however is the urge to implement the most recent developments and publications at all cost. > > The new list is said to follow the sequence of K.H.Voous' 1977 BOU 'List of Recent Holarctic Bird Species' yet the authors saw it fit to modernise Voous' list which is confusing and unpractical as now the list begins with ducks instead of grebes which in turn are now placed before the raptors. There are more such shifts and this gives a rather messy impression. > > The late Kenneth Williamson explained already in the 1950's which weather systems were responsible for the arrival of south-eastern rarities at Fair Isle. Not only rarities arrive under these specific circumstances. They displace common species as well among them Blackcaps. Yet the authors seem overwhelmed by nonsense tales that Blackcaps have changed their migratory habits and are now even developing into a new form! > > It is rather surprising that an important British bird such as the Scottish Dunlin is lumped with the Baltic Dunlin despite their obvious differences. > > In the 1971 list all large white-headed gulls with grey mantles were called Herring Gull Larus argentatus of which only two subspecies were recorded in Britain & Ireland: L.a.argenteus the breeding stock and nominate L.a.argentatus from the Murmansk area immigrating from July onwards in order to winter. Other Herring Gull subspecies mentioned as possible visitors but not recorded with certainty were L.a.taimyrensis,L.a.michahellis and L.a.heuglini. L.a.cachinnans wasn't even mentioned! > > How the world of gulls changed! > > Before 1995 very few people knew the Caspian Gull L.cachinnans existed nor that it is a European breeding bird let alone what it looked like! From our colour-ring studies in the Ukraine it became clear that Caspian Gulls dispersed to W.Europe and an excellent study by Garner & Quinn in British Birds (1997) showed that Caspians spend the winter in England. Curiously enough Parkin & Knox do not even mention this important British study of a new British bird! Whatever, I wonder, became of this splendid artist David Quinn? > > Parkin & Knox go to extreme length to introduce new genetic studies and translate them into modern taxonomy, very brave but also very risky as these are new unchartered waters which may change rapidly as new results are being published almost on a monthly basis. Mixing old and new taxonomy may lead to strange conclusions. Parkin & Knox state: "The nominate race (argentatus) breeds in Germany and Fennoscandia, and is dispersive rather than migratory." Fact is that nominate argentatus which is recognizable by it's dark grey mantle does not breed in Germany nor Fennoscandia but breeds rather exclusively along the North Russian coast near Murmansk and the adjacent part of N.Norway and as for their migratory behaviour they fly thousands of km's to winter along the southern North Sea. Indeed one of the birds colour-ringed in our Norwegian project dispersed from N.Norway to Agadir in Morocco! The Dutch Herring Gull L.a.argenteus enters the Baltic in the West and then grades into the world of the Marsh Gull L.omissus, an old species which disperses westwards and sometimes reaches Britain as has been shown by ringing in the Baltic states! > > Another unhappy mix of old and new taxonomy which leads to almost comic results is the way Parkin & Knox deal with the Yellow-legged Gull L.michahellis. Michahellis is the name given to the Adriatic Yellow-legged Gull and thefore all yellow-legged gulls must be given that name in classic taxonomic thinking. The reality however is that the Atlantic yellow-legs and Mediterranean yellow-legs form two distinct groups whereby the Alantic yellow-legs are small, short-legged birds with dark grey mantles while the Mediterranean yellow-legs are larger (the birds from the Camarque and NE Spain are truly colossal!), long-legged gulls with light to dark grey mantles.Historically the Atlantic gulls are the oldest so naming them michahellis seems a bit far-fetched and confuses an already complicated case without need. The result is that Parkin & Knox paint a vague picture for the British situation which hampers progression unnecessary since quite a bit of knowledge on the subject has been gained over the last 20 years see f.i. the sections on Yellow-legged and Atlantic Gulls here: > > > > > > > > http://home.planet.nl/~swelm001/navigationindex.htm > > > > > > The other newcomer among gulls is ofcourse the American Herring Gull first as subspecies of L.argentatus and now as species L.smithonianus. It wasn't even mentioned in 1971 let alone expected to turn up in Europe! Now it has. > > > > There is one more thing that deserves more detailed clarification in my opinion and that is the geographic origin of the small breeding population of Snow Buntings in Scotland, they are said to be both the nominate Plectrophenax n.nivalis as well as the Icelandic subspecies insulae. It would be interesting to see this phenomenon illustrated. > > All in all a great book and whole-heartedly recommended. > > > > The Collins Bird Guide 2e edition > > Also just out and eagerly awaited. When I opened the book for the first time I thought I had a misprint as the first birds on show were DUCKS! Just imagine since the first Peterson Guides way back in the 1950's any decent fieldguide opened with DIVERS, GREBES, PELICANS and so on and so on but now DUCKS! Mind you I like ducks that's not the question but to begin with ducks is many steps to far! I know a recent study has shown that ducks are the oldest amongst equals but still this is a fieldguide and not a scientific guide! And a fieldguide opens with DIVERS! > > My interest went out to the implementation of recent knowledge about gulls of course! In the first edition Caspian Gull Larus cachinnans was non-existant, now it has three quarters of a page with all ages illustrated, very well done. Even Heuglin's and Baraba Gull are illusrated allbeit rather reluctantly and Baraba of similar size as Heuglin's wheras in my opinion the latter is larger. Even the Marsh Gull L.omissus is mentioned in the text where it is mentions as having yellow legs just as in the old days was said for cachinnans. I believe in both species yellow legs are rather unusual. > > On the other hand the treatment of Atlantic and Yellow-legged Gull is very disappointing indeed with f.i. one juv. shown only. Just imagine the Iberian peninsula alone has 4 subspecies with different juvenal plumages! Surely with 700,000 copies sold an artist can be asigned to go out there and paint the little buggers, the climate is good, the peoples are nice and the beaches great? > > A recent addition to the list is the Kelp Gull Larus dominicanus which now breeds near Agadir, Morocco and has already been seen twice in Europe is also missed. > > I am also still surprised that a good series of pictures of Eskimo Curlew Numenius borealis is missing. Some people will argue that it is extinct but may I remind them that some people consider the Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris as extinct as well yet it is included in the guide! If you don't know what to look for any species becomes extinct! > > > Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > > Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Britain has a new birdlist and the 2nd ed.of Collins'Bird guide is out. At last! From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm AT WXS.NL> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 20:29:36 +0100 You are absolutely right 'omissus' has long been disputed. From our DNA studies it became clear that the Caspian Gull L.cachinnans is the oldest large gull in Europe while the gulls from the Baltic and the Gulf of Finland 'omissus' come next. I think that when you're that old the qualification 'good species' is justifiable. There is still a zone where cachinnans and omissus hybridise. You may want to read: De Knijff, P.,Denkers,F., van Swelm, N.D. & Kuiper,M.: 2001. Genetic affinities within the Herring Gull Larus argentatus assemblage revealed by AFLP genotyping. J.Mol.Evol. 53:85-93. Liebers, D.,de Knijff, P. and Helbig, A.J. 2004. The Herring Gull complex is not a ring species. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 271: 893-901. Cheers, Norman Des McKenzie asks: >I'm intrigued by the fact you've referred to 'omissus' ('Marsh Gull') in terms of it being a good species (in fact I thought it was a disputed taxon). Could you kindly point me in the direction of any studies that show this to be the case. ---- "Norman D.van Swelm" wrote: > In 1971 the BOU published an avifaunal check-list under the name 'The Status of Birds in Britain and Ireland' (ISBN 0 632 08140 6) and now in 2010 after forty years Christopher Helm cq A & C Black publishers ltd. have published a new list under the same name (ISBN 978-1-4081-2500-7) written by David T.Parkin and Alan G.Knox. > The decay of the British landscape as a result of over-population and modern agriculture was already apparent in 1970 but forty years later unlimited human immigration, huge over-fishing and EC agriculture subsidies have had a mind boggling destructive effect on NW Europe's nature and Britain is no exception. Hundred's of thousands km's of hedges have been cut down and burned, paid for by the European taxpayer and for what? Crazy! Crazy and criminal! A long list of songbirds went into decline since and the results of BTO censuses are included in the book. > Unhindered Intensive farming has diminished biodiversity to a minimum, fields once full of all kinds of life forms are now more or less dead. Only one bird has benefited: the Mediterranean Gull which thrives on fields 'drowned' in manure. After settling in large colonies near the Dutch-Belgian 'manure' belt from the late 1980's onwards ca 500 pairs breed in Britain at present. > No line drawings such as the ones which illustrated the 1971 list have been included in the new book which is a pity. On the other hand the new book contains photographs which illustrate typical scenery and even some endemics such as Hebridean Songthrush. > Parkin and Knox have done an impressive job and no one interested in faunistics can do without their monumental work. The weakness however is the urge to implement the most recent developments and publications at all cost. > The new list is said to follow the sequence of K.H.Voous' 1977 BOU 'List of Recent Holarctic Bird Species' yet the authors saw it fit to modernise Voous' list which is confusing and unpractical as now the list begins with ducks instead of grebes which in turn are now placed before the raptors. There are more such shifts and this gives a rather messy impression. > The late Kenneth Williamson explained already in the 1950's which weather systems were responsible for the arrival of south-eastern rarities at Fair Isle. Not only rarities arrive under these specific circumstances. They displace common species as well among them Blackcaps. Yet the authors seem overwhelmed by nonsense tales that Blackcaps have changed their migratory habits and are now even developing into a new form! > It is rather surprising that an important British bird such as the Scottish Dunlin is lumped with the Baltic Dunlin despite their obvious differences. > In the 1971 list all large white-headed gulls with grey mantles were called Herring Gull Larus argentatus of which only two subspecies were recorded in Britain & Ireland: L.a.argenteus the breeding stock and nominate L.a.argentatus from the Murmansk area immigrating from July onwards in order to winter. Other Herring Gull subspecies mentioned as possible visitors but not recorded with certainty were L.a.taimyrensis,L.a.michahellis and L.a.heuglini. L.a.cachinnans wasn't even mentioned! > How the world of gulls changed! > Before 1995 very few people knew the Caspian Gull L.cachinnans existed nor that it is a European breeding bird let alone what it looked like! From our colour-ring studies in the Ukraine it became clear that Caspian Gulls dispersed to W.Europe and an excellent study by Garner & Quinn in British Birds (1997) showed that Caspians spend the winter in England. Curiously enough Parkin & Knox do not even mention this important British study of a new British bird! Whatever, I wonder, became of this splendid artist David Quinn? > Parkin & Knox go to extreme length to introduce new genetic studies and translate them into modern taxonomy, very brave but also very risky as these are new unchartered waters which may change rapidly as new results are being published almost on a monthly basis. Mixing old and new taxonomy may lead to strange conclusions. Parkin & Knox state: "The nominate race (argentatus) breeds in Germany and Fennoscandia, and is dispersive rather than migratory." Fact is that nominate argentatus which is recognizable by it's dark grey mantle does not breed in Germany nor Fennoscandia but breeds rather exclusively along the North Russian coast near Murmansk and the adjacent part of N.Norway and as for their migratory behaviour they fly thousands of km's to winter along the southern North Sea. Indeed one of the birds colour-ringed in our Norwegian project dispersed from N.Norway to Agadir in Morocco! The Dutch Herring Gull L.a.argenteus enters the Baltic in the West and then grades into the world of the Marsh Gull L.omissus, an old species which disperses westwards and sometimes reaches Britain as has been shown by ringing in the Baltic states! > Another unhappy mix of old and new taxonomy which leads to almost comic results is the way Parkin & Knox deal with the Yellow-legged Gull L.michahellis. Michahellis is the name given to the Adriatic Yellow-legged Gull and thefore all yellow-legged gulls must be given that name in classic taxonomic thinking. The reality however is that the Atlantic yellow-legs and Mediterranean yellow-legs form two distinct groups whereby the Alantic yellow-legs are small, short-legged birds with dark grey mantles while the Mediterranean yellow-legs are larger (the birds from the Camarque and NE Spain are truly colossal!), long-legged gulls with light to dark grey mantles.Historically the Atlantic gulls are the oldest so naming them michahellis seems a bit far-fetched and confuses an already complicated case without need. The result is that Parkin & Knox paint a vague picture for the British situation which hampers progression unnecessary since quite a bit of knowledge on the subject has been gained over the last 20 years see f.i. the sections on Yellow-legged and Atlantic Gulls here: > > > > http://home.planet.nl/~swelm001/navigationindex.htm > > > The other newcomer among gulls is ofcourse the American Herring Gull first as subspecies of L.argentatus and now as species L.smithonianus. It wasn't even mentioned in 1971 let alone expected to turn up in Europe! Now it has. > > There is one more thing that deserves more detailed clarification in my opinion and that is the geographic origin of the small breeding population of Snow Buntings in Scotland, they are said to be both the nominate Plectrophenax n.nivalis as well as the Icelandic subspecies insulae. It would be interesting to see this phenomenon illustrated. > All in all a great book and whole-heartedly recommended. > > The Collins Bird Guide 2e edition > Also just out and eagerly awaited. When I opened the book for the first time I thought I had a misprint as the first birds on show were DUCKS! Just imagine since the first Peterson Guides way back in the 1950's any decent fieldguide opened with DIVERS, GREBES, PELICANS and so on and so on but now DUCKS! Mind you I like ducks that's not the question but to begin with ducks is many steps to far! I know a recent study has shown that ducks are the oldest amongst equals but still this is a fieldguide and not a scientific guide! And a fieldguide opens with DIVERS! > My interest went out to the implementation of recent knowledge about gulls of course! In the first edition Caspian Gull Larus cachinnans was non-existant, now it has three quarters of a page with all ages illustrated, very well done. Even Heuglin's and Baraba Gull are illusrated allbeit rather reluctantly and Baraba of similar size as Heuglin's wheras in my opinion the latter is larger. Even the Marsh Gull L.omissus is mentioned in the text where it is mentions as having yellow legs just as in the old days was said for cachinnans. I believe in both species yellow legs are rather unusual. > On the other hand the treatment of Atlantic and Yellow-legged Gull is very disappointing indeed with f.i. one juv. shown only. Just imagine the Iberian peninsula alone has 4 subspecies with different juvenal plumages! Surely with 700,000 copies sold an artist can be asigned to go out there and paint the little buggers, the climate is good, the peoples are nice and the beaches great? > A recent addition to the list is the Kelp Gull Larus dominicanus which now breeds near Agadir, Morocco and has already been seen twice in Europe is also missed. > I am also still surprised that a good series of pictures of Eskimo Curlew Numenius borealis is missing. Some people will argue that it is extinct but may I remind them that some people consider the Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris as extinct as well yet it is included in the guide! If you don't know what to look for any species becomes extinct! Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Britain has a new birdlist and the 2nd ed.of Collins'Bird guide is out. At last! From: Des McKenzie <desmond.mckenzie AT NTLWORLD.COM> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:46:20 +0000 Hi Norman, I'm intrigued by the fact you've referred to 'omissus' ('Marsh Gull') in terms of it being a good species (in fact I thought it was a disputed taxon). Could you kindly point me in the direction of any studies that show this to be the case. Much appreciated, Des McKenzie London ---- "Norman D.van Swelm" wrote: > In 1971 the BOU published an avifaunal check-list under the name 'The Status of Birds in Britain and Ireland' (ISBN 0 632 08140 6) and now in 2010 after forty years Christopher Helm cq A & C Black publishers ltd. have published a new list under the same name (ISBN 978-1-4081-2500-7) written by David T.Parkin and Alan G.Knox. > The decay of the British landscape as a result of over-population and modern agriculture was already apparent in 1970 but forty years later unlimited human immigration, huge over-fishing and EC agriculture subsidies have had a mind boggling destructive effect on NW Europe's nature and Britain is no exception. Hundred's of thousands km's of hedges have been cut down and burned, paid for by the European taxpayer and for what? Crazy! Crazy and criminal! A long list of songbirds went into decline since and the results of BTO censuses are included in the book. > Unhindered Intensive farming has diminished biodiversity to a minimum, fields once full of all kinds of life forms are now more or less dead. Only one bird has benefited: the Mediterranean Gull which thrives on fields 'drowned' in manure. After settling in large colonies near the Dutch-Belgian 'manure' belt from the late 1980's onwards ca 500 pairs breed in Britain at present. > No line drawings such as the ones which illustrated the 1971 list have been included in the new book which is a pity. On the other hand the new book contains photographs which illustrate typical scenery and even some endemics such as Hebridean Songthrush. > Parkin and Knox have done an impressive job and no one interested in faunistics can do without their monumental work. The weakness however is the urge to implement the most recent developments and publications at all cost. > The new list is said to follow the sequence of K.H.Voous' 1977 BOU 'List of Recent Holarctic Bird Species' yet the authors saw it fit to modernise Voous' list which is confusing and unpractical as now the list begins with ducks instead of grebes which in turn are now placed before the raptors. There are more such shifts and this gives a rather messy impression. > The late Kenneth Williamson explained already in the 1950's which weather systems were responsible for the arrival of south-eastern rarities at Fair Isle. Not only rarities arrive under these specific circumstances. They displace common species as well among them Blackcaps. Yet the authors seem overwhelmed by nonsense tales that Blackcaps have changed their migratory habits and are now even developing into a new form! > It is rather surprising that an important British bird such as the Scottish Dunlin is lumped with the Baltic Dunlin despite their obvious differences. > In the 1971 list all large white-headed gulls with grey mantles were called Herring Gull Larus argentatus of which only two subspecies were recorded in Britain & Ireland: L.a.argenteus the breeding stock and nominate L.a.argentatus from the Murmansk area immigrating from July onwards in order to winter. Other Herring Gull subspecies mentioned as possible visitors but not recorded with certainty were L.a.taimyrensis,L.a.michahellis and L.a.heuglini. L.a.cachinnans wasn't even mentioned! > How the world of gulls changed! > Before 1995 very few people knew the Caspian Gull L.cachinnans existed nor that it is a European breeding bird let alone what it looked like! From our colour-ring studies in the Ukraine it became clear that Caspian Gulls dispersed to W.Europe and an excellent study by Garner & Quinn in British Birds (1997) showed that Caspians spend the winter in England. Curiously enough Parkin & Knox do not even mention this important British study of a new British bird! Whatever, I wonder, became of this splendid artist David Quinn? > Parkin & Knox go to extreme length to introduce new genetic studies and translate them into modern taxonomy, very brave but also very risky as these are new unchartered waters which may change rapidly as new results are being published almost on a monthly basis. Mixing old and new taxonomy may lead to strange conclusions. Parkin & Knox state: "The nominate race (argentatus) breeds in Germany and Fennoscandia, and is dispersive rather than migratory." Fact is that nominate argentatus which is recognizable by it's dark grey mantle does not breed in Germany nor Fennoscandia but breeds rather exclusively along the North Russian coast near Murmansk and the adjacent part of N.Norway and as for their migratory behaviour they fly thousands of km's to winter along the southern North Sea. Indeed one of the birds colour-ringed in our Norwegian project dispersed from N.Norway to Agadir in Morocco! The Dutch Herring Gull L.a.argenteus enters the Baltic in the West and then grades into the world of the Marsh Gull L.omissus, an old species which disperses westwards and sometimes reaches Britain as has been shown by ringing in the Baltic states! > Another unhappy mix of old and new taxonomy which leads to almost comic results is the way Parkin & Knox deal with the Yellow-legged Gull L.michahellis. Michahellis is the name given to the Adriatic Yellow-legged Gull and thefore all yellow-legged gulls must be given that name in classic taxonomic thinking. The reality however is that the Atlantic yellow-legs and Mediterranean yellow-legs form two distinct groups whereby the Alantic yellow-legs are small, short-legged birds with dark grey mantles while the Mediterranean yellow-legs are larger (the birds from the Camarque and NE Spain are truly colossal!), long-legged gulls with light to dark grey mantles.Historically the Atlantic gulls are the oldest so naming them michahellis seems a bit far-fetched and confuses an already complicated case without need. The result is that Parkin & Knox paint a vague picture for the British situation which hampers progression unnecessary since quite a bit of knowledge on the subject has been gained over the last 20 years see f.i. the sections on Yellow-legged and Atlantic Gulls here: > > > > http://home.planet.nl/~swelm001/navigationindex.htm > > > The other newcomer among gulls is ofcourse the American Herring Gull first as subspecies of L.argentatus and now as species L.smithonianus. It wasn't even mentioned in 1971 let alone expected to turn up in Europe! Now it has. > > There is one more thing that deserves more detailed clarification in my opinion and that is the geographic origin of the small breeding population of Snow Buntings in Scotland, they are said to be both the nominate Plectrophenax n.nivalis as well as the Icelandic subspecies insulae. It would be interesting to see this phenomenon illustrated. > All in all a great book and whole-heartedly recommended. > > The Collins Bird Guide 2e edition > Also just out and eagerly awaited. When I opened the book for the first time I thought I had a misprint as the first birds on show were DUCKS! Just imagine since the first Peterson Guides way back in the 1950's any decent fieldguide opened with DIVERS, GREBES, PELICANS and so on and so on but now DUCKS! Mind you I like ducks that's not the question but to begin with ducks is many steps to far! I know a recent study has shown that ducks are the oldest amongst equals but still this is a fieldguide and not a scientific guide! And a fieldguide opens with DIVERS! > My interest went out to the implementation of recent knowledge about gulls of course! In the first edition Caspian Gull Larus cachinnans was non-existant, now it has three quarters of a page with all ages illustrated, very well done. Even Heuglin's and Baraba Gull are illusrated allbeit rather reluctantly and Baraba of similar size as Heuglin's wheras in my opinion the latter is larger. Even the Marsh Gull L.omissus is mentioned in the text where it is mentions as having yellow legs just as in the old days was said for cachinnans. I believe in both species yellow legs are rather unusual. > On the other hand the treatment of Atlantic and Yellow-legged Gull is very disappointing indeed with f.i. one juv. shown only. Just imagine the Iberian peninsula alone has 4 subspecies with different juvenal plumages! Surely with 700,000 copies sold an artist can be asigned to go out there and paint the little buggers, the climate is good, the peoples are nice and the beaches great? > A recent addition to the list is the Kelp Gull Larus dominicanus which now breeds near Agadir, Morocco and has already been seen twice in Europe is also missed. > I am also still surprised that a good series of pictures of Eskimo Curlew Numenius borealis is missing. Some people will argue that it is extinct but may I remind them that some people consider the Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris as extinct as well yet it is included in the guide! If you don't know what to look for any species becomes extinct! > Norman > > > > > > Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > > Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html > Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Bird ID content in January 2010 issue of Birding From: Ted Floyd <tedfloyd57 AT HOTMAIL.COM> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 08:45:01 -0800 Hello, Birders. Here are some items of potential interest in the current (January 2010) issue of Birding: Photo Quiz Answers, by Kimball Garrett. http://aba.org/birding/v42n1p62.pdf As in recent issues of Birding, the answers are "blind." That is to say, the person writing the answers doesn't know beforehand what the quiz birds are. Definitely more realistic. And a lot more educational, if you ask me. New Photo Quiz. http://aba.org/birding/JanuaryQuiz.htm The image contains 100+ birds. How many can you identify? (Location is Orange County, California; photo is from January.) News and Notes, by Paul Hess. http://aba.org/birding/v42n1p28.pdf The lead entry, on hybrid warblers, has content that should be familiar to F-IDers, for example, the "Junkin's Warbler" of 2007 and the apparent Blackburnian x Northern Parula in Pennsylvania in 2009. There's also continuing coverage of that great thorn in the AOU's flesh, the Savannah Sparrow--or whatever it is. Sightings, by Michael Retter. http://aba.org/birding/v42n1p24.pdf North American megas for November-December 2009. Highlights include Common Shelduck and Ash-throated Flycatcher in Newfoundland, Barrow's Goldeneye in Kentucky, Black-and-white Owl in Guerrero, Allen's Hummingbird in Ohio, and Rustic Bunting in Saskatchewan. Another highlight is the greatest photo ever of Jeff Gordon. A Birding Interview with Alvaro Jaramillo. http://aba.org/birding/v42n1p18.pdf Alvaro answers various questions, including this one: "Why are you so active in asking and answering bird-identification questions on internet discussion groups?" ;-) Additional content (article by Kenn Kaufman on Magee Marsh, commentary by Ted Eubanks on the future of Birding, etc.) is available here: http://aba.org/birding/archives.html The complete table of contents is available here: http://aba.org/birding/v42n1p5.pdf (An article by Saraiya Ruano on Flammulated Owls and a note by Peter Pyle on plumage terminology, not available online, may be of particular interest to F-IDers.) ------------------------------- Ted Floyd Editor, Birding Check out Birding magazine on Twitter: http://twitter.com/BirdingMagazine ------------------------------- _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390708/direct/01/ Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Britain has a new birdlist and the 2nd ed.ofCollins'Bird guide is out. At last! From: Alan Dean <alan_r_dean AT BTINTERNET.COM> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 22:18:56 -0000 It should be noted that in the accounts of Yellow-legged Gull and Caspian Gull in 'The Status of Birds in Britain and Ireland', the winter status of the two taxa have been inadvertently reversed. It is indicated that in winter roosts Caspian is much commoner than Yellow-legged and that, in the BTO Gull Survey (2003/4 - 2005/6), over 100 Caspians were recorded compared with only 5 Yellow-legged. In fact the numbers were the other way around, with Yellow-legged much the commoner species. (In the last couple of winters, Caspian has been catching up fast in some parts of England!) Another error which has crept in involves a confusion in the nomenclature of the Isabelline Shrikes. In the paragraph on Distribution, the Daurian form is referred to as speculigerus and the Tarim Basin form as isabellinus (the original nomenclature). However, in the paragraph on Status records in Britain are attributed to phoenicuroides and isabellinus. Here isabellinus is referring to the Daurian form and not the Tarim form (i.e. isabellinus here is the modified nomenclature following Pearson's (2000) re-identification of the type specimen). In a book dealing with every species on the British list a few errors are inevitable, and, notwithstanding the above, 'The Status of Birds in Britain and Ireland' is a thoroughly admirable work. Regards, Alan Dean ------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk [mailto:ukbirdnet-bounces AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Norman D.van Swelm Sent: 24 January 2010 19:05 To: UKBN; BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU; BirdsinRussia AT yahoogroups.com; EuroBirdNet Subject: [UKbirdnet] Britain has a new birdlist and the 2nd ed.ofCollins'Bird guide is out. At last! In 1971 the BOU published an avifaunal check-list under the name 'The Status of Birds in Britain and Ireland' (ISBN 0 632 08140 6) and now in 2010 after forty years Christopher Helm cq A & C Black publishers ltd. have published a new list under the same name (ISBN 978-1-4081-2500-7) written by David T.Parkin and Alan G.Knox. The decay of the British landscape as a result of over-population and modern agriculture was already apparent in 1970 but forty years later unlimited human immigration, huge over-fishing and EC agriculture subsidies have had a mind boggling destructive effect on NW Europe's nature and Britain is no exception. Hundred's of thousands km's of hedges have been cut down and burned, paid for by the European taxpayer and for what? Crazy! Crazy and criminal! A long list of songbirds went into decline since and the results of BTO censuses are included in the book. Unhindered Intensive farming has diminished biodiversity to a minimum, fields once full of all kinds of life forms are now more or less dead. Only one bird has benefited: the Mediterranean Gull which thrives on fields 'drowned' in manure. After settling in large colonies near the Dutch-Belgian 'manure' belt from the late 1980's onwards ca 500 pairs breed in Britain at present. No line drawings such as the ones which illustrated the 1971 list have been included in the new book which is a pity. On the other hand the new book contains photographs which illustrate typical scenery and even some endemics such as Hebridean Songthrush. Parkin and Knox have done an impressive job and no one interested in faunistics can do without their monumental work. The weakness however is the urge to implement the most recent developments and publications at all cost. The new list is said to follow the sequence of K.H.Voous' 1977 BOU 'List of Recent Holarctic Bird Species' yet the authors saw it fit to modernise Voous' list which is confusing and unpractical as now the list begins with ducks instead of grebes which in turn are now placed before the raptors. There are more such shifts and this gives a rather messy impression. The late Kenneth Williamson explained already in the 1950's which weather systems were responsible for the arrival of south-eastern rarities at Fair Isle. Not only rarities arrive under these specific circumstances. They displace common species as well among them Blackcaps. Yet the authors seem overwhelmed by nonsense tales that Blackcaps have changed their migratory habits and are now even developing into a new form! It is rather surprising that an important British bird such as the Scottish Dunlin is lumped with the Baltic Dunlin despite their obvious differences. In the 1971 list all large white-headed gulls with grey mantles were called Herring Gull Larus argentatus of which only two subspecies were recorded in Britain & Ireland: L.a.argenteus the breeding stock and nominate L.a.argentatus from the Murmansk area immigrating from July onwards in order to winter. Other Herring Gull subspecies mentioned as possible visitors but not recorded with certainty were L.a.taimyrensis,L.a.michahellis and L.a.heuglini. L.a.cachinnans wasn't even mentioned! How the world of gulls changed! Before 1995 very few people knew the Caspian Gull L.cachinnans existed nor that it is a European breeding bird let alone what it looked like! From our colour-ring studies in the Ukraine it became clear that Caspian Gulls dispersed to W.Europe and an excellent study by Garner & Quinn in British Birds (1997) showed that Caspians spend the winter in England. Curiously enough Parkin & Knox do not even mention this important British study of a new British bird! Whatever, I wonder, became of this splendid artist David Quinn? Parkin & Knox go to extreme length to introduce new genetic studies and translate them into modern taxonomy, very brave but also very risky as these are new unchartered waters which may change rapidly as new results are being published almost on a monthly basis. Mixing old and new taxonomy may lead to strange conclusions. Parkin & Knox state: "The nominate race (argentatus) breeds in Germany and Fennoscandia, and is dispersive rather than migratory." Fact is that nominate argentatus which is recognizable by it's dark grey mantle does not breed in Germany nor Fennoscandia but breeds rather exclusively along the North Russian coast near Murmansk and the adjacent part of N.Norway and as for their migratory behaviour they fly thousands of km's to winter along the southern North Sea. Indeed one of the birds colour-ringed in our Norwegian project dispersed from N.Norway to Agadir in Morocco! The Dutch Herring Gull L.a.argenteus enters the Baltic in the West and then grades into the world of the Marsh Gull L.omissus, an old species which disperses westwards and sometimes reaches Britain as has been shown by ringing in the Baltic states! Another unhappy mix of old and new taxonomy which leads to almost comic results is the way Parkin & Knox deal with the Yellow-legged Gull L.michahellis. Michahellis is the name given to the Adriatic Yellow-legged Gull and thefore all yellow-legged gulls must be given that name in classic taxonomic thinking. The reality however is that the Atlantic yellow-legs and Mediterranean yellow-legs form two distinct groups whereby the Alantic yellow-legs are small, short-legged birds with dark grey mantles while the Mediterranean yellow-legs are larger (the birds from the Camarque and NE Spain are truly colossal!), long-legged gulls with light to dark grey mantles.Historically the Atlantic gulls are the oldest so naming them michahellis seems a bit far-fetched and confuses an already complicated case without need. The result is that Parkin & Knox paint a vague picture for the British situation which hampers progression unnecessary since quite a bit of knowledge on the subject has been gained over the last 20 years see f.i. the sections on Yellow-legged and Atlantic Gulls here: http://home.planet.nl/~swelm001/navigationindex.htm The other newcomer among gulls is ofcourse the American Herring Gull first as subspecies of L.argentatus and now as species L.smithonianus. It wasn't even mentioned in 1971 let alone expected to turn up in Europe! Now it has. There is one more thing that deserves more detailed clarification in my opinion and that is the geographic origin of the small breeding population of Snow Buntings in Scotland, they are said to be both the nominate Plectrophenax n.nivalis as well as the Icelandic subspecies insulae. It would be interesting to see this phenomenon illustrated. All in all a great book and whole-heartedly recommended. The Collins Bird Guide 2e edition Also just out and eagerly awaited. When I opened the book for the first time I thought I had a misprint as the first birds on show were DUCKS! Just imagine since the first Peterson Guides way back in the 1950's any decent fieldguide opened with DIVERS, GREBES, PELICANS and so on and so on but now DUCKS! Mind you I like ducks that's not the question but to begin with ducks is many steps to far! I know a recent study has shown that ducks are the oldest amongst equals but still this is a fieldguide and not a scientific guide! And a fieldguide opens with DIVERS! My interest went out to the implementation of recent knowledge about gulls of course! In the first edition Caspian Gull Larus cachinnans was non-existant, now it has three quarters of a page with all ages illustrated, very well done. Even Heuglin's and Baraba Gull are illusrated allbeit rather reluctantly and Baraba of similar size as Heuglin's wheras in my opinion the latter is larger. Even the Marsh Gull L.omissus is mentioned in the text where it is mentions as having yellow legs just as in the old days was said for cachinnans. I believe in both species yellow legs are rather unusual. On the other hand the treatment of Atlantic and Yellow-legged Gull is very disappointing indeed with f.i. one juv. shown only. Just imagine the Iberian peninsula alone has 4 subspecies with different juvenal plumages! Surely with 700,000 copies sold an artist can be asigned to go out there and paint the little buggers, the climate is good, the peoples are nice and the beaches great? A recent addition to the list is the Kelp Gull Larus dominicanus which now breeds near Agadir, Morocco and has already been seen twice in Europe is also missed. I am also still surprised that a good series of pictures of Eskimo Curlew Numenius borealis is missing. Some people will argue that it is extinct but may I remind them that some people consider the Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris as extinct as well yet it is included in the guide! If you don't know what to look for any species becomes extinct! Norman Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Britain has a new birdlist and the 2nd ed.of Collins'Bird guide is out. At last! From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm AT WXS.NL> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 20:05:09 +0100 In 1971 the BOU published an avifaunal check-list under the name 'The Status of Birds in Britain and Ireland' (ISBN 0 632 08140 6) and now in 2010 after forty years Christopher Helm cq A & C Black publishers ltd. have published a new list under the same name (ISBN 978-1-4081-2500-7) written by David T.Parkin and Alan G.Knox. The decay of the British landscape as a result of over-population and modern agriculture was already apparent in 1970 but forty years later unlimited human immigration, huge over-fishing and EC agriculture subsidies have had a mind boggling destructive effect on NW Europe's nature and Britain is no exception. Hundred's of thousands km's of hedges have been cut down and burned, paid for by the European taxpayer and for what? Crazy! Crazy and criminal! A long list of songbirds went into decline since and the results of BTO censuses are included in the book. Unhindered Intensive farming has diminished biodiversity to a minimum, fields once full of all kinds of life forms are now more or less dead. Only one bird has benefited: the Mediterranean Gull which thrives on fields 'drowned' in manure. After settling in large colonies near the Dutch-Belgian 'manure' belt from the late 1980's onwards ca 500 pairs breed in Britain at present. No line drawings such as the ones which illustrated the 1971 list have been included in the new book which is a pity. On the other hand the new book contains photographs which illustrate typical scenery and even some endemics such as Hebridean Songthrush. Parkin and Knox have done an impressive job and no one interested in faunistics can do without their monumental work. The weakness however is the urge to implement the most recent developments and publications at all cost. The new list is said to follow the sequence of K.H.Voous' 1977 BOU 'List of Recent Holarctic Bird Species' yet the authors saw it fit to modernise Voous' list which is confusing and unpractical as now the list begins with ducks instead of grebes which in turn are now placed before the raptors. There are more such shifts and this gives a rather messy impression. The late Kenneth Williamson explained already in the 1950's which weather systems were responsible for the arrival of south-eastern rarities at Fair Isle. Not only rarities arrive under these specific circumstances. They displace common species as well among them Blackcaps. Yet the authors seem overwhelmed by nonsense tales that Blackcaps have changed their migratory habits and are now even developing into a new form! It is rather surprising that an important British bird such as the Scottish Dunlin is lumped with the Baltic Dunlin despite their obvious differences. In the 1971 list all large white-headed gulls with grey mantles were called Herring Gull Larus argentatus of which only two subspecies were recorded in Britain & Ireland: L.a.argenteus the breeding stock and nominate L.a.argentatus from the Murmansk area immigrating from July onwards in order to winter. Other Herring Gull subspecies mentioned as possible visitors but not recorded with certainty were L.a.taimyrensis,L.a.michahellis and L.a.heuglini. L.a.cachinnans wasn't even mentioned! How the world of gulls changed! Before 1995 very few people knew the Caspian Gull L.cachinnans existed nor that it is a European breeding bird let alone what it looked like! From our colour-ring studies in the Ukraine it became clear that Caspian Gulls dispersed to W.Europe and an excellent study by Garner & Quinn in British Birds (1997) showed that Caspians spend the winter in England. Curiously enough Parkin & Knox do not even mention this important British study of a new British bird! Whatever, I wonder, became of this splendid artist David Quinn? Parkin & Knox go to extreme length to introduce new genetic studies and translate them into modern taxonomy, very brave but also very risky as these are new unchartered waters which may change rapidly as new results are being published almost on a monthly basis. Mixing old and new taxonomy may lead to strange conclusions. Parkin & Knox state: "The nominate race (argentatus) breeds in Germany and Fennoscandia, and is dispersive rather than migratory." Fact is that nominate argentatus which is recognizable by it's dark grey mantle does not breed in Germany nor Fennoscandia but breeds rather exclusively along the North Russian coast near Murmansk and the adjacent part of N.Norway and as for their migratory behaviour they fly thousands of km's to winter along the southern North Sea. Indeed one of the birds colour-ringed in our Norwegian project dispersed from N.Norway to Agadir in Morocco! The Dutch Herring Gull L.a.argenteus enters the Baltic in the West and then grades into the world of the Marsh Gull L.omissus, an old species which disperses westwards and sometimes reaches Britain as has been shown by ringing in the Baltic states! Another unhappy mix of old and new taxonomy which leads to almost comic results is the way Parkin & Knox deal with the Yellow-legged Gull L.michahellis. Michahellis is the name given to the Adriatic Yellow-legged Gull and thefore all yellow-legged gulls must be given that name in classic taxonomic thinking. The reality however is that the Atlantic yellow-legs and Mediterranean yellow-legs form two distinct groups whereby the Alantic yellow-legs are small, short-legged birds with dark grey mantles while the Mediterranean yellow-legs are larger (the birds from the Camarque and NE Spain are truly colossal!), long-legged gulls with light to dark grey mantles.Historically the Atlantic gulls are the oldest so naming them michahellis seems a bit far-fetched and confuses an already complicated case without need. The result is that Parkin & Knox paint a vague picture for the British situation which hampers progression unnecessary since quite a bit of knowledge on the subject has been gained over the last 20 years see f.i. the sections on Yellow-legged and Atlantic Gulls here: http://home.planet.nl/~swelm001/navigationindex.htm The other newcomer among gulls is ofcourse the American Herring Gull first as subspecies of L.argentatus and now as species L.smithonianus. It wasn't even mentioned in 1971 let alone expected to turn up in Europe! Now it has. There is one more thing that deserves more detailed clarification in my opinion and that is the geographic origin of the small breeding population of Snow Buntings in Scotland, they are said to be both the nominate Plectrophenax n.nivalis as well as the Icelandic subspecies insulae. It would be interesting to see this phenomenon illustrated. All in all a great book and whole-heartedly recommended. The Collins Bird Guide 2e edition Also just out and eagerly awaited. When I opened the book for the first time I thought I had a misprint as the first birds on show were DUCKS! Just imagine since the first Peterson Guides way back in the 1950's any decent fieldguide opened with DIVERS, GREBES, PELICANS and so on and so on but now DUCKS! Mind you I like ducks that's not the question but to begin with ducks is many steps to far! I know a recent study has shown that ducks are the oldest amongst equals but still this is a fieldguide and not a scientific guide! And a fieldguide opens with DIVERS! My interest went out to the implementation of recent knowledge about gulls of course! In the first edition Caspian Gull Larus cachinnans was non-existant, now it has three quarters of a page with all ages illustrated, very well done. Even Heuglin's and Baraba Gull are illusrated allbeit rather reluctantly and Baraba of similar size as Heuglin's wheras in my opinion the latter is larger. Even the Marsh Gull L.omissus is mentioned in the text where it is mentions as having yellow legs just as in the old days was said for cachinnans. I believe in both species yellow legs are rather unusual. On the other hand the treatment of Atlantic and Yellow-legged Gull is very disappointing indeed with f.i. one juv. shown only. Just imagine the Iberian peninsula alone has 4 subspecies with different juvenal plumages! Surely with 700,000 copies sold an artist can be asigned to go out there and paint the little buggers, the climate is good, the peoples are nice and the beaches great? A recent addition to the list is the Kelp Gull Larus dominicanus which now breeds near Agadir, Morocco and has already been seen twice in Europe is also missed. I am also still surprised that a good series of pictures of Eskimo Curlew Numenius borealis is missing. Some people will argue that it is extinct but may I remind them that some people consider the Slender-billed Curlew Numenius tenuirostris as extinct as well yet it is included in the guide! If you don't know what to look for any species becomes extinct! Norman Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Herring Gull gallery From: Kevin McGowan <kjm2 AT CORNELL.EDU> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 21:13:27 -0500 Last week a friend lent me her new Canon digital SLR with a moderately long lens (250mm). It was my first chance to photograph birds by other than digiscoping in the last 10 years, and it was my first experience with a digital SLR. The big excitement for me was shooting flying birds. (I took over 3,000 photos in the first weekend.) I used the opportunity to try to document some of the variability in Herring Gulls that visit central New York in winter. I have put a number of shots at http://picasaweb.google.com/KevinJ.McGowan/HerringGullsInIthaca. These were all taken over 2 days at the Cornell compost facility east of Ithaca (I will be adding some more from the next weekend, eventually). I have been working at this particular facility for over 10 years now, mainly looking for marked crows for my long-term study. In the last 5 years or so we have had a bonanza of different gull species occurring there, recording Ring-billed Gull, Laughing Gull (1x), fly-over Bonaparte's, Herring Gull (including some European-looking individuals), Iceland Gull (ca. dozen yearly), Thayer's Gull (at least 5 1cy), Lesser Black-backed Gull (ca. 10 yearly), Great Black-backed Gull, Slaty-backed Gull (2 adults), Glaucous Gull (ca. 2-3 yearly), and hybrids Herring x Glaucous (Nelson's), Herring x Lesser Black-backed, and possibly others. Herring Gulls breed in New York state, but not in the near vicinity of Ithaca. From reading band numbers we know that we get some from breeding colonies along the St. Lawrence River and from Maine. Where else they come from, I don't know. I see a huge amount of variation in adults in terms of dark head markings, bill markings, and pattern of dark in the wings. We see individuals with the underside of the wingtips as dark as Ring-billed Gulls and some as white as Thayer's. I posted some examples of adults a while ago at http://www.birds.cornell.edu/crows/HEGUadults.htm. Whether the extremes represents variation within a single breeding unit or the occurrence of several different and distinct clusters from disparate locations is unknown. The examples posted at http://picasaweb.google.com/KevinJ.McGowan/HerringGullsInIthaca are not a random sample; they are essentially birds that flew past my car close enough to be photographed and at the right angle for sunlight to illuminate them under the wings. I tried to exclude multiple pictures of the same individual. I did not include multiple photos from the same sequence, but I will not guarantee that the same individuals are not represented more than once. I have thousands of digiscoped photos of immature Herring Gulls showing an incredible mix of characters from past years, but, oddly, right now we have primarily adult Herrings present, and they represent the bulk of what I have posted. Kevin ***************************************************** Kevin J. McGowan Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology 159 Sapsucker Woods Road Ithaca, NY 14850 kjm2 AT cornell.edu http://birds.cornell.edu/crows/ Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm AT WXS.NL> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 02:43:29 +0100 This week I found a 1st winter female Goldeneye Bucephala clangula with a yellowish bill, may be not as much yellow as the New Brunswick bird but still with a considerable amount simmering through the brownish areas. Nothing hints at it being a hybrid I think. Have a look at the link below. Cheers, Norman http://www.radioactiverobins.com/ducks/ducks8goldeneye%20bucephala%20clangula.htm Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Ole One-Foot From: "hhorne AT earthlink.net" <hhorne@EARTHLINK.NET> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:54:18 -0500 Hi all, A 1990 Alabama Birdlife Article detailing the history of the locally famous One-Foot Gull with a summary of numerous sightings over a 13-year period can be found here: http://www.aosbirds.org/AlabamaBirdlife/1990/Vol%2037%20No.%202_1990_p16-18. pdf Also, a very brief mention on the various opinions on the bird's identity is provided. Cheers, Howard Horne Mobile, AL -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web.com - Microsoft® Exchange solutions from a leading provider - http://link.mail2web.com/Business/Exchange Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: ol one foot. From: Rob Parsons <parsons8 AT MTS.NET> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 23:25:10 -0600 Al, others interested, Alabama was where Ol' One Foot used to hang out, possibly Florida, too. Here are a few links: http://home.bway.net/lewis/birds/oloneft/olone.html http://www.aba.org/nab/v61n1p18.pdf http://home.bway.net/lewis/birds/gulls.html Cheers, Rob Parsons Winnipeg, MB CANADA parsons8 AT mts.net ----- Original Message ----- From: Alvaro Jaramillo To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 11:08 PM Subject: [BIRDWG01] ol one foot. Folks As a teenager I remember reading about a dark backed gull with one foot that came back for several years in a row to a wintering site in the south, was it Louisiana? Anyone recall the bird, it was given the nickname Ol one foot as it was never conclusively identified. I know there are photos of it in some American Birds magazine from the 80s somewhere, and wonder if anyone has color photos of it. I always thought that this unidentified bird would one day be identified, and maybe now we know enough to put a name to the thing, but then maybe not. Cheers Alvaro Alvaro Jaramillo chucao AT coastside.net Half Moon Bay, California Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide www.fieldguides.com Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: ol one foot. From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao AT COASTSIDE.NET> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 21:08:05 -0800 Folks As a teenager I remember reading about a dark backed gull with one foot that came back for several years in a row to a wintering site in the south, was it Louisiana? Anyone recall the bird, it was given the nickname Ol one foot as it was never conclusively identified. I know there are photos of it in some American Birds magazine from the 80s somewhere, and wonder if anyone has color photos of it. I always thought that this unidentified bird would one day be identified, and maybe now we know enough to put a name to the thing, but then maybe not. Cheers Alvaro Alvaro Jaramillo chucao AT coastside.net Half Moon Bay, California Field Guides - Birding Tours Worldwide www.fieldguides.com Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: possible adult european herring gull, From: Alain cote <skua56 AT GMAIL.COM> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 20:48:28 -0500 Hi all, I photographed this adult gull at La Malbaie, Quebec, Canada in april 2006. This bird caught my attention because the upper parts were darker gray than any American Herring gull (Larus smithsonianus). Any comments on this gull would be appreciated. Follow this link: http://larophile.blogspot.com/ Alain Cote skua56 AT gmail.com Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Clark's Grebe or not? From: Steven Mlodinow <sgmlod AT AOL.COM> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 13:36:01 -0500 Greetings All Thanks to Kevin for bringing this interesting dilemma back to the surface. I was out of town when it first arose, and then forgot about it. Conclusion first: This bird shows more CLGR traits, in my mind, than WEGR traits. However, there are some troubling points that give me pause, and I would very much hesitate to identify it as a CLGR. Indeed, given what I can tell from the photos, I would tentatively label it as an "apparent hybrid," though better images might prove that conclusion false. I am certain that it is not a Western Grebe. We all seem to have our own set of marks, overlapping to be sure, for separating these species. I have a lot of interest in this species pair, as they both breed in WA, but CLGR is rare w. of the Cascades and anywhere in winter... so though common in some general sense, birds identified as Clark's are often scrutinized. Actual nests are not easily viewed in large numbers, but small numbers certainly are, and somewhere around 1-5% of nests I've examined in Washington's Columbia Basin are attended to by mixed pairs. Later in the season, Doug Schonewald (who lives near the main breeding areas) has also seen mixed pair attending intermediate appearing downy young. Additionally, occasional birds are seen during breeding season (when differences more distinct) that defy identification and are almost certainly hybrids. Re: the NC Clark's type -- The bill color looks fabulous for CLGR. I must admit, I have never seen an "apparent hybrid" with such an orange bill. Bill color and pattern are, to me, very important in separating these two species. The pics are just fuzzy enough to create uncertainty about bill pattern. I am not sure if I would be able to see a narrow dark stripe on underside of lower mandible or long stripe on culmen. The face pattern, in most shots, seem to show very cloudy lores. In alternate plumage, the facial differences are glaring; not so much so in basic plumage. That said, most CLGR show a pretty decent white spot in lores, even if there is a narrow dusky line from cap to bill. This bird shows a fuzzy grayish area throughout lores in most shots. This is a pattern that I see in most winter hybrid-types and some apparently pure Westerns. I am not a big fan of nape stripe nor flank color, as there seems to be rather extensive overlap in these features. However, the fact that the potential Clark's has (in one pic that seems to show such) darkish sides and a nape stripe is on the broad side causes me to pause. Regarding bill size: Both species seem dramatically dimorphic with regards to bill size. I am not sure, though I suspect, that this is a male vs female difference. In any case, scanning any flock of Western or Clark's Grebes in WA will show a huge amount of variation within each species. There may be an average difference between the two species, but it seems so swamped by intra-species variation that I have not been able to use such in the field though I've tried, and it would be very hard (in my opinion) to apply to these somewhat fuzzy photos. The challenge of judging bill size on these birds is increased by color differences: The brilliant orange of the NC Clarks-type bill contrasts greatly against the dark background waters making it "pop" and look quite large. The duller colored, dark-edged bill of the WEGR blends into the background, making it appear small. So, the Clark's type bill looks huge compared to the WEGR. Not sure that the difference is as great as it appears. Regardless, I have seen this much variation within both species. Regarding bill shape: Kevin's comments are intriguing. Looking through photos of about 10 individuals of each species, a quick survey of a small number I admit, I see an average difference consistent w/ Kevin's comments. I also found a tendency for WEGR to show a more pronounced sharp upturn in the lower mandible (think of a slim YBLO bill). However, there seems to be some overlap, and I wonder about how extensive this overlap would be over a large sample size. Something for me to look at next summer. In any case, I'd argue that these differences are subtle, too subtle to be confidently judged from the photos presented. I am not trying to denigrate Kevin in any way, but rather give my perspective. I do agree with Kevin: there seems too much WEGR in this bird to confidently call it a CLGR, assuming the photos accurately portray the bird. If gun put to my head, I'd guess a WEGRxCLGR hybrid. Best Wishes Steven Mlodinow Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Clark's Grebe or not? From: Kevin Karlson <karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 18:33:03 +0000 Joe and all: thank you for the correction to my posting. I was not aware of the differences in bill sizes and shape related to sex, and my post was obviously not correct. Thanks for the gentle correction, and I will file this new information in my data bank. Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joseph Morlan" To: karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET Cc: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 1:21:05 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Clark's Grebe or not? On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:47:26 +0000, Kevin Karlson wrote: >Clark's typically shows a bill that is slightly thinner than Western and has a slightly recurved upper mandible versus Western's slightly heavier, straight bill (see photo of both species at:) http://www.kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Loons/Clark_s_+Western+Grebes_+adults+breeding_+Santa+Barbara_+CA_+March.jpg.html   The bird in question has a noticeably thicker, straight bill compared to the Western. Kevin, I was under the impression that the difference in bill size and shape have more to do with sex than with species.  Females have a shorter more upturned bill while males have a straighter bill in both species.   The BNA account for Western Grebe says, "Sexes similar, but female smaller. Bill of female shorter, much thinner with a nearly straight culmen, which with the curvature of the mandible gives bill a somewhat upturned appearance. Sexes nearly 100% separable on bill size and shape." I have no problem with one of the two birds shown at: http://www.carolinabirdclub.org/gallery/wegr_link.html ...being a Clark's Grebe.  Notice that it also has a conspicuous white wing patch.  The BNA account for Western Grebe says, "White in wing variable in extent, never in a well-defined patch." Reference: Storer, R. W. and G. L. Nuechterlein. 1992. Western Grebe (Aechmophorus occidentalis), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/026a doi:10.2173/bna.26a -- Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA        jmorlan (at) ccsf.edu SF Birding Classes start Feb.9     http://fog.ccsf.edu/jmorlan/ California Bird Records Committee  http://www.californiabirds.org/ Western Field Ornithologists       http://www.westernfieldornithologists.org/ Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Clark's Grebe or not? From: Joseph Morlan <jmorlan AT GMAIL.COM> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 10:21:05 -0800 On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:47:26 +0000, Kevin Karlson wrote: >Clark's typically shows a bill that is slightly thinner than Western and has a slightly recurved upper mandible versus Western's slightly heavier, straight bill (see photo of both species at:) http://www.kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Loons/Clark_s_+Western+Grebes_+adults+breeding_+Santa+Barbara_+CA_+March.jpg.html   The bird in question has a noticeably thicker, straight bill compared to the Western. Kevin, I was under the impression that the difference in bill size and shape have more to do with sex than with species. Females have a shorter more upturned bill while males have a straighter bill in both species. The BNA account for Western Grebe says, "Sexes similar, but female smaller. Bill of female shorter, much thinner with a nearly straight culmen, which with the curvature of the mandible gives bill a somewhat upturned appearance. Sexes nearly 100% separable on bill size and shape." I have no problem with one of the two birds shown at: http://www.carolinabirdclub.org/gallery/wegr_link.html ...being a Clark's Grebe. Notice that it also has a conspicuous white wing patch. The BNA account for Western Grebe says, "White in wing variable in extent, never in a well-defined patch." Reference: Storer, R. W. and G. L. Nuechterlein. 1992. Western Grebe (Aechmophorus occidentalis), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/026a doi:10.2173/bna.26a -- Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA jmorlan (at) ccsf.edu SF Birding Classes start Feb.9 http://fog.ccsf.edu/jmorlan/ California Bird Records Committee http://www.californiabirds.org/ Western Field Ornithologists http://www.westernfieldornithologists.org/ Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Clark's Grebe or not? From: Kevin Karlson <karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:47:26 +0000 Harry and all: Re: Clark's Grebe or not, the bird in question is difficult to ID to species since it has traits of both Clark's and Western Grebes. While the bill color is fine for Clark's, the thickness of the bill is not. Clark's typically shows a bill that is slightly thinner than Western and has a slightly recurved upper mandible versus Western's slightly heavier, straight bill (see photo of both species at:) http://www.kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Loons/Clark_s_+Western+Grebes_+adults+breeding_+Santa+Barbara_+CA_+March.jpg.html   The bird in question has a noticeably thicker, straight bill compared to the Western. Clark's also averages slightly smaller than Western, whereas this bird is clearly bigger and bulkier. The dark crown that extends further onto the face than the Western and a noticeable wide nape stripe is also better for Western.  Clark's also typically shows a paler gray back (see above image via link), which this bird does not. A whiter flank is also a good feature for Clark's, but none of these photos shows the central and rear flanks clearly. A pure Clark's should also show a bit more white in the supraloral area, which this bird does not. I think a consideration of mixed genes is the best settlement for this bird's ID, and Sibley mentions that some intermediate birds seen in winter may be hybrids. There are too many structural and plumage traits on this bird that line up perfectly for Western to confidently call this bird a pure Clark's Grebe. Kevin Karlson ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harry LeGrand" To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 8:53:27 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: [BIRDWG01] Clark's Grebe or not? For a couple of weeks in December 2009, two grebes, one a clear Western and the other of uncertain ID, appeared on a lake at Greensboro, NC. Both were originally ID-ed as Western, then there was the revelation that one bird had an unmarked orange-yellow bill, a field mark of Clark's. I did not go to see the birds, and some "experts" in NC claim the second is a Clark's and some claim both to be Western. Of course, some think the mystery bird might be an intermediate and are unwilling to put a name on it. So, to my eyes, the bill is certainly a Clark's; whereas back color, width of the black neck stripe, and black feathering on the side of the face can be considered good for Western -- at least they seem to match that of the obvious Western in the photos.  I don't have experience with the amount of white in the wing, but one photo shows a stretched wing. I have seen both species, but my experience with Clark's is essentially in the warmer months, out West (of course), when the white on the face is so obvious that the dark eye stands out on the white face. In winter, Clark's shows more dark feathering near the eye, and many can be more difficult to ID. Of course, Clark's is casual/accidental in the East, and thus we must ID such mystery birds with care.  Western is rare to very rare, but not casual. Here is a link, with a number of photos -- none crisp because of the great distance of the birds. http://www.carolinabirdclub.org/gallery/wegr_link.html What do you Westerners think? The bird will likely be written up as a Clark's, but I wanted to get some commentary from folks outside of the Carolinas, who should be a lot more familiar with these two, especially in winter. Harry LeGrand Raleigh, NC Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Possible Mew Gull or ? From: Bill Boyle <sawwhet AT OPTONLINE.NET> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:35:04 -0700 The following link has a photo (poor quality) of a gull that was seen at some distance with Ring-billed Gulls on the Hackensack River in Bergen County, NJ, on January 18. It was posted as a possible Mew Gull. The bird has not been relocated, but the photo has generated some discussion concerning the identity of the bird, with Ring-billed x Black-headed hybrid as one suggestion. Comments would be appreciated. http://www.flickr.com/photos/37227459 AT N08/4286150157/ Bill Boyle Warren, NJ Secretary, New Jersey Bird Records Committee Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags From: Andrew Kratter <kratter AT FLMNH.UFL.EDU> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 07:50:08 -0700 The FOSRC recently dealt with such as case, an 1883 specimen of a Common Greenshank from Tampa. The FOSRC endorsed the record, with one dissenting vote. Here is the account in the draft minutes: Common Greenshank, Tringa nebularia. 09-768 (AWK). This bird was collected and prepared by an unknown person, and then sent in the 1880s to Theodore Jasper, who was accumulating specimens to illustrate a book on North American Birds. The oldest tag on the specimen is Jasper’s (#553), who identified the bird correctly, and gave a collection date of 23 May 1882 and a locality of Tampa, Hillsborough Co. (although at the time, Hillsborough County included all of Pinellas Co.). The Jasper collection was given to the Ohio State University Museum of Biological Diversity The identification this was later changed to Greater Yellowlegs (T. melanoleuca). Bill Whan, who is researching Jasper, thought Jasper’s identification was correct, which he forwarded to the FOSRC. Jasper’s collection includes a number of birds collected in Tampa at the same time. Audubon purportedly collected three Common Greenshanks at Key West in May 1832. The specimens, illustrated by Audubon, have not been located, and the species was considered not documented for Florida by Robertson and Woolfenden (1994). A dissenting vote by the FOSRC felt that there was no direct evidence linking the specimen to the Tampa collecting locale, and that trade and some cases of fraud of specimens at that time cast doubt on the authenticity of the label data. Although the collector was unknown, nothing leads me to think that the data had been fabricated. The timing is good for a migrant shorebird in breeding plumage. The specimen was bought for $3, the same as a Marbled Godwit in Jasper's collection. However, Jasper has two other interesting specimens, a Crested Grebe from Newfoundland, and a Bluethroat from Greenland. Andy Kratter Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags From: Kevin McGowan <kjm2 AT CORNELL.EDU> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 20:45:04 -0500 I don't believe that I was saying to uncritically accept old records. That's the whole reason I posted in the first place, to point out how to check the information. Like most things, using museum specimens takes understanding how and why the specimens were prepared, the limitations inherent in various preparation techniques, and knowing what conventions were used to capture the data. And you'd better be ready to use appropriately old maps and old nomenclature. This is history as well as science. Trust me, everyone makes mistakes in every format that information can be captured. The larger the data set, the higher the probability that there will be mistakes. We're doing much better now, with GPS and Google Maps, but it will never be perfect. Kevin At 08:24 PM 1/19/2010, Lethaby, Nick wrote: >Kevin: > >Everyone would agree that it would be ridiculous to dismiss specimen >data. However, it is also equally wrong to uncritically accept >records that appear very doubtful based on modern knowledge of distribution. > >I am not even convinced the mislabeling is mostly due to fraud. In >the 19th century, you couldn't just GPS every find and note it in >your handheld. It's likely that many specimens wouldn't get labeled >in the field and they only need to put in the wrong box to an >incorrect label later on once they were examined. > >Nick > >-----Original Message----- >From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification >[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Kevin McGowan >Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 4:32 PM >To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU >Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags > >Fascinating, yes, but probably unique in science. And note that >enough data were left behind to be able to track down the fraud 100 >years later. > >It would be ridiculous to dismiss specimen data just because a couple >of cases of fraud or errors have been found. Use caution, but use the data. > >Kevin > >At 07:13 PM 1/19/2010, Joseph Morlan wrote: > >On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:47:54 -0800, Peter Pyle wrote: > > > > >Correction - the New Yorker article was by John Seabrook and features > > >Rasmussen's findings based on detailed sleuthing of Meinertzhagen's > > >specimens. P > > > >A full PDF of this fascinating article is available for free at: > > > >http://special.news.msu.edu/rasmussen/documents/Rasmussen%20New%20Y > orker%20article.pdf > > > >-- > >Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA jmorlan (at) ccsf.edu > >SF Birding Classes start Feb.9 http://fog.ccsf.edu/jmorlan/ > >California Bird Records Committee http://www.californiabirds.org/ > >Western Field > Ornithologists http://www.westernfieldornithologists.org/ > > > > > >Join or Leave BIRDWG01: > http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > > > >Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html > > >Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > >Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html > > >Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > >Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags From: "Lethaby, Nick" <nlethaby AT TI.COM> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:24:55 -0600 Kevin: Everyone would agree that it would be ridiculous to dismiss specimen data. However, it is also equally wrong to uncritically accept records that appear very doubtful based on modern knowledge of distribution. I am not even convinced the mislabeling is mostly due to fraud. In the 19th century, you couldn't just GPS every find and note it in your handheld. It's likely that many specimens wouldn't get labeled in the field and they only need to put in the wrong box to an incorrect label later on once they were examined. Nick -----Original Message----- From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification [mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Kevin McGowan Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 4:32 PM To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags Fascinating, yes, but probably unique in science. And note that enough data were left behind to be able to track down the fraud 100 years later. It would be ridiculous to dismiss specimen data just because a couple of cases of fraud or errors have been found. Use caution, but use the data. Kevin At 07:13 PM 1/19/2010, Joseph Morlan wrote: >On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:47:54 -0800, Peter Pyle wrote: > > >Correction - the New Yorker article was by John Seabrook and features > >Rasmussen's findings based on detailed sleuthing of Meinertzhagen's > >specimens. P > >A full PDF of this fascinating article is available for free at: > >http://special.news.msu.edu/rasmussen/documents/Rasmussen%20New%20Yorker%20article.pdf > >-- >Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA jmorlan (at) ccsf.edu >SF Birding Classes start Feb.9 http://fog.ccsf.edu/jmorlan/ >California Bird Records Committee http://www.californiabirds.org/ >Western Field Ornithologists http://www.westernfieldornithologists.org/ > > >Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > >Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags From: Joseph Morlan <jmorlan AT GMAIL.COM> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:58:13 -0800 On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:32:14 -0500, Kevin McGowan wrote: >It would be ridiculous to dismiss specimen data just because a couple >of cases of fraud or errors have been found. Use caution, but use the data. I don't think anyone is advocating the dismissing of all specimen data, but most agree that caution is warranted when it comes to old specimens. I would say the more outrageous the claim, and the older the specimen, the more caution is warranted. Early specimens of seabirds are virtually useless because they were mostly labeled by the port of entry, not the locality where they were actually taken. The type specimen of Kittlitz's Murrelet is attributed to Mexico. It's just about as outrageous as those stray Black Catbird and Bumblebee Hummingbird records. Was that Worthen's Sparrow type specimen really collected at Silver City, New Mexico? In the case of the Meinertzhagen fraud, it took a long time to uncover, although the evidence was there. Even the notorious Hasting's Rarities remained controversial long after they should have. Are old 19th Century specimens really more reliable than modern sight records, or photos that have been critically reviewed? -- Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA jmorlan (at) ccsf.edu SF Birding Classes start Feb.9 http://fog.ccsf.edu/jmorlan/ California Bird Records Committee http://www.californiabirds.org/ Western Field Ornithologists http://www.westernfieldornithologists.org/ Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags From: Kevin McGowan <kjm2 AT CORNELL.EDU> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 19:32:14 -0500 Fascinating, yes, but probably unique in science. And note that enough data were left behind to be able to track down the fraud 100 years later. It would be ridiculous to dismiss specimen data just because a couple of cases of fraud or errors have been found. Use caution, but use the data. Kevin At 07:13 PM 1/19/2010, Joseph Morlan wrote: >On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:47:54 -0800, Peter Pyle wrote: > > >Correction - the New Yorker article was by John Seabrook and features > >Rasmussen's findings based on detailed sleuthing of Meinertzhagen's > >specimens. P > >A full PDF of this fascinating article is available for free at: > >http://special.news.msu.edu/rasmussen/documents/Rasmussen%20New%20Yorker%20article.pdf > >-- >Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA jmorlan (at) ccsf.edu >SF Birding Classes start Feb.9 http://fog.ccsf.edu/jmorlan/ >California Bird Records Committee http://www.californiabirds.org/ >Western Field Ornithologists http://www.westernfieldornithologists.org/ > > >Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > >Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags From: Joseph Morlan <jmorlan AT GMAIL.COM> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:13:20 -0800 On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:47:54 -0800, Peter Pyle wrote: >Correction - the New Yorker article was by John Seabrook and features >Rasmussen's findings based on detailed sleuthing of Meinertzhagen's >specimens. P A full PDF of this fascinating article is available for free at: http://special.news.msu.edu/rasmussen/documents/Rasmussen%20New%20Yorker%20article.pdf -- Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA jmorlan (at) ccsf.edu SF Birding Classes start Feb.9 http://fog.ccsf.edu/jmorlan/ California Bird Records Committee http://www.californiabirds.org/ Western Field Ornithologists http://www.westernfieldornithologists.org/ Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags From: Peter Pyle <ppyle AT BIRDPOP.ORG> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:47:54 -0800 Correction - the New Yorker article was by John Seabrook and features Rasmussen's findings based on detailed sleuthing of Meinertzhagen's specimens. P At 02:36 PM 1/19/2010, Peter Pyle wrote: >I work a lot with specimens and fully agree with all that has been >mentioned so far. > >More references: > >Clench, M.H. 1976. Possible pitfalls in museum specimen data. N. Am. >Bird Bander 1:20-21. > >Parkes, K.C. 1989. Sex ratios based on museum specimens - a caution. >Colonial Waterbirds 12:130-131. > >Rasmussen, P. Ruffled fathers. New Yorker. May 29 2006, p. 50.. > >I highly recommend this last article if you can find it. An abstract is here: > >http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/05/29/060529fa_fact_seabrook > >Peter > >At 02:23 PM 1/19/2010, Jean Iron wrote: >>This is an important subject for those researching old records. >>I've looked a lot of study skins and have been puzzled by some >>label notations. Old-time collectors who sold specimens to >>collectors (once a fairly common hobby) had the profit motive to >>misrepresent specimens for sale. Private collections were often >>donated or willed to museums and universities. Two examples of >>fraud in ornithology follow. >> >>1. I researched Cory's Least Bitterns for an article in Ontario >>Birds in 1996. The total number of specimens in existence today is >>about 38. They were prized by early collectors when it was >>considered a full species. The Toronto Telegram newspaper in 1913 >>reported that a boy (lots of shotguns back then) sold a Cory's to a >>Toronto taxidermist for 25 cents. After mounting it, the >>taxidermist sold the Cory's to millionaire bird collector in New >>York City for 100 dollars. This would be several thousand dollars >>today. The late Jim Baillie of the Royal Ontario Museum knew a >>collector who dyed normally colored Least Bitterns red and sold >>them to unsuspecting collectors. One of these birds apparently >>surfaced in the 1950s when the late Earl Godfrey of the National >>Museum of Canada was sent a specimen of a Cory's to examine. >>Godfrey determined it was a typical Least Bittern dyed to look like >>a Cory's Least Bittern. Cory's status changed from a species to a >>color morph by the AOU supplement of 1923 and in the 1931 AOU >>Check-list. Interestingly, there is no mention of Cory's in the >>last three AOU Check-lists (AOU 1957, 1983, 1998). >> >>2. I recommend reading a letter to The Auk 15, No 2, 1898 titled >>"An Untrustworthy Observer". It is signed by the legendary gull and >>molt expert Jonathon Dwight. His letter is reprinted under "100 >>Years Ago in The Auk" 115(2):554, 1998. Dwight's letter will widen >>your eyes. It should be available on SORA for those who don't have a hard copy. >> >>Ron Pittaway >>Minden and Toronto ON >> >> >> >>At 01:32 PM 1/19/2010, Ned Keller wrote: >>>The Ohio committee has just received a documentation of a McCown's >>>Longspur, consisting of an 1880 specimen at Harvard University. In >>>that context, Walter Szeliga's recent Wheatear post caused some >>>bells to go off. >>> >>>How reliable are older specimen tags? We're obviously going to >>>have to attempt to track down some more information on the history >>>of our specimen. But in general, does anyone have a feel for how >>>often location information on specimen tags is incorrect, either >>>from simple error or from deliberate falsification? >>> >>> >>>Walter M Szeliga wrote: >>>>Dear Frontier, >>>> I'm compiling information for submission to the Ontario Bird >>>> Records Committee of a specimen of a Northern Wheatear collected >>>> in Beaumaris, Ont on 25 Sep, 1894. This specimen was originally >>>> submitted to the Smithsonian by a fellow from Michigan who tried >>>> to pass it off as Michigan's first state record. The specimen >>>> was actually collected by P. A. Taverner (documented in personal >>>> letters between Ridgeway and Taverner) in neighboring Ontario. >>> >>>Ned Keller >>>keller AT one.net >>> >>>Join or Leave BIRDWG01: >>>http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 >>>Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html >> >> >>Join or Leave BIRDWG01: >>http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 >> >>Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html > > >Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > >Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags From: Peter Pyle <ppyle AT BIRDPOP.ORG> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:36:13 -0800 I work a lot with specimens and fully agree with all that has been mentioned so far. More references: Clench, M.H. 1976. Possible pitfalls in museum specimen data. N. Am. Bird Bander 1:20-21. Parkes, K.C. 1989. Sex ratios based on museum specimens - a caution. Colonial Waterbirds 12:130-131. Rasmussen, P. Ruffled fathers. New Yorker. May 29 2006, p. 50.. I highly recommend this last article if you can find it. An abstract is here: http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/05/29/060529fa_fact_seabrook Peter At 02:23 PM 1/19/2010, Jean Iron wrote: >This is an important subject for those researching old records. I've >looked a lot of study skins and have been puzzled by some label >notations. Old-time collectors who sold specimens to collectors >(once a fairly common hobby) had the profit motive to misrepresent >specimens for sale. Private collections were often donated or willed >to museums and universities. Two examples of fraud in ornithology follow. > >1. I researched Cory's Least Bitterns for an article in Ontario >Birds in 1996. The total number of specimens in existence today is >about 38. They were prized by early collectors when it was >considered a full species. The Toronto Telegram newspaper in 1913 >reported that a boy (lots of shotguns back then) sold a Cory's to a >Toronto taxidermist for 25 cents. After mounting it, the taxidermist >sold the Cory's to millionaire bird collector in New York City for >100 dollars. This would be several thousand dollars today. The late >Jim Baillie of the Royal Ontario Museum knew a collector who dyed >normally colored Least Bitterns red and sold them to unsuspecting >collectors. One of these birds apparently surfaced in the 1950s when >the late Earl Godfrey of the National Museum of Canada was sent a >specimen of a Cory's to examine. Godfrey determined it was a typical >Least Bittern dyed to look like a Cory's Least Bittern. Cory's >status changed from a species to a color morph by the AOU supplement >of 1923 and in the 1931 AOU Check-list. Interestingly, there is no >mention of Cory's in the last three AOU Check-lists (AOU 1957, 1983, 1998). > >2. I recommend reading a letter to The Auk 15, No 2, 1898 titled "An >Untrustworthy Observer". It is signed by the legendary gull and molt >expert Jonathon Dwight. His letter is reprinted under "100 Years Ago >in The Auk" 115(2):554, 1998. Dwight's letter will widen your eyes. >It should be available on SORA for those who don't have a hard copy. > >Ron Pittaway >Minden and Toronto ON > > > >At 01:32 PM 1/19/2010, Ned Keller wrote: >>The Ohio committee has just received a documentation of a McCown's >>Longspur, consisting of an 1880 specimen at Harvard University. In >>that context, Walter Szeliga's recent Wheatear post caused some >>bells to go off. >> >>How reliable are older specimen tags? We're obviously going to have >>to attempt to track down some more information on the history of >>our specimen. But in general, does anyone have a feel for how often >>location information on specimen tags is incorrect, either from >>simple error or from deliberate falsification? >> >> >>Walter M Szeliga wrote: >>>Dear Frontier, >>> I'm compiling information for submission to the Ontario Bird >>> Records Committee of a specimen of a Northern Wheatear collected >>> in Beaumaris, Ont on 25 Sep, 1894. This specimen was originally >>> submitted to the Smithsonian by a fellow from Michigan who tried >>> to pass it off as Michigan's first state record. The specimen >>> was actually collected by P. A. Taverner (documented in personal >>> letters between Ridgeway and Taverner) in neighboring Ontario. >> >>Ned Keller >>keller AT one.net >> >>Join or Leave BIRDWG01: >>http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 >>Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html > > >Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > >Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags From: Jean Iron <jeaniron AT SYMPATICO.CA> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 17:23:50 -0500 This is an important subject for those researching old records. I've looked a lot of study skins and have been puzzled by some label notations. Old-time collectors who sold specimens to collectors (once a fairly common hobby) had the profit motive to misrepresent specimens for sale. Private collections were often donated or willed to museums and universities. Two examples of fraud in ornithology follow. 1. I researched Cory's Least Bitterns for an article in Ontario Birds in 1996. The total number of specimens in existence today is about 38. They were prized by early collectors when it was considered a full species. The Toronto Telegram newspaper in 1913 reported that a boy (lots of shotguns back then) sold a Cory's to a Toronto taxidermist for 25 cents. After mounting it, the taxidermist sold the Cory's to millionaire bird collector in New York City for 100 dollars. This would be several thousand dollars today. The late Jim Baillie of the Royal Ontario Museum knew a collector who dyed normally colored Least Bitterns red and sold them to unsuspecting collectors. One of these birds apparently surfaced in the 1950s when the late Earl Godfrey of the National Museum of Canada was sent a specimen of a Cory's to examine. Godfrey determined it was a typical Least Bittern dyed to look like a Cory's Least Bittern. Cory's status changed from a species to a color morph by the AOU supplement of 1923 and in the 1931 AOU Check-list. Interestingly, there is no mention of Cory's in the last three AOU Check-lists (AOU 1957, 1983, 1998). 2. I recommend reading a letter to The Auk 15, No 2, 1898 titled "An Untrustworthy Observer". It is signed by the legendary gull and molt expert Jonathon Dwight. His letter is reprinted under "100 Years Ago in The Auk" 115(2):554, 1998. Dwight's letter will widen your eyes. It should be available on SORA for those who don't have a hard copy. Ron Pittaway Minden and Toronto ON At 01:32 PM 1/19/2010, Ned Keller wrote: >The Ohio committee has just received a documentation of a McCown's >Longspur, consisting of an 1880 specimen at Harvard University. In >that context, Walter Szeliga's recent Wheatear post caused some >bells to go off. > >How reliable are older specimen tags? We're obviously going to have >to attempt to track down some more information on the history of our >specimen. But in general, does anyone have a feel for how often >location information on specimen tags is incorrect, either from >simple error or from deliberate falsification? > > >Walter M Szeliga wrote: >>Dear Frontier, >> I'm compiling information for submission to the Ontario Bird >> Records Committee of a specimen of a Northern Wheatear collected >> in Beaumaris, Ont on 25 Sep, 1894. This specimen was originally >> submitted to the Smithsonian by a fellow from Michigan who tried >> to pass it off as Michigan's first state record. The specimen was >> actually collected by P. A. Taverner (documented in personal >> letters between Ridgeway and Taverner) in neighboring Ontario. > >Ned Keller >keller AT one.net > >Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 >Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags From: Angus Wilson <oceanwanderers AT GMAIL.COM> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 15:16:17 -0500 I realize this thread runs the risk of veering away from identification issues but wanted to make the comment that this does seem like a topic with direct bearing on the use of specimen collections to study both ID and distributional questions. There is much we can learn from ornithologists with extensive museum experience such Kevin McGowan and his colleagues around the world, in terms of evaluating the information on specimen tags. It is easy to forget that some of the notations (e.g. sex or age) may indeed be interpretations rather than fact. It also makes sense that the person who prepared the skin may have the better sense of this than someone revisiting the specimen years, if not decades, later. Examples of foul play (OK, pun intended) are equally interesting and should be kept on the table when appraising exceptional records. During the heyday of flora and fauna collecting in Britain there were certainly strong financial and ego driven incentives to misrepresent the origins of specimens (cf. taxidermist George Bristow and the infamous Hastings rarities). I don't know if this occurred to anything like the same extent in North America or elsewhere but the example of a Northern Wheatear collected in Ontario being passed off as a Michigan specimen should give pause for thought. To offer one more example of where things are not what they seem, back in 2007 Glen Chilton and Michael Sorenson used DNA testing to demonstrate that all nine extant Labrador Duck eggs are more likely to have come from common species (Common Eider, Red-breasted Merganser and Mallard-type), implying poor record keeping, sloppy collecting practices or worse (see Auk 2007 vol. 124, issue 3). -- Angus Wilson New York City & The Springs, NY, USA http://birdingtotheend.blogspot.com/ Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags From: "Lethaby, Nick" <nlethaby AT TI.COM> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:06:42 -0600 All: My personal feeling is that significant % of old specimen tags may have inaccurate location information. I remember questioning a record of Nuttall's Woodpecker in S. OR that consisted of two birds taken on subsequent days in Ashland, which is not really very suitable habitat. In a similar vein, I think the old Feb records of multiple Varied Buntings from California and the old Bumblebee Hummingbird records for AZ are pretty unbelievable. What's particular striking is how often these records involve multiple birds. I am very skeptical that someone could chance on two Bumblebee Hummingbirds back then, yet no one has subsequently seen one despite all birders looking at hummingbirds in AZ. If these old collectors were also finding lots of the other rarities we now know about, they might be more believable. However, I've noticed that often even regularly occurring breeding species we're not discovered until later suggesting that the old observers were missing a lot of easy species. Obviously there are cases where birds have declined significantly and old specimens of species no longer recorded by modern birders are legitimate. Examples would be specimens of vagrant Eskimo Curlews in the UK or the Slender-billed Curlew in ON (I think there was one). Both these species are now likely extinct. I can't comment whether my alleged mislabeling was due to deliberate fraud or simply because the much slower pace of travel, lack of computers, etc. made it more likely that mistakes would be made if some specimens got retroactively tagged later on. My feeling is that mislabeling is mostly due to errors rather than fraud. I spoke to a friend of mine who is a professional museum curator and a leading authority on reptiles and amphibians in Madagascar. He told me that he had examined many specimens that clearly could not have been collected at the locations marked and guesstimated that 20% of the specimens he had looked at from that country were mislabeled. In the case of the Wheatear, I think there is a chance it's genuine simply because the collector would have had to go a really long way to get one unless he simply sent for it and committed an outright fraud. I would be very interested in the thoughts of the museum professionals on this subject. In particular, whether anyone has studied where these collectors were immediately prior to some of these unusual claims. Regards, Nick Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags From: Kevin McGowan <kjm2 AT CORNELL.EDU> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:07:34 -0500 Mistakes do happen, but I do not get a sense that 19th century specimen tags are any more likely to be in error than modern ones. In fact, computerization of collection catalogs and printed labels present myriad novel ways to confuse data. Fraud does happen, but it has always been rare. What would be the motive? Tracking down the provenance of the specimen is very important. Things to look for are 1) Is the original tag on the specimen? (Although it's a sin to remove a tag, some people did it all the time.) The original tag is the one to trust. That is where the history is. That should have been written by the person who collected the bird and saw inside it. A second tag put on later is an interpretation. And as demonstrated by the tag on the Smithsonian wheatear, well-meaning but ignorant or careless people interpret things incorrectly all the time. On that specimen, look at what one infers is the original tag, the one without "Smithsonian" on it, unfortunately the tag on the bottom that is not photographed well. The sex is given as a Mercury symbol (male), but as was true at the time, instead of an arrow there was a cross extending from the right side of the circle. Whoever copied that tag to make the top one interpreted the circle and cross to be a Venus (female) symbol, even though it was 135 degrees off, and wrote that on the tag. Someone else later caught that mistake and corrected it, hence the confusion on the top tag. If the bird does not have its original tag, then confidence in the data declines. 2) Can you find the original specimen catalog or field notes? Most private bird collectors of that era kept field notes and catalogs of their specimens. It can be very instructive to find the entry for the specimen of interest in the collector's catalog. One hopes it confirms what is on the tag, but sometimes it allows you to see where mistakes were made. (For a case of the latter, see Houston, C. S., and K. J. McGowan. The westward spread of the Barred Owl. Blue Jay 57(4):190-195; pdf available on request). There are other "detective" methods that can be used, but these are the two ones to start with. Kevin ***************************************************** Kevin J. McGowan Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology 159 Sapsucker Woods Road Ithaca, NY 14850 kjm2 AT cornell.edu http://birds.cornell.edu/crows/ At 01:32 PM 1/19/2010, Ned Keller wrote: >The Ohio committee has just received a documentation of a McCown's >Longspur, consisting of an 1880 specimen at Harvard University. In >that context, Walter Szeliga's recent Wheatear post caused some >bells to go off. > >How reliable are older specimen tags? We're obviously going to have >to attempt to track down some more information on the history of our >specimen. But in general, does anyone have a feel for how often >location information on specimen tags is incorrect, either from >simple error or from deliberate falsification? > > >Walter M Szeliga wrote: >>Dear Frontier, >> I'm compiling information for submission to the Ontario Bird >> Records Committee of a specimen of a Northern Wheatear collected >> in Beaumaris, Ont on 25 Sep, 1894. This specimen was originally >> submitted to the Smithsonian by a fellow from Michigan who tried >> to pass it off as Michigan's first state record. The specimen was >> actually collected by P. A. Taverner (documented in personal >> letters between Ridgeway and Taverner) in neighboring Ontario. > > >-- >-- >Ned Keller >keller AT one.net > > >Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > >Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Reliability of 19th Century Specimen Tags From: Ned Keller <keller AT ONE.NET> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:32:33 -0500 The Ohio committee has just received a documentation of a McCown's Longspur, consisting of an 1880 specimen at Harvard University. In that context, Walter Szeliga's recent Wheatear post caused some bells to go off. How reliable are older specimen tags? We're obviously going to have to attempt to track down some more information on the history of our specimen. But in general, does anyone have a feel for how often location information on specimen tags is incorrect, either from simple error or from deliberate falsification? Walter M Szeliga wrote: > Dear Frontier, > I'm compiling information for submission to the Ontario Bird Records > Committee of a specimen of a Northern Wheatear collected in Beaumaris, > Ont on 25 Sep, 1894. This specimen was originally submitted to the > Smithsonian by a fellow from Michigan who tried to pass it off as > Michigan's first state record. The specimen was actually collected by > P. A. Taverner (documented in personal letters between Ridgeway and > Taverner) in neighboring Ontario. -- -- Ned Keller keller AT one.net Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Northern Wheatear Specimen, Age and Sex? From: "Norman D.van Swelm" <Norman.vanswelm AT WXS.NL> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:15:18 +0100 The fresh round primary and tail feathers suggest this bird is an adult cq older than first year bird. The black centres of the primaries and coverts are typical for males. A wing chord of 103 mm falls in the overlap of male and female, however it would be interesting to know how and when the wing was measured I.e. 'natural' curve or max. stretched and flattened. Cheers, Norman Walter M Szeliga asks: > I'm compiling information for submission to the Ontario Bird Records > Committee of a specimen of a Northern Wheatear collected in Beaumaris, > Ont on 25 Sep, 1894. This specimen was originally submitted to the > Smithsonian by a fellow from Michigan who tried to pass it off as > Michigan's first state record. The specimen was actually collected by P. > A. Taverner (documented in personal letters between Ridgeway and > Taverner) in neighboring Ontario. Stejneger measured the wing chord of > this specimen for a paper describing the subspecies leucorhoa [Stejneger, > L., "On the Wheatears (Saxicola) Occurring in North America", 1901, Proc. > US Nat. Mus. 23(1220), p. 473-481]. The wing chord is 103 mm, placing it > safely in the subspecies leucorhoa. Dr. C. Angle from the US National > Museum has graciously taken photographs of the specimen which are posted > at: > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/71237162 AT N00/sets/72157623239455068/ > > I'm emailing the list for comments on the age and sex of this specimen. > Stejneger lists the specimen as a male, however the tags (which contain > both the correct and incorrect information) list the specimen as both a > female (crossed out) and a male. Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Northern Wheatear Specimen, Age and Sex? From: Walter M Szeliga <Walter.Szeliga AT COLORADO.EDU> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 20:04:28 -0700 Dear Frontier, I'm compiling information for submission to the Ontario Bird Records Committee of a specimen of a Northern Wheatear collected in Beaumaris, Ont on 25 Sep, 1894. This specimen was originally submitted to the Smithsonian by a fellow from Michigan who tried to pass it off as Michigan's first state record. The specimen was actually collected by P. A. Taverner (documented in personal letters between Ridgeway and Taverner) in neighboring Ontario. Stejneger measured the wing chord of this specimen for a paper describing the subspecies leucorhoa [Stejneger, L., "On the Wheatears (Saxicola) Occurring in North America", 1901, Proc. US Nat. Mus. 23(1220), p. 473-481]. The wing chord is 103 mm, placing it safely in the subspecies leucorhoa. Dr. C. Angle from the US National Museum has graciously taken photographs of the specimen which are posted at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/71237162 AT N00/sets/72157623239455068/ I'm emailing the list for comments on the age and sex of this specimen. Stejneger lists the specimen as a male, however the tags (which contain both the correct and incorrect information) list the specimen as both a female (crossed out) and a male. Thanks, Walter Szeliga Boulder, CO Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Arctic Loon G.a.artica/Black-throated Loonr vs. G.a.viridularis in winter: Separable? From: "Jim Barton" <redwingatfp1986 AT comcast.net> Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:46:59 -0500 Hello. I have just come from studying a winter adult G. arctica subsp. in Boston Harbor, together with two other observers. The bird was well seen by all three of us, at some distance, but always in calm water and in very good light. Details on request. The best representation of our bird appears in the National Geographic. Sibley's portrayal is also good. In both guides, the bird is shown as very, very dark on the upperparts with little to no contrast between the crown, nape and back. That's what we were seeing (among other things). Presumably, both guides show the Alaskan/Siberian Arctic Loon, viridigularis. Common sense might suggest that arctica arctica would be much more likely to cross the Atlantic than viridigularis would be to cross the entire North American landmass. But Mullarney et al. show contrast on the winter BT Loon between a dark back and a paler, grayish nape and crown, not at all what we were looking at. We would greatly appreciate your considered opinion as to whether viridigularis and BL Loon are separable in winter, and, if so, what observers should be looking for. \ Yours, Jim Barton Cambridge, MA _______________________________________________ UKbirdnet mailing list ukbirdnet AT rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk http://rhea.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/ukbirdnet Subject: Arctic Loon G.a.artica/Black-throated Loonr vs. G.a.viridularis in winter: Separable? From: Jim Barton <redwingatfp1986 AT COMCAST.NET> Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:46:59 -0500 Hello. I have just come from studying a winter adult G. arctica subsp. in Boston Harbor, together with two other observers. The bird was well seen by all three of us, at some distance, but always in calm water and in very good light. Details on request. The best representation of our bird appears in the National Geographic. Sibley's portrayal is also good. In both guides, the bird is shown as very, very dark on the upperparts with little to no contrast between the crown, nape and back. That's what we were seeing (among other things). Presumably, both guides show the Alaskan/Siberian Arctic Loon, viridigularis. Common sense might suggest that arctica arctica would be much more likely to cross the Atlantic than viridigularis would be to cross the entire North American landmass. But Mullarney et al. show contrast on the winter BT Loon between a dark back and a paler, grayish nape and crown, not at all what we were looking at. We would greatly appreciate your considered opinion as to whether viridigularis and BL Loon are separable in winter, and, if so, what observers should be looking for. \ Yours, Jim Barton Cambridge, MA Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ From: Jean Iron <jeaniron AT SYMPATICO.CA> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 21:11:12 -0500 My experience in Ontario and Quebec is similar to Tony Leukering's. We haven't seen any yellow-billed female goldeneyes suspected of being hybrids. Female hybrids are harder to detect, but there may be another reason why they are under-reported, because in some hybrid bird combinations males greatly outnumber females. Ron Pittaway Minden ON At 04:04 PM 1/15/2010, greatgrayowl AT AOL.COM wrote: >All: > >I noted the following in my original post to the >NJ listserver, but in my 14 years in CO, I saw >some 12-14 yellow-billed (or mostly >yellow-billed) female Common Goldeneyes >(COGO). All of these were noted in winter after >the Common Goldeneyes had arrived and were, >presumably, all adults (eye color, bill >color). (Note that Barrow's Goldeneye (BAGO) >is a permanent resident in the state and I saw >20-100 in most years.) In that time, I saw some >4-5 male hybrid goldeneyes. Every yellow-billed >COGO that I saw looked precisely like an adult >female COGO, except for the bill color. I fully >understand that mixing genes in waterfowl can >produce some very odd results, but I just cannot >believe that that many "female hybrid goldeneye" >could all look just like COGOs, except for the >bill color; bill shape and size and head shape >were all well within range of female COGO and >outside the parameters for female BAGO. I just >don't see any need to require BAGO genes to >explain the NJ goldeneye. Yes, they're rare, >but they exist, at least in Colorado and Ontario. > >Respectfully, > >Tony Leukering >Villas, NJ > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Lethaby, Nick >To: Tony Leukering ; >BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU >Sent: Fri, Jan 15, 2010 10:00 am >Subject: RE: [BIRDWG01] Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ > >All: > >Some of the discussion here has got me thinking >about whether yellow-billed C. Goldeneye females >are hybrids. Off the top of my head, I can only >remember seeing one or two and I can remember >seeing at least two male hybrids. Can anyone >else comment on the ratio they have noticed? I >would be particularly interested if all >yellow-billed Common Goldeneyes are found in >Europe, where hybrids should not be present. I >don’t recall seeing on when I lived in the UK >but that that’s a long time ago. > >Nick Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ From: Karl Bardon <karl_bardon AT YAHOO.COM> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:56:29 -0800 In Minnesota, where Barrow's is rare but nearly annual, and Common Goldeneye can be scanned through by the thousands, I have regularly seen orange or yellow-billed female Common Goldeneyes, usually at least several per year, and believe they represent one in several thousand. I have always studied them for potential Barrow's and have always concluded that their bill and head shape and head color were within the normal variation of female Commons, though at times they do appear slighlty odd, often lacking a dark nail on the bill, and often appearing a dusky yellow/orange throughout the bill rather than the typical carrot orange of pure female Barrow's. I personally did not see the NJ bird as being intermediate and felt it matched the birds I see in Minnesota. I have linked a photo of one such female Common with an almost entirely orange/yellow bill at www.pbase.com/karlbardon., photographed a few days ago at Duluth, MN The lack of consensus on the fairly well photographed NJ female suggests hybrid females are probably not safely distinguished in the field but perhaps the accumulation of more photos of these yellow-billed female "Commons" can help resolve whether they are hybrids or merely variants. Karl Bardon Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ From: greatgrayowl AT AOL.COM Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:04:20 -0500 All: I noted the following in my original post to the NJ listserver, but in my 14 years in CO, I saw some 12-14 yellow-billed (or mostly yellow-billed) female Common Goldeneyes (COGO). All of these were noted in winter after the Common Goldeneyes had arrived and were, presumably, all adults (eye color, bill color). (Note that Barrow's Goldeneye (BAGO) is a permanent resident in the state and I saw 20-100 in most years.) In that time, I saw some 4-5 male hybrid goldeneyes. Every yellow-billed COGO that I saw looked precisely like an adult female COGO, except for the bill color. I fully understand that mixing genes in waterfowl can produce some very odd results, but I just cannot believe that that many "female hybrid goldeneye" could all look just like COGOs, except for the bill color; bill shape and size and head shape were all well within range of female COGO and outside the parameters for female BAGO. I just don't see any need to require BAGO genes to explain the NJ goldeneye. Yes, they're rare, but they exist, at least in Colorado and Ontario. Respectfully, Tony Leukering Villas, NJ -----Original Message----- From: Lethaby, Nick To: Tony Leukering ; BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Sent: Fri, Jan 15, 2010 10:00 am Subject: RE: [BIRDWG01] Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ All: Some of the discussion here has got me thinking about whether yellow-billed C. Goldeneye females are hybrids. Off the top of my head, I can only remember seeing one or two and I can remember seeing at least two male hybrids. Can anyone else comment on the ratio they have noticed? I would be particularly interested if all yellow-billed Common Goldeneyes are found in Europe, where hybrids should not be present. I don’t recall seeing on when I lived in the UK but that that’s a long time ago. Nick From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification [mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Tony Leukering Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 6:39 AM To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ Hi all: Another point in favor of the goldeneye being an adult is that the bill is all yellow. Imm female Barrow's at this time of year still have partly- to mostly-dark bills and imm female Com. Goldeneyes have virtually to definitely all-dark bills. Despite comments somewhat to the contrary by D. Sibley and M. O'Brien, I don't really see much in the bird of Barrow's, as I originally posted to the NJ listserver. Sincerely, Tony Leukering Villas, NJ Sent from my iPhone On Jan 14, 2010, at 4:04 PM, BRUCE DEUEL wrote: David S. is right. If the greater secondary coverts have black tips, the bird is an adult female, of either species. Cheers, Bruce Deuel Red Bluff, CA Retired DFG biologist and participant in 20 waterfowl parts collection surveys. On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 8:33 AM, David Sibley wrote: Hi Ron and Kevin, I still see features of head shape in the NJ goldeneye that are reminiscent of Barrow's, and that seem to show consistently across the whole set of photos. I could argue that your points about bill size and head color are so subtle and variable (and difficult to judge from these photos), that none of those actually rule out a possible hybrid, but I realize that leaves almost nothing that could rule out a hybrid, and it would take much much better photos to add anything to this debate. As far as age, the dark tips on the greater coverts (shown in the in-flight photos) make it an adult. I agree that the eye looks drab, but I guess that's just one more anomaly about this individual. I'm willing to accept that it falls within the range of Common Goldeneye, but I also still believe that it could fall within the range of a hybrid, and deserves a little more attention. David Sibley Concord, MA sibleyart AT yahoo.com Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html = Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html = Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ From: "Lethaby, Nick" <nlethaby AT TI.COM> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 09:00:44 -0600 All: Some of the discussion here has got me thinking about whether yellow-billed C. Goldeneye females are hybrids. Off the top of my head, I can only remember seeing one or two and I can remember seeing at least two male hybrids. Can anyone else comment on the ratio they have noticed? I would be particularly interested if all yellow-billed Common Goldeneyes are found in Europe, where hybrids should not be present. I don't recall seeing on when I lived in the UK but that that's a long time ago. Nick ________________________________ From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification [mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Tony Leukering Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 6:39 AM To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ Hi all: Another point in favor of the goldeneye being an adult is that the bill is all yellow. Imm female Barrow's at this time of year still have partly- to mostly-dark bills and imm female Com. Goldeneyes have virtually to definitely all-dark bills. Despite comments somewhat to the contrary by D. Sibley and M. O'Brien, I don't really see much in the bird of Barrow's, as I originally posted to the NJ listserver. Sincerely, Tony Leukering Villas, NJ Sent from my iPhone On Jan 14, 2010, at 4:04 PM, BRUCE DEUEL > wrote: David S. is right. If the greater secondary coverts have black tips, the bird is an adult female, of either species. Cheers, Bruce Deuel Red Bluff, CA Retired DFG biologist and participant in 20 waterfowl parts collection surveys. On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 8:33 AM, David Sibley <david_sibley AT comcast.net> wrote: Hi Ron and Kevin, I still see features of head shape in the NJ goldeneye that are reminiscent of Barrow's, and that seem to show consistently across the whole set of photos. I could argue that your points about bill size and head color are so subtle and variable (and difficult to judge from these photos), that none of those actually rule out a possible hybrid, but I realize that leaves almost nothing that could rule out a hybrid, and it would take much much better photos to add anything to this debate. As far as age, the dark tips on the greater coverts (shown in the in-flight photos) make it an adult. I agree that the eye looks drab, but I guess that's just one more anomaly about this individual. I'm willing to accept that it falls within the range of Common Goldeneye, but I also still believe that it could fall within the range of a hybrid, and deserves a little more attention. David Sibley Concord, MA sibleyart AT yahoo.com Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html = Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html Subject: Re: Interesting female Goldeneye, New Brunswick, NJ From: Tony Leukering <greatgrayowl AT AOL.COM> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 09:39:12 -0500 Hi all: Another point in favor of the goldeneye being an adult is that the bill is all yellow. Imm female Barrow's at this time of year still have partly- to mostly-dark bills and imm female Com. Goldeneyes have virtually to definitely all-dark bills. Despite comments somewhat to the contrary by D. Sibley and M. O'Brien, I don't really see much in the bird of Barrow's, as I originally posted to the NJ listserver. Sincerely, Tony Leukering Villas, NJ Sent from my iPhone On Jan 14, 2010, at 4:04 PM, BRUCE DEUEL wrote: > David S. is right. If the greater secondary coverts have black > tips, the bird is an adult female, of either species. > Cheers, > Bruce Deuel > Red Bluff, CA > Retired DFG biologist and participant in 20 waterfowl parts > collection surveys. > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 8:33 AM, David Sibley > wrote: > Hi Ron and Kevin, > > I still see features of head shape in the NJ goldeneye that are > reminiscent of Barrow's, and that seem to show consistently across > the whole set of photos. I could argue that your points about bill > size and head color are so subtle and variable (and difficult to > judge from these photos), that none of those actually rule out a > possible hybrid, but I realize that leaves almost nothing that could > rule out a hybrid, and it would take much much better photos to add > anything to this debate. > > As far as age, the dark tips on the greater coverts (shown in the in- > flight photos) make it an adult. I agree that the eye looks drab, > but I guess that's just one more anomaly about this individual. > > I'm willing to accept that it falls within the range of Common > Goldeneye, but I also still believe that it could fall within the > range of a hybrid, and deserves a little more attention. > > > David Sibley > Concord, MA > sibleyart AT yahoo.com > > > Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > > Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html > > Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 > > Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html > Join or Leave BIRDWG01: http://listserv.arizona.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=birdwg01 Archives: http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/birdwg01.html