Birdingonthe.Net

Recent Postings from
Frontiers of Identification

> Home > Mail
> Alerts

Updated on Monday, May 23 at 08:37 PM EST
The most recently received Mail is at the top.


Northern Shrike,©Jan Wilczur

24 May Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin [Ryan Brady ]
23 May Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin [Alvaro Jaramillo ]
23 May Re: Fwd: Re: [BIRDWG01] Minnesota Tropical Kingbird [Peter Pyle ]
23 May Re: Fwd: Re: [BIRDWG01] Minnesota Tropical Kingbird [Joseph Morlan ]
23 May Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin [Alvaro Jaramillo ]
23 May Fwd: Re: [BIRDWG01] Minnesota Tropical Kingbird [Peter Pyle ]
23 May Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin [Brian Sullivan ]
23 May Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin [Alvaro Jaramillo ]
23 May Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin [Peter Pyle ]
23 May Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin []
23 May Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin [David Irons ]
23 May Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin [Ryan Brady ]
20 May Re: RFI - Yellowthroat ID [Mary Beth Stowe ]
19 May Re: RFI - Yellowthroat ID [Andrew Spencer ]
19 May RFI - Yellowthroat ID [DPratt14 ]
18 May Fwd: RFI - Yellowthroat ID [Andrew Spencer ]
17 May Re: very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage? [Martin Reid ]
17 May Re: very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage? [Martin Reid ]
17 May Re: very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage? [julian hough ]
17 May Re: very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage? [julian hough ]
16 May very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage? [JR Rigby ]
16 May A request for images of atricapillus Northern Goshawk [The HH75 ]
12 May Re: Within Range for NA Mew Gull? [Robert O'Brien ]
12 May Within Range for NA Mew Gull? [Matthew G Hunter ]
6 May RFI- Samuel Patten's Dissertation [Amar Ayyash ]
6 May Re: NYC Central Park Hermit Warbler (1 May 2016): Updated Photo Gallery [Alvaro Jaramillo ]
6 May Re: NYC Central Park Hermit Warbler (1 May 2016): Updated Photo Gallery [Karen Fung ]
6 May Re: NYC Central Park Hermit Warbler (1 May 2016): Updated Photo Gallery [Alvaro Jaramillo ]
6 May NYC Central Park Hermit Warbler (1 May 2016): Updated Photo Gallery [Karen Fung ]
4 May Tanager ID [Russ Ruffing ]
2 May Re: NYC: Central Park mystery warbler with Hermit appearance, BTGreen song [David Irons ]
2 May Re: NYC: Central Park mystery warbler with Hermit appearance, BTGreen song []
1 May NYC: Central Park mystery warbler with Hermit appearance, BTGreen song [Karen Fung ]
26 Apr Re: Song Sparrow Subspecies identification [Steve Hampton ]
26 Apr Song Sparrow Subspecies identification [Dan A ]
25 Apr Re: hawk question [Steve Hampton ]
25 Apr Re: hawk question [Brian Sullivan ]
25 Apr hawk question [Steve Hampton ]
20 Apr RFI: Audio recording of Myrtle Warbler in Britain [Ted Floyd ]
15 Apr Odd Harrier in Nebraska [Noah Arthur ]
11 Apr Gestalt Keys - A Possible Solution to Gestalt from Digital Images [Mike O'Keeffe ]
26 Mar Re: Techniques for assessing gestalt from photos [Mike O'Keeffe ]
15 Mar Re: "Interesting" juvenile Petrochelidon Swallow in Nebraska []
12 Mar Techniques for assessing gestalt from photos ["Mike O'Keeffe" ]
10 Mar West Virginia white goose identification [Terry Bronson ]
7 Mar Re: Ross's Goose or hybrid? [David Irons ]
7 Mar Re: Dark-eyed Junco with white wing-bars [David Irons ]
6 Mar Ross's Goose or hybrid? [Terry Bronson ]
6 Mar Re: Dark-eyed Junco with white wing-bars [Tony Leukering ]
6 Mar Dark-eyed Junco with white wing-bars ["Heveran ." ]
23 Feb Thank you [Peter Post ]
21 Feb Re: Fwd: NY GOOSE [Declan Troy ]
20 Feb Re: Fwd: NY GOOSE [Ardith Bondi ]
20 Feb Re: Fwd: NY GOOSE [David Irons ]
19 Feb Re: Fwd: [nwcalbird] Bear River Ridge Raptor ID [Elias Elias ]
19 Feb Re: Fwd: [nwcalbird] Bear River Ridge Raptor ID [Tristan McKee ]
19 Feb Re: Fwd: NY GOOSE [Alvaro Jaramillo ]
19 Feb Fwd: [nwcalbird] Bear River Ridge Raptor ID [John Sterling ]
19 Feb Fwd: NY GOOSE [Tony Leukering ]
19 Feb Re: Dark juvenile Buteos []
19 Feb Re: Dark juvenile Buteos [Tony Leukering ]
19 Feb Re: Dark juvenile Buteos [Tristan McKee ]
19 Feb Re: Dark juvenile Buteos [Cathy Sheeter ]
19 Feb Re: Dark juvenile Buteos [Tristan McKee ]
19 Feb Re: Dark juvenile Buteos [Tristan McKee ]
19 Feb Re: Dark juvenile Buteos [Cathy Sheeter ]
18 Feb Re: Dark juvenile Buteos [Tristan McKee ]
18 Feb Re: Dark juvenile Buteos [Brian Sullivan ]
18 Feb Re: Dark juvenile Buteos [Tristan McKee ]
18 Feb Re: Dark juvenile Buteos [Rob Parsons ]
18 Feb Re: Dark juvenile Buteos [Brian Sullivan ]
18 Feb Dark juvenile Buteos [Tristan McKee ]
18 Feb Re: the Lesser Canada--Cackling mess [Paul Guris ]
18 Feb the Lesser Canada--Cackling mess [Paul Lehman ]
17 Feb Re: goose ID []
17 Feb Re: goose ID [Alvaro Jaramillo ]

Subject: Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
From: Ryan Brady <ryanbrady10 AT HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 01:30:59 +0000
Many thanks to all for the input and continued discussion. It is extremely 
appreciated and informative. 


Ryan Brady
Washburn, Bayfield County, WI
http://www.pbase.com/rbrady

________________________________________
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification 
 on behalf of Alvaro Jaramillo 
 

Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 4:36 PM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin

Hello,
 Not sure if this went out earlier today. My apologies if it did go out. I 
could not see it. 

Alvaro

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Alvaro Jaramillo [mailto:chucao AT coastside.net]
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 9:34 AM
To: 'Brian Sullivan' ; 'BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU' 
 

Subject: RE: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin

Brian,
 Interesting! One issue that may be a problem is that the subspecific 
delineation might not fall clearly along the line of migrant vs resident forms. 
Whether the break is migrant vs resident or South American vs north of Panama 
is an open question. I think vocal work or genetics would have to be 
incorporated. There are vocal differences between South America Tropical and 
those from farther north, not huge, but they exist. See below. 

 Something similar will be published soon regarding Vermilion Flycatchers, a 
paper I am involved in, Austral migrants being one of the elements involved. 
Again, I do wonder if some vagrant Vermilion Flycatchers are actually South 
American Austral migrants. 


TROPICAL KINGBIRD DAWN SONGS:
Dawn song Nicaragua
http://www.xeno-canto.org/11078

Dawn song Costa Rica
http://www.xeno-canto.org/137689

Dawn song Ecuador
http://www.xeno-canto.org/260975

Dawn song Brazil
http://www.xeno-canto.org/247446


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

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

Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 9:13 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin

Al et al.,

I've wondered the same thing, even about some of the fall birds in CA. I've 
posted these before, but this individual had me thinking pretty hard about some 
of the Austral forms. No conclusion though: 


http://ebird.org/ebird/view/checklist?subID=S15300880

Brian

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Alvaro Jaramillo 
wrote:

> All,
>   Is there any evidence that some of these vagrant Tropicals are in
> fact the Austral migrants from Southern South America? They are long
> distance migrants, perhaps not as much as Fork-tailed Flycatchers but close 
to it. 

> Therefore it is logical to think that some of them make it to North
> America. Maybe? Some of these birds are smaller billed to me than what
> one characteristically sees in Mexico-Central America.
>    Photos here. http://www.wikiaves.com.br/753524&t=s&s=11338&p=2
>
> Alvaro Jaramillo
> alvaro AT alvarosadventures.com
> www.alvarosadventures.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification [mailto:
> BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET
> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 8:25 AM
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern
> Wisconsin
>
> Ryan and all: Dave Irons did a good job with his comments on this bird
> concerning differences in some Tropical and Couch's Kingbirds. I have
> been studying these two species critically in the Rio Grande Valley
> where they occur together for much of the year for over 15 years in
> fall, and using their calls to confirm the ID of the birds in
> question, and then assessing the physical profile of each bird. As
> Dave pointed out, some birds fall into a middle ground category where
> the physical features are not definitive, and where call is needed to
> verify the ID. I can usually ID some of these in between birds as
> well, however, after studying hundreds of individuals using their bill
> size/length/shape proportions and their head shape in a relaxed mood.
>
> In my opinion, this is definitely a Tropical Kingbird that is not one
> of the in between birds. I suspected prior to this year that male
> Tropicals are probably the ones with smaller bills and less definitive
> head shapes, but recent study that I did of mated pairs of Tropicals
> in Honduras did not show the obvious differences that occur in some
> birds, but one bird in each pair had slight differences in bill size
> and head shape. The very long, heavy bill of this bird that does not
> show a deeper base is one that I have only seen in Tropical Kingbird,
> and never in Couch's. Couch's usually shows a shorter bill that has a
> noticeable thicker base, and whose bill does not approach the length
> and overall massive nature of this bird's bill. As Dave pointed out,
> Couch's typically in a relaxed mood shows a steep forecrown that rises
> to a more dome shaped head, which is usually shallower in depth from
> front to back compared to most Tropicals. Tropical's head shape is
> usually "squarer or more rectangular" in shape, for lack of better
> words to describe a head that does not have a rounded appearance due
> to the higher crown and shallower depth of head like Couch's.
> Tropical's crown is typically somewhat flat across the top, like the
> bird shown, unless it is agitated. I provided a link to a composite
> photo I put together from two calling birds that shows these
> differences in the two birds: Couch's at
> left: Tropical at right.
> http://kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Frontiers/Figure+152+-+Co
> uch_s+Kingbird+and+Tropical+Kingbird_+new+Sept+2013.jpg.html
> .
>
> The Tropical in this composite photo is not one of the large-billed
> birds that I often encounter, which is why I used it in this composite
> to show how subtle the differences can be, but they are obvious in
> this photo if you critically compare them. Many Couch's also don't
> show forked tails, but square-tipped ones (males?), so this feature is
> also helpful in eliminating some Couch's, but these birds with square
> tails usually have very short, thick based bills and high profile
> heads like the bird in my composite. I would not hesitate calling this
> bird a Tropical Kingbird, but I know a first state record usually
> requires some more concrete information for acceptance. Just for
> comparison sake, I included a link to a long-billed Tropical from
> Costa Rica that is more representative of the extreme Tropical's Dave
> speaks of, with a very long, even width bill, shallow forecrown and deep head 
profile: 

> http://kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Flycatchers/Tropical+King
> bird_+March_+Costa+Rica.jpg.html
>
> Kevin Karlson
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Ryan Brady" 
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 11:23:52 PM
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
>
> We found a Tropical/Couch's Kingbird along the Lake Superior shoreline
> in Washburn, Wisconsin, on Thursday. It never vocalized and was seen
> for only a short time on one day. Though we're aware it's a very
> difficult ID I did manage a bunch of images from various angles.
>
>
> http://www.pbase.com/rbrady/kingbird2016
>
>
> Is there even a chance of separating the two without vocals? Wisconsin
> has only one accepted Tropical/Couch's (which was initially reported
> as a Western and had few accompanying photos) and none for either at
> species level.
>
> Thanks for any input you can provide.
>
>
> Ryan Brady
> Washburn, Bayfield County, WI
>
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>



--
===========


*Brian L. SullivaneBird Project Leader * www.ebird.org

*Photo Editor*
Birds of North America Online
http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/BNA
-------------------------------

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao AT COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 16:36:06 -0700
Hello, 
 Not sure if this went out earlier today. My apologies if it did go out. I 
could not see it. 

Alvaro 

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Alvaro Jaramillo [mailto:chucao AT coastside.net] 
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 9:34 AM
To: 'Brian Sullivan' ; 'BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU' 
 

Subject: RE: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin

Brian, 
 Interesting! One issue that may be a problem is that the subspecific 
delineation might not fall clearly along the line of migrant vs resident forms. 
Whether the break is migrant vs resident or South American vs north of Panama 
is an open question. I think vocal work or genetics would have to be 
incorporated. There are vocal differences between South America Tropical and 
those from farther north, not huge, but they exist. See below. 

 Something similar will be published soon regarding Vermilion Flycatchers, a 
paper I am involved in, Austral migrants being one of the elements involved. 
Again, I do wonder if some vagrant Vermilion Flycatchers are actually South 
American Austral migrants. 


TROPICAL KINGBIRD DAWN SONGS: 
Dawn song Nicaragua
http://www.xeno-canto.org/11078

Dawn song Costa Rica
http://www.xeno-canto.org/137689

Dawn song Ecuador
http://www.xeno-canto.org/260975

Dawn song Brazil
http://www.xeno-canto.org/247446


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

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

Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 9:13 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin

Al et al.,

I've wondered the same thing, even about some of the fall birds in CA. I've 
posted these before, but this individual had me thinking pretty hard about some 
of the Austral forms. No conclusion though: 


http://ebird.org/ebird/view/checklist?subID=S15300880

Brian

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Alvaro Jaramillo 
wrote:

> All,
>   Is there any evidence that some of these vagrant Tropicals are in 
> fact the Austral migrants from Southern South America? They are long 
> distance migrants, perhaps not as much as Fork-tailed Flycatchers but close 
to it. 

> Therefore it is logical to think that some of them make it to North 
> America. Maybe? Some of these birds are smaller billed to me than what 
> one characteristically sees in Mexico-Central America.
>    Photos here. http://www.wikiaves.com.br/753524&t=s&s=11338&p=2
>
> Alvaro Jaramillo
> alvaro AT alvarosadventures.com
> www.alvarosadventures.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification [mailto:
> BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET
> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 8:25 AM
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern 
> Wisconsin
>
> Ryan and all: Dave Irons did a good job with his comments on this bird 
> concerning differences in some Tropical and Couch's Kingbirds. I have 
> been studying these two species critically in the Rio Grande Valley 
> where they occur together for much of the year for over 15 years in 
> fall, and using their calls to confirm the ID of the birds in 
> question, and then assessing the physical profile of each bird. As 
> Dave pointed out, some birds fall into a middle ground category where 
> the physical features are not definitive, and where call is needed to 
> verify the ID. I can usually ID some of these in between birds as 
> well, however, after studying hundreds of individuals using their bill 
> size/length/shape proportions and their head shape in a relaxed mood.
>
> In my opinion, this is definitely a Tropical Kingbird that is not one 
> of the in between birds. I suspected prior to this year that male 
> Tropicals are probably the ones with smaller bills and less definitive 
> head shapes, but recent study that I did of mated pairs of Tropicals 
> in Honduras did not show the obvious differences that occur in some 
> birds, but one bird in each pair had slight differences in bill size 
> and head shape. The very long, heavy bill of this bird that does not 
> show a deeper base is one that I have only seen in Tropical Kingbird, 
> and never in Couch's. Couch's usually shows a shorter bill that has a 
> noticeable thicker base, and whose bill does not approach the length 
> and overall massive nature of this bird's bill. As Dave pointed out, 
> Couch's typically in a relaxed mood shows a steep forecrown that rises 
> to a more dome shaped head, which is usually shallower in depth from 
> front to back compared to most Tropicals. Tropical's head shape is 
> usually "squarer or more rectangular" in shape, for lack of better 
> words to describe a head that does not have a rounded appearance due 
> to the higher crown and shallower depth of head like Couch's.
> Tropical's crown is typically somewhat flat across the top, like the 
> bird shown, unless it is agitated. I provided a link to a composite 
> photo I put together from two calling birds that shows these 
> differences in the two birds: Couch's at
> left: Tropical at right.
> http://kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Frontiers/Figure+152+-+Co
> uch_s+Kingbird+and+Tropical+Kingbird_+new+Sept+2013.jpg.html
> .
>
> The Tropical in this composite photo is not one of the large-billed 
> birds that I often encounter, which is why I used it in this composite 
> to show how subtle the differences can be, but they are obvious in 
> this photo if you critically compare them. Many Couch's also don't 
> show forked tails, but square-tipped ones (males?), so this feature is 
> also helpful in eliminating some Couch's, but these birds with square 
> tails usually have very short, thick based bills and high profile 
> heads like the bird in my composite. I would not hesitate calling this 
> bird a Tropical Kingbird, but I know a first state record usually 
> requires some more concrete information for acceptance. Just for 
> comparison sake, I included a link to a long-billed Tropical from 
> Costa Rica that is more representative of the extreme Tropical's Dave 
> speaks of, with a very long, even width bill, shallow forecrown and deep head 
profile: 

> http://kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Flycatchers/Tropical+King
> bird_+March_+Costa+Rica.jpg.html
>
> Kevin Karlson
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Ryan Brady" 
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 11:23:52 PM
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
>
> We found a Tropical/Couch's Kingbird along the Lake Superior shoreline 
> in Washburn, Wisconsin, on Thursday. It never vocalized and was seen 
> for only a short time on one day. Though we're aware it's a very 
> difficult ID I did manage a bunch of images from various angles.
>
>
> http://www.pbase.com/rbrady/kingbird2016
>
>
> Is there even a chance of separating the two without vocals? Wisconsin 
> has only one accepted Tropical/Couch's (which was initially reported 
> as a Western and had few accompanying photos) and none for either at 
> species level.
>
> Thanks for any input you can provide.
>
>
> Ryan Brady
> Washburn, Bayfield County, WI
>
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>



--
===========


*Brian L. SullivaneBird Project Leader * www.ebird.org

*Photo Editor*
Birds of North America Online
http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/BNA
-------------------------------

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [BIRDWG01] Minnesota Tropical Kingbird
From: Peter Pyle <ppyle AT BIRDPOP.ORG>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 14:59:14 -0700
Hi Joe and all -

We had the same word-of-mouth information about this Farallon 
specimen (Ned Johnson also concurred with obscurus) but I could not 
locate it during thorough searches of the CAS, MVZ, and PRBO 
collections during the late 1980s sometime. It had evidently been 
sent around and at some point was never returned. I am still hopeful 
that it will turn up again, but for now there is no opportunity to 
examine or sample it.

Re the Wisconsin bird, as I mentioned earlier, the molt pattern and 
extent of wear on the juvenile p1-p3 and s1-s4, the formative p4-p10, 
s5-s7, and rectrices, and (especially) the first-alternate s8 (on 
both wings) is consistent with northern-breeding occidentalis at this 
time of year. This quite contrasts with the two late-June Tropical 
Kingbirds from last year, which included an adult finishing molt 
(Minnesota) and a first-cycle bird that still retained juvenile outer 
primaries (Ontario), more consistent with molt timing and wear from 
Austral populations.

Peter

At 12:48 PM 5/23/2016, Joseph Morlan wrote:
>Peter,
>
>My recollection is that the Farallon Tropical Kingbird specimen from August
>1973 (PRBO #713) was identified by Wesley Lanyon as M. m. obscurus which
>ranges from western and central Peru north to Ecuador and SW Columbia. This
>race is now synonymized by most authors with nominate melancholicus.
>
>Information on obscurus is hard to come by, but Zimmer's 1937 description
>of obscurus along with comparison of other races is at....
>
>http://digitallibrary.amnh.org/handle/2246/3860
>
>The BNA account mentions that Steve Cardiff examined the specimen and felt
>it was an escaped cage-bird, but most other sources have considered it to
>be a genuine vagrant.  It might be interesting to reexamine the specimen.
>Also I believe there is now a reasonably good DNA baseline available so
>molecular testing might shed further light on the record.
>
>I believe a couple of other specimens from Eastern North America have been
>attributed to M. m. satrapa from Mexico/Central America.  Some are listed
>by Mlodinov in a 1998 article in "Field Notes."  They should probably be
>reviewed again. Mlodinov's summary is at...
>
>https://sora.unm.edu/node/113356
>
>
>On Mon, 23 May 2016 09:18:49 -0700, Peter Pyle  wrote:
>
> >Some discussion we had last summer (below) on where spring-summer
> >Tropical Kingbirds north of the range in North America may originate.
> >My first take on the Wisconsin bird is that it fits molt and wear
> >patterns for northern populations but I'll take another look later today.
> >
> >Peter
> >
> >>Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2015 11:25:08 -0700
> >>To: "R.D. Everhart" 
> >>From: Peter Pyle 
> >>Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Minnesota Tropical Kingbird
> >>Cc: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> >>
> >>Hi Roger and all -
> >>
> >>David Sibley also forwarded an open-wing shot of the kingbird taken
> >>by Annabelle Watts. My response below applies as well to your photos
> >>just posted (where you can see all primaries replaced but the
> >>secondaries still old, but not looking old enough for juvenile
> >>feathers), although the outer primary tip is not visible. We both
> >>think that summer records of Tropical Kingbirds in eastern North
> >>America may most likely be of nominate Austral migrants, and this
> >>would seem to indicate the potential for White-throated Kingbird to
> >>show up as well.
> >>
> >>Peter
> >>
> >>The flight shot by Annabelle Watts is quite useful in that it
> >>indicates it to be an adult female. Had it been a first-year bird
> >>undergoing the preformative molt we would expect it to have an
> >>eccentric pattern (retaining inner primaries and beginning molt at
> >>p4-p7) instead of showing all inner primaries replaced. (It seems
> >>close to all kingbird individuals undergo eccentric preformative
> >>molts, except in Eastern Kingbird where all primaries are usually
> >>replaced.)  Also the outer primaries and secondaries on the
> >>Minnesota bird do not look like juvenile feathers to me, with enough
> >>of a notch to p10 to indicate a formative or basic feather in a
> >>female. I had suspected this based on what I could see in Roger
> >>Evehart's photo but I was not sure enough.
> >>
> >>The time frame for completing the prebasic molt in occidentalis
> >>would be Nov according the ID Guide, but it would not surprise me if
> >>these molts regularly extend into winter or early spring. We're
> >>finding that birds undergoing flight-feather molt on Neotropical
> >>winter grounds tend to protract it more than is published, due to
> >>lack of food and other constraints, only needing to complete it
> >>before spring migration. Thus, I'd expect occidentalis could easily
> >>be completing a prebasic molt in Nov-Jan or later. As such, the molt
> >>timing of the Minnesota bird is six months off cycle and would
> >>indicate an Austral migrant. I don't see the prebasic molt being
> >>anywhere close to this stage in late June, in any Boreal-cycle kingbird.
> >>
> >>The outer rectrices of the Ontario kingbird
> >>http://tinyurl.com/pr5dmod
> >>look like juvenile feathers by shape, but do not show the extreme
> >>wear that juvenile feathers would show if it was a year-old
> >>occidentalis. Plus, the juvenile rectrices are often replaced during
> >>the preformative molt (although the ID Guide splits the
> >>flight-feather molt into preformative and first prealternate, I
> >>would tend now to call it all part of a protracted preformative molt
> >>overlapping first-prealternate body feather molt). The outer
> >>primary, from what I can see of it, looks brownish and pointed like
> >>a juvenile feather and it almost looks like p9 might be missing and
> >>p8 growing, but this is just a speculative hunch. Too bad there are
> >>not more photos. But if my hunches are correct it would indicate the
> >>bird may have been completing the preformative molt, again about six
> >>months off what would be expected of occidentalis.
> >>
> >>I don't know how this might equate to molt and migration in nominate
> >>Tropical Kingbird or White-throated Kingbird, but it seems
> >>reasonable that they could show molt patterns similar to Boreal
> >>conspecific/congeners but six months off cycle. I'll be interested
> >>in further thoughts and documentation on these or any other vagrant
> >>summer Tropical Kingbirds. The Farallon specimen has unfortunately
> >>been misplaced, but I still hope it turns up somewhere for analysis
> >>of molt timing and age.
> >>
> >>
> >>At 08:37 AM 7/3/2015, R.D. Everhart wrote:
> >>>Based on Peter's comments I went back and found a couple of photos of
> >>>the Minnesota Kingbird that may (or may not) help the discussion. I
> >>>posted them at
> >>>
> >>>http://minnesotabirdnerd.blogspot.com
> >>>
> >>>Hope this helps.
> >>>
> >>>Roger Everhart
> >>>Apple Valley, MN
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>---- Original Message ----
> >>>From: ppyle AT birdpop.org
> >>>To: everhart AT BLACK-HOLE.COM, wormington AT JUNO.COM
> >>>Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Minnesota Tropical Kingbird
> >>>Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 12:57:07 -0700
> >>>
> >>> >I'm not certain of this, but it seems both the Minnesota and the
> >>> >Ontario kingbirds may be on molt cycles reflecting an Austral rather
> >>> >than a Boreal breeding and migrating populations. The Minnesota bird
> >>> >is completing a molt and I thought that the Ontario bird may still
> >>> >have juvenile outer rectrices and outer primary (but not worn enough
> >>> >to be a year old). Better photos of each, with open wings and tails,
> >>> >would help determine molt progression and age. For northern Tropical
> >>> >Kingbirds (occidentalis) we would expect to see molt patterns like
> >>> >this in Nov-Dec on the winter grounds (both preformative and
> >>> >prebasic) and not June. Something to consider when encountering and
> >>> >documenting summer kingbirds in North America.
> >>> >
> >>> >Peter
> >>> >
> >>> >At 10:59 AM 7/2/2015, R.D. Everhart wrote:
> >>> >>Hey everyone-
> >>> >>
> >>> >>     I went out to chase the Tropical Kingbird that has been seen at
> >>> >>Murphy-Hanrahan Park south of Minneapolis/St. Paul and got a few
> >>> >>photos that I have posted here:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>http://minnesotabirdnerd.blogspot.com
> >>> >>
> >>> >>    The bird was seen off and on between about 7 am and 9:30 am. It
> >>> >>did not vocalize while I was there.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>Roger Everhart
> >>> >>Apple Valley, MN
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
> >
> >Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>--
>Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [BIRDWG01] Minnesota Tropical Kingbird
From: Joseph Morlan <jmorlan AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 12:48:07 -0700
Peter,

My recollection is that the Farallon Tropical Kingbird specimen from August
1973 (PRBO #713) was identified by Wesley Lanyon as M. m. obscurus which
ranges from western and central Peru north to Ecuador and SW Columbia. This
race is now synonymized by most authors with nominate melancholicus.  

Information on obscurus is hard to come by, but Zimmer's 1937 description
of obscurus along with comparison of other races is at....

http://digitallibrary.amnh.org/handle/2246/3860

The BNA account mentions that Steve Cardiff examined the specimen and felt
it was an escaped cage-bird, but most other sources have considered it to
be a genuine vagrant.  It might be interesting to reexamine the specimen.
Also I believe there is now a reasonably good DNA baseline available so
molecular testing might shed further light on the record.  

I believe a couple of other specimens from Eastern North America have been
attributed to M. m. satrapa from Mexico/Central America.  Some are listed
by Mlodinov in a 1998 article in "Field Notes."  They should probably be
reviewed again. Mlodinov's summary is at...  

https://sora.unm.edu/node/113356


On Mon, 23 May 2016 09:18:49 -0700, Peter Pyle  wrote:

>Some discussion we had last summer (below) on where spring-summer 
>Tropical Kingbirds north of the range in North America may originate. 
>My first take on the Wisconsin bird is that it fits molt and wear 
>patterns for northern populations but I'll take another look later today.
>
>Peter
>
>>Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2015 11:25:08 -0700
>>To: "R.D. Everhart" 
>>From: Peter Pyle 
>>Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Minnesota Tropical Kingbird
>>Cc: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
>>
>>Hi Roger and all -
>>
>>David Sibley also forwarded an open-wing shot of the kingbird taken 
>>by Annabelle Watts. My response below applies as well to your photos 
>>just posted (where you can see all primaries replaced but the 
>>secondaries still old, but not looking old enough for juvenile 
>>feathers), although the outer primary tip is not visible. We both 
>>think that summer records of Tropical Kingbirds in eastern North 
>>America may most likely be of nominate Austral migrants, and this 
>>would seem to indicate the potential for White-throated Kingbird to 
>>show up as well.
>>
>>Peter
>>
>>The flight shot by Annabelle Watts is quite useful in that it 
>>indicates it to be an adult female. Had it been a first-year bird 
>>undergoing the preformative molt we would expect it to have an 
>>eccentric pattern (retaining inner primaries and beginning molt at 
>>p4-p7) instead of showing all inner primaries replaced. (It seems 
>>close to all kingbird individuals undergo eccentric preformative 
>>molts, except in Eastern Kingbird where all primaries are usually 
>>replaced.)  Also the outer primaries and secondaries on the 
>>Minnesota bird do not look like juvenile feathers to me, with enough 
>>of a notch to p10 to indicate a formative or basic feather in a 
>>female. I had suspected this based on what I could see in Roger 
>>Evehart's photo but I was not sure enough.
>>
>>The time frame for completing the prebasic molt in occidentalis 
>>would be Nov according the ID Guide, but it would not surprise me if 
>>these molts regularly extend into winter or early spring. We're 
>>finding that birds undergoing flight-feather molt on Neotropical 
>>winter grounds tend to protract it more than is published, due to 
>>lack of food and other constraints, only needing to complete it 
>>before spring migration. Thus, I'd expect occidentalis could easily 
>>be completing a prebasic molt in Nov-Jan or later. As such, the molt 
>>timing of the Minnesota bird is six months off cycle and would 
>>indicate an Austral migrant. I don't see the prebasic molt being 
>>anywhere close to this stage in late June, in any Boreal-cycle kingbird.
>>
>>The outer rectrices of the Ontario kingbird
>>http://tinyurl.com/pr5dmod
>>look like juvenile feathers by shape, but do not show the extreme 
>>wear that juvenile feathers would show if it was a year-old 
>>occidentalis. Plus, the juvenile rectrices are often replaced during 
>>the preformative molt (although the ID Guide splits the 
>>flight-feather molt into preformative and first prealternate, I 
>>would tend now to call it all part of a protracted preformative molt 
>>overlapping first-prealternate body feather molt). The outer 
>>primary, from what I can see of it, looks brownish and pointed like 
>>a juvenile feather and it almost looks like p9 might be missing and 
>>p8 growing, but this is just a speculative hunch. Too bad there are 
>>not more photos. But if my hunches are correct it would indicate the 
>>bird may have been completing the preformative molt, again about six 
>>months off what would be expected of occidentalis.
>>
>>I don't know how this might equate to molt and migration in nominate 
>>Tropical Kingbird or White-throated Kingbird, but it seems 
>>reasonable that they could show molt patterns similar to Boreal 
>>conspecific/congeners but six months off cycle. I'll be interested 
>>in further thoughts and documentation on these or any other vagrant 
>>summer Tropical Kingbirds. The Farallon specimen has unfortunately 
>>been misplaced, but I still hope it turns up somewhere for analysis 
>>of molt timing and age.
>>
>>
>>At 08:37 AM 7/3/2015, R.D. Everhart wrote:
>>>Based on Peter's comments I went back and found a couple of photos of
>>>the Minnesota Kingbird that may (or may not) help the discussion. I
>>>posted them at
>>>
>>>http://minnesotabirdnerd.blogspot.com
>>>
>>>Hope this helps.
>>>
>>>Roger Everhart
>>>Apple Valley, MN
>>>
>>>
>>>---- Original Message ----
>>>From: ppyle AT birdpop.org
>>>To: everhart AT BLACK-HOLE.COM, wormington AT JUNO.COM
>>>Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Minnesota Tropical Kingbird
>>>Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 12:57:07 -0700
>>>
>>> >I'm not certain of this, but it seems both the Minnesota and the
>>> >Ontario kingbirds may be on molt cycles reflecting an Austral rather
>>> >than a Boreal breeding and migrating populations. The Minnesota bird
>>> >is completing a molt and I thought that the Ontario bird may still
>>> >have juvenile outer rectrices and outer primary (but not worn enough
>>> >to be a year old). Better photos of each, with open wings and tails,
>>> >would help determine molt progression and age. For northern Tropical
>>> >Kingbirds (occidentalis) we would expect to see molt patterns like
>>> >this in Nov-Dec on the winter grounds (both preformative and
>>> >prebasic) and not June. Something to consider when encountering and
>>> >documenting summer kingbirds in North America.
>>> >
>>> >Peter
>>> >
>>> >At 10:59 AM 7/2/2015, R.D. Everhart wrote:
>>> >>Hey everyone-
>>> >>
>>> >>     I went out to chase the Tropical Kingbird that has been seen at
>>> >>Murphy-Hanrahan Park south of Minneapolis/St. Paul and got a few
>>> >>photos that I have posted here:
>>> >>
>>> >>http://minnesotabirdnerd.blogspot.com
>>> >>
>>> >>    The bird was seen off and on between about 7 am and 9:30 am. It
>>> >>did not vocalize while I was there.
>>> >>
>>> >>Roger Everhart
>>> >>Apple Valley, MN
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>>> >
>>>
>>>Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>
>Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
--
Joseph Morlan, Pacifica, CA

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao AT COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 09:34:01 -0700
Brian, 
 Interesting! One issue that may be a problem is that the subspecific 
delineation might not fall clearly along the line of migrant vs resident forms. 
Whether the break is migrant vs resident or South American vs north of Panama 
is an open question. I think vocal work or genetics would have to be 
incorporated. There are vocal differences between South America Tropical and 
those from farther north, not huge, but they exist. See below. 

 Something similar will be published soon regarding Vermilion Flycatchers, a 
paper I am involved in, Austral migrants being one of the elements involved. 
Again, I do wonder if some vagrant Vermilion Flycatchers are actually South 
American Austral migrants. 


TROPICAL KINGBIRD DAWN SONGS: 
Dawn song Nicaragua
http://www.xeno-canto.org/11078

Dawn song Costa Rica
http://www.xeno-canto.org/137689

Dawn song Ecuador
http://www.xeno-canto.org/260975

Dawn song Brazil
http://www.xeno-canto.org/247446


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

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

Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 9:13 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin

Al et al.,

I've wondered the same thing, even about some of the fall birds in CA. I've 
posted these before, but this individual had me thinking pretty hard about some 
of the Austral forms. No conclusion though: 


http://ebird.org/ebird/view/checklist?subID=S15300880

Brian

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Alvaro Jaramillo 
wrote:

> All,
>   Is there any evidence that some of these vagrant Tropicals are in 
> fact the Austral migrants from Southern South America? They are long 
> distance migrants, perhaps not as much as Fork-tailed Flycatchers but close 
to it. 

> Therefore it is logical to think that some of them make it to North 
> America. Maybe? Some of these birds are smaller billed to me than what 
> one characteristically sees in Mexico-Central America.
>    Photos here. http://www.wikiaves.com.br/753524&t=s&s=11338&p=2
>
> Alvaro Jaramillo
> alvaro AT alvarosadventures.com
> www.alvarosadventures.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification [mailto:
> BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET
> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 8:25 AM
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern 
> Wisconsin
>
> Ryan and all: Dave Irons did a good job with his comments on this bird 
> concerning differences in some Tropical and Couch's Kingbirds. I have 
> been studying these two species critically in the Rio Grande Valley 
> where they occur together for much of the year for over 15 years in 
> fall, and using their calls to confirm the ID of the birds in 
> question, and then assessing the physical profile of each bird. As 
> Dave pointed out, some birds fall into a middle ground category where 
> the physical features are not definitive, and where call is needed to 
> verify the ID. I can usually ID some of these in between birds as 
> well, however, after studying hundreds of individuals using their bill 
> size/length/shape proportions and their head shape in a relaxed mood.
>
> In my opinion, this is definitely a Tropical Kingbird that is not one 
> of the in between birds. I suspected prior to this year that male 
> Tropicals are probably the ones with smaller bills and less definitive 
> head shapes, but recent study that I did of mated pairs of Tropicals 
> in Honduras did not show the obvious differences that occur in some 
> birds, but one bird in each pair had slight differences in bill size 
> and head shape. The very long, heavy bill of this bird that does not 
> show a deeper base is one that I have only seen in Tropical Kingbird, 
> and never in Couch's. Couch's usually shows a shorter bill that has a 
> noticeable thicker base, and whose bill does not approach the length 
> and overall massive nature of this bird's bill. As Dave pointed out, 
> Couch's typically in a relaxed mood shows a steep forecrown that rises 
> to a more dome shaped head, which is usually shallower in depth from 
> front to back compared to most Tropicals. Tropical's head shape is 
> usually "squarer or more rectangular" in shape, for lack of better 
> words to describe a head that does not have a rounded appearance due 
> to the higher crown and shallower depth of head like Couch's. 
> Tropical's crown is typically somewhat flat across the top, like the 
> bird shown, unless it is agitated. I provided a link to a composite 
> photo I put together from two calling birds that shows these 
> differences in the two birds: Couch's at
> left: Tropical at right.
> http://kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Frontiers/Figure+152+-+Co
> uch_s+Kingbird+and+Tropical+Kingbird_+new+Sept+2013.jpg.html
> .
>
> The Tropical in this composite photo is not one of the large-billed 
> birds that I often encounter, which is why I used it in this composite 
> to show how subtle the differences can be, but they are obvious in 
> this photo if you critically compare them. Many Couch's also don't 
> show forked tails, but square-tipped ones (males?), so this feature is 
> also helpful in eliminating some Couch's, but these birds with square 
> tails usually have very short, thick based bills and high profile 
> heads like the bird in my composite. I would not hesitate calling this 
> bird a Tropical Kingbird, but I know a first state record usually 
> requires some more concrete information for acceptance. Just for 
> comparison sake, I included a link to a long-billed Tropical from 
> Costa Rica that is more representative of the extreme Tropical's Dave 
> speaks of, with a very long, even width bill, shallow forecrown and deep head 
profile: 

> http://kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Flycatchers/Tropical+King
> bird_+March_+Costa+Rica.jpg.html
>
> Kevin Karlson
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Ryan Brady" 
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 11:23:52 PM
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
>
> We found a Tropical/Couch's Kingbird along the Lake Superior shoreline 
> in Washburn, Wisconsin, on Thursday. It never vocalized and was seen 
> for only a short time on one day. Though we're aware it's a very 
> difficult ID I did manage a bunch of images from various angles.
>
>
> http://www.pbase.com/rbrady/kingbird2016
>
>
> Is there even a chance of separating the two without vocals? Wisconsin 
> has only one accepted Tropical/Couch's (which was initially reported 
> as a Western and had few accompanying photos) and none for either at 
> species level.
>
> Thanks for any input you can provide.
>
>
> Ryan Brady
> Washburn, Bayfield County, WI
>
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>



--
===========


*Brian L. SullivaneBird Project Leader *
www.ebird.org

*Photo Editor*
Birds of North America Online
http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/BNA
-------------------------------

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Fwd: Re: [BIRDWG01] Minnesota Tropical Kingbird
From: Peter Pyle <ppyle AT BIRDPOP.ORG>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 09:18:49 -0700
Some discussion we had last summer (below) on where spring-summer 
Tropical Kingbirds north of the range in North America may originate. 
My first take on the Wisconsin bird is that it fits molt and wear 
patterns for northern populations but I'll take another look later today.

Peter

>Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2015 11:25:08 -0700
>To: "R.D. Everhart" 
>From: Peter Pyle 
>Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Minnesota Tropical Kingbird
>Cc: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
>
>Hi Roger and all -
>
>David Sibley also forwarded an open-wing shot of the kingbird taken 
>by Annabelle Watts. My response below applies as well to your photos 
>just posted (where you can see all primaries replaced but the 
>secondaries still old, but not looking old enough for juvenile 
>feathers), although the outer primary tip is not visible. We both 
>think that summer records of Tropical Kingbirds in eastern North 
>America may most likely be of nominate Austral migrants, and this 
>would seem to indicate the potential for White-throated Kingbird to 
>show up as well.
>
>Peter
>
>The flight shot by Annabelle Watts is quite useful in that it 
>indicates it to be an adult female. Had it been a first-year bird 
>undergoing the preformative molt we would expect it to have an 
>eccentric pattern (retaining inner primaries and beginning molt at 
>p4-p7) instead of showing all inner primaries replaced. (It seems 
>close to all kingbird individuals undergo eccentric preformative 
>molts, except in Eastern Kingbird where all primaries are usually 
>replaced.)  Also the outer primaries and secondaries on the 
>Minnesota bird do not look like juvenile feathers to me, with enough 
>of a notch to p10 to indicate a formative or basic feather in a 
>female. I had suspected this based on what I could see in Roger 
>Evehart's photo but I was not sure enough.
>
>The time frame for completing the prebasic molt in occidentalis 
>would be Nov according the ID Guide, but it would not surprise me if 
>these molts regularly extend into winter or early spring. We're 
>finding that birds undergoing flight-feather molt on Neotropical 
>winter grounds tend to protract it more than is published, due to 
>lack of food and other constraints, only needing to complete it 
>before spring migration. Thus, I'd expect occidentalis could easily 
>be completing a prebasic molt in Nov-Jan or later. As such, the molt 
>timing of the Minnesota bird is six months off cycle and would 
>indicate an Austral migrant. I don't see the prebasic molt being 
>anywhere close to this stage in late June, in any Boreal-cycle kingbird.
>
>The outer rectrices of the Ontario kingbird
>http://tinyurl.com/pr5dmod
>look like juvenile feathers by shape, but do not show the extreme 
>wear that juvenile feathers would show if it was a year-old 
>occidentalis. Plus, the juvenile rectrices are often replaced during 
>the preformative molt (although the ID Guide splits the 
>flight-feather molt into preformative and first prealternate, I 
>would tend now to call it all part of a protracted preformative molt 
>overlapping first-prealternate body feather molt). The outer 
>primary, from what I can see of it, looks brownish and pointed like 
>a juvenile feather and it almost looks like p9 might be missing and 
>p8 growing, but this is just a speculative hunch. Too bad there are 
>not more photos. But if my hunches are correct it would indicate the 
>bird may have been completing the preformative molt, again about six 
>months off what would be expected of occidentalis.
>
>I don't know how this might equate to molt and migration in nominate 
>Tropical Kingbird or White-throated Kingbird, but it seems 
>reasonable that they could show molt patterns similar to Boreal 
>conspecific/congeners but six months off cycle. I'll be interested 
>in further thoughts and documentation on these or any other vagrant 
>summer Tropical Kingbirds. The Farallon specimen has unfortunately 
>been misplaced, but I still hope it turns up somewhere for analysis 
>of molt timing and age.
>
>
>At 08:37 AM 7/3/2015, R.D. Everhart wrote:
>>Based on Peter's comments I went back and found a couple of photos of
>>the Minnesota Kingbird that may (or may not) help the discussion. I
>>posted them at
>>
>>http://minnesotabirdnerd.blogspot.com
>>
>>Hope this helps.
>>
>>Roger Everhart
>>Apple Valley, MN
>>
>>
>>---- Original Message ----
>>From: ppyle AT birdpop.org
>>To: everhart AT BLACK-HOLE.COM, wormington AT JUNO.COM
>>Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Minnesota Tropical Kingbird
>>Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 12:57:07 -0700
>>
>> >I'm not certain of this, but it seems both the Minnesota and the
>> >Ontario kingbirds may be on molt cycles reflecting an Austral rather
>> >than a Boreal breeding and migrating populations. The Minnesota bird
>> >is completing a molt and I thought that the Ontario bird may still
>> >have juvenile outer rectrices and outer primary (but not worn enough
>> >to be a year old). Better photos of each, with open wings and tails,
>> >would help determine molt progression and age. For northern Tropical
>> >Kingbirds (occidentalis) we would expect to see molt patterns like
>> >this in Nov-Dec on the winter grounds (both preformative and
>> >prebasic) and not June. Something to consider when encountering and
>> >documenting summer kingbirds in North America.
>> >
>> >Peter
>> >
>> >At 10:59 AM 7/2/2015, R.D. Everhart wrote:
>> >>Hey everyone-
>> >>
>> >>     I went out to chase the Tropical Kingbird that has been seen at
>> >>Murphy-Hanrahan Park south of Minneapolis/St. Paul and got a few
>> >>photos that I have posted here:
>> >>
>> >>http://minnesotabirdnerd.blogspot.com
>> >>
>> >>    The bird was seen off and on between about 7 am and 9:30 am. It
>> >>did not vocalize while I was there.
>> >>
>> >>Roger Everhart
>> >>Apple Valley, MN
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>> >
>>
>>Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
From: Brian Sullivan <heraldpetrel AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 10:13:07 -0600
Al et al.,

I've wondered the same thing, even about some of the fall birds in CA. I've
posted these before, but this individual had me thinking pretty hard about
some of the Austral forms. No conclusion though:

http://ebird.org/ebird/view/checklist?subID=S15300880

Brian

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Alvaro Jaramillo 
wrote:

> All,
>   Is there any evidence that some of these vagrant Tropicals are in fact
> the Austral migrants from Southern South America? They are long distance
> migrants, perhaps not as much as Fork-tailed Flycatchers but close to it.
> Therefore it is logical to think that some of them make it to North
> America. Maybe? Some of these birds are smaller billed to me than what one
> characteristically sees in Mexico-Central America.
>    Photos here. http://www.wikiaves.com.br/753524&t=s&s=11338&p=2
>
> Alvaro Jaramillo
> alvaro AT alvarosadventures.com
> www.alvarosadventures.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification [mailto:
> BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET
> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 8:25 AM
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
>
> Ryan and all: Dave Irons did a good job with his comments on this bird
> concerning differences in some Tropical and Couch's Kingbirds. I have been
> studying these two species critically in the Rio Grande Valley where they
> occur together for much of the year for over 15 years in fall, and using
> their calls to confirm the ID of the birds in question, and then assessing
> the physical profile of each bird. As Dave pointed out, some birds fall
> into a middle ground category where the physical features are not
> definitive, and where call is needed to verify the ID. I can usually ID
> some of these in between birds as well, however, after studying hundreds of
> individuals using their bill size/length/shape proportions and their head
> shape in a relaxed mood.
>
> In my opinion, this is definitely a Tropical Kingbird that is not one of
> the in between birds. I suspected prior to this year that male Tropicals
> are probably the ones with smaller bills and less definitive head shapes,
> but recent study that I did of mated pairs of Tropicals in Honduras did not
> show the obvious differences that occur in some birds, but one bird in each
> pair had slight differences in bill size and head shape. The very long,
> heavy bill of this bird that does not show a deeper base is one that I have
> only seen in Tropical Kingbird, and never in Couch's. Couch's usually shows
> a shorter bill that has a noticeable thicker base, and whose bill does not
> approach the length and overall massive nature of this bird's bill. As Dave
> pointed out, Couch's typically in a relaxed mood shows a steep forecrown
> that rises to a more dome shaped head, which is usually shallower in depth
> from front to back compared to most Tropicals. Tropical's head shape is
> usually "squarer or more rectangular" in shape, for lack of better words to
> describe a head that does not have a rounded appearance due to the higher
> crown and shallower depth of head like Couch's. Tropical's crown is
> typically somewhat flat across the top, like the bird shown, unless it is
> agitated. I provided a link to a composite photo I put together from two
> calling birds that shows these differences in the two birds: Couch's at
> left: Tropical at right.
> 
http://kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Frontiers/Figure+152+-+Couch_s+Kingbird+and+Tropical+Kingbird_+new+Sept+2013.jpg.html 

> .
>
> The Tropical in this composite photo is not one of the large-billed birds
> that I often encounter, which is why I used it in this composite to show
> how subtle the differences can be, but they are obvious in this photo if
> you critically compare them. Many Couch's also don't show forked tails, but
> square-tipped ones (males?), so this feature is also helpful in eliminating
> some Couch's, but these birds with square tails usually have very short,
> thick based bills and high profile heads like the bird in my composite. I
> would not hesitate calling this bird a Tropical Kingbird, but I know a
> first state record usually requires some more concrete information for
> acceptance. Just for comparison sake, I included a link to a long-billed
> Tropical from Costa Rica that is more representative of the extreme
> Tropical's Dave speaks of, with a very long, even width bill, shallow
> forecrown and deep head profile:
> 
http://kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Flycatchers/Tropical+Kingbird_+March_+Costa+Rica.jpg.html 

>
> Kevin Karlson
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Ryan Brady" 
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 11:23:52 PM
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
>
> We found a Tropical/Couch's Kingbird along the Lake Superior shoreline in
> Washburn, Wisconsin, on Thursday. It never vocalized and was seen for only
> a short time on one day. Though we're aware it's a very difficult ID I did
> manage a bunch of images from various angles.
>
>
> http://www.pbase.com/rbrady/kingbird2016
>
>
> Is there even a chance of separating the two without vocals? Wisconsin has
> only one accepted Tropical/Couch's (which was initially reported as a
> Western and had few accompanying photos) and none for either at species
> level.
>
> Thanks for any input you can provide.
>
>
> Ryan Brady
> Washburn, Bayfield County, WI
>
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>



-- 
===========


*Brian L. SullivaneBird Project Leader *
www.ebird.org

*Photo Editor*
Birds of North America Online
http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/BNA
-------------------------------

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao AT COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 09:01:53 -0700
All, 
 Is there any evidence that some of these vagrant Tropicals are in fact the 
Austral migrants from Southern South America? They are long distance migrants, 
perhaps not as much as Fork-tailed Flycatchers but close to it. Therefore it is 
logical to think that some of them make it to North America. Maybe? Some of 
these birds are smaller billed to me than what one characteristically sees in 
Mexico-Central America. 

   Photos here. http://www.wikiaves.com.br/753524&t=s&s=11338&p=2 

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

-----Original Message-----
From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification 
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET 

Sent: Monday, May 23, 2016 8:25 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin

Ryan and all: Dave Irons did a good job with his comments on this bird 
concerning differences in some Tropical and Couch's Kingbirds. I have been 
studying these two species critically in the Rio Grande Valley where they occur 
together for much of the year for over 15 years in fall, and using their calls 
to confirm the ID of the birds in question, and then assessing the physical 
profile of each bird. As Dave pointed out, some birds fall into a middle ground 
category where the physical features are not definitive, and where call is 
needed to verify the ID. I can usually ID some of these in between birds as 
well, however, after studying hundreds of individuals using their bill 
size/length/shape proportions and their head shape in a relaxed mood. 


In my opinion, this is definitely a Tropical Kingbird that is not one of the in 
between birds. I suspected prior to this year that male Tropicals are probably 
the ones with smaller bills and less definitive head shapes, but recent study 
that I did of mated pairs of Tropicals in Honduras did not show the obvious 
differences that occur in some birds, but one bird in each pair had slight 
differences in bill size and head shape. The very long, heavy bill of this bird 
that does not show a deeper base is one that I have only seen in Tropical 
Kingbird, and never in Couch's. Couch's usually shows a shorter bill that has a 
noticeable thicker base, and whose bill does not approach the length and 
overall massive nature of this bird's bill. As Dave pointed out, Couch's 
typically in a relaxed mood shows a steep forecrown that rises to a more dome 
shaped head, which is usually shallower in depth from front to back compared to 
most Tropicals. Tropical's head shape is usually "squarer or more rectangular" 
in shape, for lack of better words to describe a head that does not have a 
rounded appearance due to the higher crown and shallower depth of head like 
Couch's. Tropical's crown is typically somewhat flat across the top, like the 
bird shown, unless it is agitated. I provided a link to a composite photo I put 
together from two calling birds that shows these differences in the two birds: 
Couch's at left: Tropical at right. 
http://kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Frontiers/Figure+152+-+Couch_s+Kingbird+and+Tropical+Kingbird_+new+Sept+2013.jpg.html. 


The Tropical in this composite photo is not one of the large-billed birds that 
I often encounter, which is why I used it in this composite to show how subtle 
the differences can be, but they are obvious in this photo if you critically 
compare them. Many Couch's also don't show forked tails, but square-tipped ones 
(males?), so this feature is also helpful in eliminating some Couch's, but 
these birds with square tails usually have very short, thick based bills and 
high profile heads like the bird in my composite. I would not hesitate calling 
this bird a Tropical Kingbird, but I know a first state record usually requires 
some more concrete information for acceptance. Just for comparison sake, I 
included a link to a long-billed Tropical from Costa Rica that is more 
representative of the extreme Tropical's Dave speaks of, with a very long, even 
width bill, shallow forecrown and deep head profile: 
http://kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Flycatchers/Tropical+Kingbird_+March_+Costa+Rica.jpg.html 


Kevin Karlson 

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

From: "Ryan Brady"  
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU 
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 11:23:52 PM 
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin 

We found a Tropical/Couch's Kingbird along the Lake Superior shoreline in 
Washburn, Wisconsin, on Thursday. It never vocalized and was seen for only a 
short time on one day. Though we're aware it's a very difficult ID I did manage 
a bunch of images from various angles. 



http://www.pbase.com/rbrady/kingbird2016 


Is there even a chance of separating the two without vocals? Wisconsin has only 
one accepted Tropical/Couch's (which was initially reported as a Western and 
had few accompanying photos) and none for either at species level. 


Thanks for any input you can provide. 


Ryan Brady 
Washburn, Bayfield County, WI 


Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html 


Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
From: Peter Pyle <ppyle AT BIRDPOP.ORG>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 08:32:54 -0700
I concur with first-spring TRKI (nice eccentric pattern) and would 
add that it appears to be a female by the shape of the formative 
outer primary.

Peter

At 09:26 PM 5/22/2016, Tony Leukering wrote:
>Hey Ryan:
>
>First off, your bird seems to be a second-calendar-year beast, if I 
>read Pyle (1997) correctly, due to the obvious molt limit in the ss.
>
>Wing formula is useful in this differentiation, so it's unfortunate 
>that the open-wing shots aren't the best.  However, in pic 8383, the 
>right wing seems to be shown well enough for me to take a stab at 
>it.  While it's difficult to be certain where the tip of p10 is, 
>precisely, p5 seems obviously not much shorter than p6.  The same 
>p5-p6 relationship seems to be shown by pic 8353.  That should argue 
>strongly that the bird is a Tropical.
>
>Tony
>
>Tony Leukering
>currently Cut Bank, MT
>www.aba.org/photoquiz/
>www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering
>http://cowyebird.blogspot.com
>
> > On May 22, 2016, at 21:23, Ryan Brady  wrote:
> >
> > We found a Tropical/Couch's Kingbird along the Lake Superior 
> shoreline in Washburn, Wisconsin, on Thursday. It never vocalized 
> and was seen for only a short time on one day. Though we're aware 
> it's a very difficult ID I did manage a bunch of images from various angles.
> >
> >
> > http://www.pbase.com/rbrady/kingbird2016
> >
> >
> > Is there even a chance of separating the two without vocals? 
> Wisconsin has only one accepted Tropical/Couch's (which was 
> initially reported as a Western and had few accompanying photos) 
> and none for either at species level.
> >
> > Thanks for any input you can provide.
> >
> >
> > Ryan Brady
> > Washburn, Bayfield County, WI
> >
> >
> > Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>
>Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
From: karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 15:24:54 +0000
Ryan and all: Dave Irons did a good job with his comments on this bird 
concerning differences in some Tropical and Couch's Kingbirds. I have been 
studying these two species critically in the Rio Grande Valley where they occur 
together for much of the year for over 15 years in fall, and using their calls 
to confirm the ID of the birds in question, and then assessing the physical 
profile of each bird. As Dave pointed out, some birds fall into a middle ground 
category where the physical features are not definitive, and where call is 
needed to verify the ID. I can usually ID some of these in between birds as 
well, however, after studying hundreds of individuals using their bill 
size/length/shape proportions and their head shape in a relaxed mood. 


In my opinion, this is definitely a Tropical Kingbird that is not one of the in 
between birds. I suspected prior to this year that male Tropicals are probably 
the ones with smaller bills and less definitive head shapes, but recent study 
that I did of mated pairs of Tropicals in Honduras did not show the obvious 
differences that occur in some birds, but one bird in each pair had slight 
differences in bill size and head shape. The very long, heavy bill of this bird 
that does not show a deeper base is one that I have only seen in Tropical 
Kingbird, and never in Couch's. Couch's usually shows a shorter bill that has a 
noticeable thicker base, and whose bill does not approach the length and 
overall massive nature of this bird's bill. As Dave pointed out, Couch's 
typically in a relaxed mood shows a steep forecrown that rises to a more dome 
shaped head, which is usually shallower in depth from front to back compared to 
most Tropicals. Tropical's head shape is usually "squarer or more rectangular" 
in shape, for lack of better words to describe a head that does not have a 
rounded appearance due to the higher crown and shallower depth of head like 
Couch's. Tropical's crown is typically somewhat flat across the top, like the 
bird shown, unless it is agitated. I provided a link to a composite photo I put 
together from two calling birds that shows these differences in the two birds: 
Couch's at left: Tropical at right. 
http://kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Frontiers/Figure+152+-+Couch_s+Kingbird+and+Tropical+Kingbird_+new+Sept+2013.jpg.html. 


The Tropical in this composite photo is not one of the large-billed birds that 
I often encounter, which is why I used it in this composite to show how subtle 
the differences can be, but they are obvious in this photo if you critically 
compare them. Many Couch's also don't show forked tails, but square-tipped ones 
(males?), so this feature is also helpful in eliminating some Couch's, but 
these birds with square tails usually have very short, thick based bills and 
high profile heads like the bird in my composite. I would not hesitate calling 
this bird a Tropical Kingbird, but I know a first state record usually requires 
some more concrete information for acceptance. Just for comparison sake, I 
included a link to a long-billed Tropical from Costa Rica that is more 
representative of the extreme Tropical's Dave speaks of, with a very long, even 
width bill, shallow forecrown and deep head profile: 
http://kevinkarlsonphotography.com/gallery/v/Flycatchers/Tropical+Kingbird_+March_+Costa+Rica.jpg.html 


Kevin Karlson 

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

From: "Ryan Brady"  
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU 
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 11:23:52 PM 
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin 

We found a Tropical/Couch's Kingbird along the Lake Superior shoreline in 
Washburn, Wisconsin, on Thursday. It never vocalized and was seen for only a 
short time on one day. Though we're aware it's a very difficult ID I did manage 
a bunch of images from various angles. 



http://www.pbase.com/rbrady/kingbird2016 


Is there even a chance of separating the two without vocals? Wisconsin has only 
one accepted Tropical/Couch's (which was initially reported as a Western and 
had few accompanying photos) and none for either at species level. 


Thanks for any input you can provide. 


Ryan Brady 
Washburn, Bayfield County, WI 


Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html 


Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
From: David Irons <llsdirons AT MSN.COM>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 04:31:15 +0000
Ryan,

In my opinion, many of the profile shots of this bird's bill are strongly 
suggestive, if not diagnostic for Tropical Kingbird. There are certainly birds 
that are tweeners in terms of apparent bill length and shape, but this does not 
fall into that category. In particular, photos 8453, 8455, 8456, 8457 and 8481 
capture what I would characterize as the classic Tropical Kingbird bill shape 
and length. To my eye, Tropicals generally show noticeably longer bills than 
Couch's and the base to tip taper is not as apparent. Couch's have a shorter 
bill that usually looks proportionally thick at the base (probably due to 
shorter overall length) and is more steeply tapered from base to tip. 


There are some other features that I think also support this being a Tropical 
Kingbird. I find that Couch's Kingbirds often appear to have a more peaked 
crown profile and are perhaps darker gray on the head with a slightly stronger 
blackish mask through the eye. This bird seems to have a flatter crown profile 
and is paler gray on the head and has a less conspicuous mask than I would 
expect to see on a Couch's. The tail also looks strongly notched. According to 
some sources, Tropicals have a more deeply notched tail than Couch's. 


For the past five years I've spent 7-9 days each November in the Lower Rio 
Grande Valley, where both species can be readily found. I've taken hundreds of 
photos and spent many hours studying both species, typically confirming 
identifications with vocalizations. Some of the other regular leaders at the 
Rio Grande Valley Birding Festival have similarly studied these two kingbirds. 
Several agree that there are some noticeable structural differences, 
particularly as they relate to bill length and shape, that can be used to 
separate many individuals of these two species with virtual certainty. I also 
see Tropical Kingbirds most years here in Oregon, where they appear annually 
during late fall. There are no Oregon records for Couch's. The fall birds we 
get typically show a bill shape and length that is near identical to this bird. 


Here is link to some specimen photos taken at Cornell. The profile shot showing 
the comparative bill length and shape illustrates what I was describing about 
the bill profile of Tropical compared to Couch's. 

http://www.birds.cornell.edu/crows/kingbirdsX.htm

Dave Irons


> Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 03:23:52 +0000
> From: ryanbrady10 AT HOTMAIL.COM
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> 
> We found a Tropical/Couch's Kingbird along the Lake Superior shoreline in 
Washburn, Wisconsin, on Thursday. It never vocalized and was seen for only a 
short time on one day. Though we're aware it's a very difficult ID I did manage 
a bunch of images from various angles. 

> 
> 
> http://www.pbase.com/rbrady/kingbird2016
> 
> 
> Is there even a chance of separating the two without vocals? Wisconsin has 
only one accepted Tropical/Couch's (which was initially reported as a Western 
and had few accompanying photos) and none for either at species level. 

> 
> Thanks for any input you can provide.
> 
> 
> Ryan Brady
> Washburn, Bayfield County, WI
>  
>    
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
 		 	   		  
Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Tropical/Couch's Kingbird ID - Northern Wisconsin
From: Ryan Brady <ryanbrady10 AT HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 03:23:52 +0000
We found a Tropical/Couch's Kingbird along the Lake Superior shoreline in 
Washburn, Wisconsin, on Thursday. It never vocalized and was seen for only a 
short time on one day. Though we're aware it's a very difficult ID I did manage 
a bunch of images from various angles. 



http://www.pbase.com/rbrady/kingbird2016


Is there even a chance of separating the two without vocals? Wisconsin has only 
one accepted Tropical/Couch's (which was initially reported as a Western and 
had few accompanying photos) and none for either at species level. 


Thanks for any input you can provide.


Ryan Brady
Washburn, Bayfield County, WI
 
   
Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: RFI - Yellowthroat ID
From: Mary Beth Stowe <mbstowe AT MIRIAMEAGLEMON.COM>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 05:01:04 -0500
Hi, all!

FWIW, that excellent call note recording sounds NOTHING like any Common 
Yellowthroat I've ever heard, so unless there's a real difference in local COYE 
dialects, I would feel comfortable with Andrew's call (no pun intended) on that 
alone! 


Mary Beth Stowe
Alamo, TX
www.miriameaglemon.com



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

Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 1:38 PM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] RFI - Yellowthroat ID

I think what is happening is that the person questioning the ID (the ebird
reviewer) saw that the book says Bahama Yellowthroat is supposed to have a 
yellow belly, and that they are used to some of the other subspecies that DO 
have a yellow belly, so they assumed that this must be a Common Yellowthroat 
because it does NOT have a yellow belly. But as you say, I believe the 
preponderance of the evidence points towards Bahama Yellowthroat. 


Hopefully I can get some more pictures of the species from the other islands 
I'll be visiting for comparison. 



Andrew

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:56 AM, DPratt14  wrote:

> Hello birders:
>
>
> What's the problem here?  It would be far more questionable to have a 
> territorial Common Yellowthroat in this location/habitat.  This bird 
> looks just like Bahama Yellowthroats, including underpart coloration,  
> I photographed in the same general locality some years ago.  Other 
> marks include the obviously enormous bill and a thin "comma" that 
> trails off the posterior lower end of the mask, unlike Common which 
> has a rounded lower rear edge of the mask.
>
> Doug Pratt
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: RFI - Yellowthroat ID
From: Andrew Spencer <gwwarbler AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 14:38:10 -0400
I think what is happening is that the person questioning the ID (the ebird
reviewer) saw that the book says Bahama Yellowthroat is supposed to have a
yellow belly, and that they are used to some of the other subspecies that
DO have a yellow belly, so they assumed that this must be a Common
Yellowthroat because it does NOT have a yellow belly.  But as you say, I
believe the preponderance of the evidence points towards Bahama
Yellowthroat.

Hopefully I can get some more pictures of the species from the other
islands I'll be visiting for comparison.


Andrew

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 11:56 AM, DPratt14  wrote:

> Hello birders:
>
>
> What's the problem here?  It would be far more questionable to have a
> territorial Common Yellowthroat in this location/habitat.  This bird looks
> just like Bahama Yellowthroats, including underpart coloration,  I
> photographed in the same general locality some years ago.  Other marks
> include the obviously enormous bill and a thin "comma" that trails off the
> posterior lower end of the mask, unlike Common which has a rounded lower
> rear edge of the mask.
>
> Doug Pratt
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: RFI - Yellowthroat ID
From: DPratt14 <DPratt14 AT NC.RR.COM>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 11:56:10 -0400
Hello birders:


What's the problem here?  It would be far more questionable to have a  
territorial Common Yellowthroat in this location/habitat.  This bird  
looks just like Bahama Yellowthroats, including underpart coloration,   
I photographed in the same general locality some years ago.  Other  
marks include the obviously enormous bill and a thin "comma" that  
trails off the posterior lower end of the mask, unlike Common which  
has a rounded lower rear edge of the mask.

Doug Pratt

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Fwd: RFI - Yellowthroat ID
From: Andrew Spencer <gwwarbler AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 13:26:45 -0400
Hi all,

I am currently birding in the Bahamas, and yesterday photographed a
territorial male Yellowthroat on Grand Bahama, in pine barrens with an
thick palmetto understory.  I identified the bird as Bahama Yellowthroat at
the time, but the ID was questioned based on the photo I posted to the
ebird list for the location.  The photo is visible here:

http://ebird.org/ebird/view/checklist?subID=S29743158

The field mark cited as favoring Common instead of Bahama was the buffy
belly.  To my eye, though, the bill looks exceptionally heavy for a
Common.  In addition, the hint of yellow above the mask, what appears to me
to be a slightly more extensive mask, and (not obvious in the photo), the
bulky build and apparently larger than expected size for a Common, are what
had me calling it a Bahama Yellowthroat.  The habitat and apparent
territoriality in a very un-Common Yellowthroat setting also seemed to
support my ID.  I have good recordings of the song and contact call, though
it may be a while before I have a chance to upload those.  In the mean
time, can anyone here comment on the ID based on the photo?  I'll admit
that I have essentially no experience with Bahama Yellowthroats, so any
help is much appreciated,

Andrew Spencer

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage?
From: Martin Reid <upupa AT AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 10:59:54 -0500
Dear Julian/All,
Had a fat-finger episode with that last email - I’ll try again…

Here in Texas such a bird would be unusual but certainly not exceptional, as 
the exact pattern of the upperpart feathers is quite varied, as is the strength 
of chestnut edging to the tertials. The latter aspect is confounded by the fact 
that some LESAs retain one or more old/worn basic-type feathers well into May 
(mostly 2CY birds?) 


Regarding the pattern of the innermost greater covert:
Long-toed Stint can occasionally have a not-straight outer edge of the black 
center, albeit usually a subdued version of the typical pattern for LESA, and 
more of an indent than a notch - see examples: 


http://www.bushpea.com/bd/pg/all/l/long-toed%20stint%2005.html 
 


http://www.nabirding.com/2012/05/21/attu-may-20-return-to-casco-cove/ 
 



http://ibc.lynxeds.com/photo/long-toed-stint-calidris-subminuta/bird-shallow-water 
 


http://www.surfbirds.com/media/Photos/smalllongtoes.jpg 
 


http://alder-birds.blog.ntu.edu.tw/2012/03/08/long-toed-stint/ 
 



I’d like to ask keen peepophiles about the reverse situation: the extent to 
which they see LESAs that lack a notch on this feather (i.e. have a straight 
outer edge to the dark center of the innermost greater covert) - ? 


Thanks,
Martin 

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



> On May 16, 2016, at May 16, 7:22 PM, julian hough > wrote: 

> 
> Jason,
> 
> A bright bird indeed! The pattern on the face and the overall tone would 
attract attention and would likely force the consideration of a stint for many 
observers. Thankfully the pale legs would eliminate Little Stint, and really 
only Long-toed would be a consideration. 

> 
> The key feature I instantly check is the shape of the dark border of the 
inner greater coverts and tertials...if indented or wavy (like on this bird) it 
rules out the stints and pegs the bird as a Least Sandpiper without too much 
angst over other, more variable features. 

> 
> Hope this helps.
> 
> Julian Hough
> New Haven, CT 06519
> www.naturescapeimages.wordpress.com 
 

> 
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 5/16/16, JR Rigby > 
wrote: 

> 
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage?
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU 
> Date: Monday, May 16, 2016, 7:24 PM
> 
> I wanted to share a bird with the
> group that Jason Hoeksema, Hal Mitchell
> and I photographed in central Mississippi on May 11 of this
> year:
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/j_hoeksema/sets/72157667600374900/ 
 

> 
> We were surveying shorebirds on a converted aquaculture farm
> that is now
> largely fallow with some shallow water and early succession
> vegetation. The
> habitat favors the "marsh-pipers" but with some exposed
> mudflats and large
> areas of shallow water. The most numerous shorebirds for the
> day were
> Dunlin (~200) but with White-rumped and Stilt Sandpipers
> also present in
> decent numbers among 15 total shorebird species. Among the
> peeps,
> Semipalmated Sandpipers outnumbered Least Sandpipers at most
> stops, though
> the latter is typically our most abundant peep. In the fall
> particularly we
> see flocks of Least Sandpipers of over a thousand
> individuals in the area.
> 
> Several of the Least Sandpipers on this day appeared to be
> in very fresh
> alternate plumage, giving them a brighter rufescent
> appearance than is
> typical. This particular individual held our attention both
> for the
> brightness of the plumage and the extent of rufous edging on
> many of the
> feathers. After much discussion we decided it was ultimately
> just a
> puzzling Least Sandpiper since structure, bill shape,
> posture, and facial
> pattern did not seem to us to favor any of the other (rarer)
> Calidridine
> species. For comparison, here is a more typical, but still
> fairly bright,
> LESA individual from the same flock: https://flic.kr/p/GaWMTq 
 

> 
> Keep in mind that the photos in the gallery above were taken
> in overcast
> conditions. We first encountered the bird in direct
> sunlight, under which
> the rich coppery tones of the plumage were most impressive.
> You can see a
> little of this in another photograph with Semipalmated
> Sandpipers in the
> foreground for comparison (focal individual distant
> center):
> https://flic.kr/p/GEj3Cw 
> 
> We found this to be a remarkable plumage, so I wanted to
> send it around to
> the group to see if it merits comment from those with more
> experience. Have
> others seen LESA alternate plumages that look like this?
> Does this seem to
> be an outlier or within normal variation? With no first-hand
> experience
> with stints, we ruled this a LESA. Do others agree with the
> identification?
> 
> Thanks for any insight you can offer.
> 
> J.R.
> Oxford, MS
> 
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html 
 

> 
> 
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html 
 



Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage?
From: Martin Reid <upupa AT AIRMAIL.NET>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 09:29:15 -0500
Dear Julian/All,
Here in Texas such a bird would be unusual but certainly not exceptional, as 
the exact pattern of the l upperpart feathers is quite varied, as in the 
strength of chestnut edging to the tertials. The latter aspect is confounded by 
the fact that some LESAs retain one of more old/wrong basic -type feathers well 
into May (mostly 2CY birds?) 


Regarding the pattern of the innermost greater covert:
Long-toed Stint can occasionally have a not-straight outer edge of the black 
center, albeit usually a subdued version of the typical pattern for LESA, and 
more of an indent than a notch - see examples: 


http://www.bushpea.com/bd/pg/all/l/long-toed%20stint%2005.html

http://www.nabirding.com/2012/05/21/attu-may-20-return-to-casco-cove/


http://ibc.lynxeds.com/photo/long-toed-stint-calidris-subminuta/bird-shallow-water 


http://www.surfbirds.com/media/Photos/smalllongtoes.jpg

http://alder-birds.blog.ntu.edu.tw/2012/03/08/long-toed-stint/


I’d like to ask keen peepophiles about the reverse situation: the extent to 
which they see LESAs that lack a notch on this feather (i.e. have a straight 
outer edge to the dark center of the innermost greater covert) - ? 


Thanks,
Martin 

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



> On May 16, 2016, at May 16, 7:22 PM, julian hough  wrote:
> 
> Jason,
> 
> A bright bird indeed! The pattern on the face and the overall tone would 
attract attention and would likely force the consideration of a stint for many 
observers. Thankfully the pale legs would eliminate Little Stint, and really 
only Long-toed would be a consideration. 

> 
> The key feature I instantly check is the shape of the dark border of the 
inner greater coverts and tertials...if indented or wavy (like on this bird) it 
rules out the stints and pegs the bird as a Least Sandpiper without too much 
angst over other, more variable features. 

> 
> Hope this helps.
> 
> Julian Hough
> New Haven, CT 06519
> www.naturescapeimages.wordpress.com
> 
> --------------------------------------------
> On Mon, 5/16/16, JR Rigby  wrote:
> 
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage?
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Date: Monday, May 16, 2016, 7:24 PM
> 
> I wanted to share a bird with the
> group that Jason Hoeksema, Hal Mitchell
> and I photographed in central Mississippi on May 11 of this
> year:
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/j_hoeksema/sets/72157667600374900/
> 
> We were surveying shorebirds on a converted aquaculture farm
> that is now
> largely fallow with some shallow water and early succession
> vegetation. The
> habitat favors the "marsh-pipers" but with some exposed
> mudflats and large
> areas of shallow water. The most numerous shorebirds for the
> day were
> Dunlin (~200) but with White-rumped and Stilt Sandpipers
> also present in
> decent numbers among 15 total shorebird species. Among the
> peeps,
> Semipalmated Sandpipers outnumbered Least Sandpipers at most
> stops, though
> the latter is typically our most abundant peep. In the fall
> particularly we
> see flocks of Least Sandpipers of over a thousand
> individuals in the area.
> 
> Several of the Least Sandpipers on this day appeared to be
> in very fresh
> alternate plumage, giving them a brighter rufescent
> appearance than is
> typical. This particular individual held our attention both
> for the
> brightness of the plumage and the extent of rufous edging on
> many of the
> feathers. After much discussion we decided it was ultimately
> just a
> puzzling Least Sandpiper since structure, bill shape,
> posture, and facial
> pattern did not seem to us to favor any of the other (rarer)
> Calidridine
> species. For comparison, here is a more typical, but still
> fairly bright,
> LESA individual from the same flock: https://flic.kr/p/GaWMTq
> 
> Keep in mind that the photos in the gallery above were taken
> in overcast
> conditions. We first encountered the bird in direct
> sunlight, under which
> the rich coppery tones of the plumage were most impressive.
> You can see a
> little of this in another photograph with Semipalmated
> Sandpipers in the
> foreground for comparison (focal individual distant
> center):
> https://flic.kr/p/GEj3Cw
> 
> We found this to be a remarkable plumage, so I wanted to
> send it around to
> the group to see if it merits comment from those with more
> experience. Have
> others seen LESA alternate plumages that look like this?
> Does this seem to
> be an outlier or within normal variation? With no first-hand
> experience
> with stints, we ruled this a LESA. Do others agree with the
> identification?
> 
> Thanks for any insight you can offer.
> 
> J.R.
> Oxford, MS
> 
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
> 
> 
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html


Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage?
From: julian hough <jrhough1 AT SNET.NET>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 01:42:01 +0000
Here's the reference to a paper that mentions the previous feature and other 
good stuff: 


The identification of juvenile Red-necked and Long-toed Stints
P Alstrom, U Olsson - Brit. Birds, 1989 - britishbirds.co.uk

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

--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 5/16/16, JR Rigby  wrote:

 Subject: [BIRDWG01] very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage?
 To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
 Date: Monday, May 16, 2016, 7:24 PM
 
 I wanted to share a bird with the
 group that Jason Hoeksema, Hal Mitchell
 and I photographed in central Mississippi on May 11 of this
 year:
 
 https://www.flickr.com/photos/j_hoeksema/sets/72157667600374900/
 
 We were surveying shorebirds on a converted aquaculture farm
 that is now
 largely fallow with some shallow water and early succession
 vegetation. The
 habitat favors the "marsh-pipers" but with some exposed
 mudflats and large
 areas of shallow water. The most numerous shorebirds for the
 day were
 Dunlin (~200) but with White-rumped and Stilt Sandpipers
 also present in
 decent numbers among 15 total shorebird species. Among the
 peeps,
 Semipalmated Sandpipers outnumbered Least Sandpipers at most
 stops, though
 the latter is typically our most abundant peep. In the fall
 particularly we
 see flocks of Least Sandpipers of over a thousand
 individuals in the area.
 
 Several of the Least Sandpipers on this day appeared to be
 in very fresh
 alternate plumage, giving them a brighter rufescent
 appearance than is
 typical. This particular individual held our attention both
 for the
 brightness of the plumage and the extent of rufous edging on
 many of the
 feathers. After much discussion we decided it was ultimately
 just a
 puzzling Least Sandpiper since structure, bill shape,
 posture, and facial
 pattern did not seem to us to favor any of the other (rarer)
 Calidridine
 species. For comparison, here is a more typical, but still
 fairly bright,
 LESA individual from the same flock: https://flic.kr/p/GaWMTq
 
 Keep in mind that the photos in the gallery above were taken
 in overcast
 conditions. We first encountered the bird in direct
 sunlight, under which
 the rich coppery tones of the plumage were most impressive.
 You can see a
 little of this in another photograph with Semipalmated
 Sandpipers in the
 foreground for comparison (focal individual distant
 center):
 https://flic.kr/p/GEj3Cw
 
 We found this to be a remarkable plumage, so I wanted to
 send it around to
 the group to see if it merits comment from those with more
 experience. Have
 others seen LESA alternate plumages that look like this?
 Does this seem to
 be an outlier or within normal variation? With no first-hand
 experience
 with stints, we ruled this a LESA. Do others agree with the
 identification?
 
 Thanks for any insight you can offer.
 
 J.R.
 Oxford, MS
 
 Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
 

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage?
From: julian hough <jrhough1 AT SNET.NET>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 00:22:06 +0000
Jason,

A bright bird indeed! The pattern on the face and the overall tone would 
attract attention and would likely force the consideration of a stint for many 
observers. Thankfully the pale legs would eliminate Little Stint, and really 
only Long-toed would be a consideration. 


The key feature I instantly check is the shape of the dark border of the inner 
greater coverts and tertials...if indented or wavy (like on this bird) it rules 
out the stints and pegs the bird as a Least Sandpiper without too much angst 
over other, more variable features. 


Hope this helps.

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

--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 5/16/16, JR Rigby  wrote:

 Subject: [BIRDWG01] very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage?
 To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
 Date: Monday, May 16, 2016, 7:24 PM
 
 I wanted to share a bird with the
 group that Jason Hoeksema, Hal Mitchell
 and I photographed in central Mississippi on May 11 of this
 year:
 
 https://www.flickr.com/photos/j_hoeksema/sets/72157667600374900/
 
 We were surveying shorebirds on a converted aquaculture farm
 that is now
 largely fallow with some shallow water and early succession
 vegetation. The
 habitat favors the "marsh-pipers" but with some exposed
 mudflats and large
 areas of shallow water. The most numerous shorebirds for the
 day were
 Dunlin (~200) but with White-rumped and Stilt Sandpipers
 also present in
 decent numbers among 15 total shorebird species. Among the
 peeps,
 Semipalmated Sandpipers outnumbered Least Sandpipers at most
 stops, though
 the latter is typically our most abundant peep. In the fall
 particularly we
 see flocks of Least Sandpipers of over a thousand
 individuals in the area.
 
 Several of the Least Sandpipers on this day appeared to be
 in very fresh
 alternate plumage, giving them a brighter rufescent
 appearance than is
 typical. This particular individual held our attention both
 for the
 brightness of the plumage and the extent of rufous edging on
 many of the
 feathers. After much discussion we decided it was ultimately
 just a
 puzzling Least Sandpiper since structure, bill shape,
 posture, and facial
 pattern did not seem to us to favor any of the other (rarer)
 Calidridine
 species. For comparison, here is a more typical, but still
 fairly bright,
 LESA individual from the same flock: https://flic.kr/p/GaWMTq
 
 Keep in mind that the photos in the gallery above were taken
 in overcast
 conditions. We first encountered the bird in direct
 sunlight, under which
 the rich coppery tones of the plumage were most impressive.
 You can see a
 little of this in another photograph with Semipalmated
 Sandpipers in the
 foreground for comparison (focal individual distant
 center):
 https://flic.kr/p/GEj3Cw
 
 We found this to be a remarkable plumage, so I wanted to
 send it around to
 the group to see if it merits comment from those with more
 experience. Have
 others seen LESA alternate plumages that look like this?
 Does this seem to
 be an outlier or within normal variation? With no first-hand
 experience
 with stints, we ruled this a LESA. Do others agree with the
 identification?
 
 Thanks for any insight you can offer.
 
 J.R.
 Oxford, MS
 
 Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
 

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: very rufous Least Sandpiper plumage?
From: JR Rigby <jr.rigby AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 18:24:43 -0500
I wanted to share a bird with the group that Jason Hoeksema, Hal Mitchell
and I photographed in central Mississippi on May 11 of this year:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/j_hoeksema/sets/72157667600374900/

We were surveying shorebirds on a converted aquaculture farm that is now
largely fallow with some shallow water and early succession vegetation. The
habitat favors the "marsh-pipers" but with some exposed mudflats and large
areas of shallow water. The most numerous shorebirds for the day were
Dunlin (~200) but with White-rumped and Stilt Sandpipers also present in
decent numbers among 15 total shorebird species. Among the peeps,
Semipalmated Sandpipers outnumbered Least Sandpipers at most stops, though
the latter is typically our most abundant peep. In the fall particularly we
see flocks of Least Sandpipers of over a thousand individuals in the area.

Several of the Least Sandpipers on this day appeared to be in very fresh
alternate plumage, giving them a brighter rufescent appearance than is
typical. This particular individual held our attention both for the
brightness of the plumage and the extent of rufous edging on many of the
feathers. After much discussion we decided it was ultimately just a
puzzling Least Sandpiper since structure, bill shape, posture, and facial
pattern did not seem to us to favor any of the other (rarer) Calidridine
species. For comparison, here is a more typical, but still fairly bright,
LESA individual from the same flock: https://flic.kr/p/GaWMTq

Keep in mind that the photos in the gallery above were taken in overcast
conditions. We first encountered the bird in direct sunlight, under which
the rich coppery tones of the plumage were most impressive. You can see a
little of this in another photograph with Semipalmated Sandpipers in the
foreground for comparison (focal individual distant center):
https://flic.kr/p/GEj3Cw

We found this to be a remarkable plumage, so I wanted to send it around to
the group to see if it merits comment from those with more experience. Have
others seen LESA alternate plumages that look like this? Does this seem to
be an outlier or within normal variation? With no first-hand experience
with stints, we ruled this a LESA. Do others agree with the identification?

Thanks for any insight you can offer.

J.R.
Oxford, MS

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: A request for images of atricapillus Northern Goshawk
From: The HH75 <hhussey3 AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 11:18:15 +0100
Hello all,
    I am presently doing a little bit of my own research into the
diagnosbility (or otherwise) of atricapillus Northern Goshawk versus
nominate gentilis. I have been able to source many images of birds
photographed in various European countries, but, to date, my sample size of
images of atricapillus is pitifully small. I am particularly interested in
images of juveniles, either in flight, or trapped for ringing/banding
(preferrably with at least one wing spread to show the underwing pattern),
but images of adults would be gratefully received also, in spite of
features being known that allow for their seperation (though testing the
robustness of these criteria would also be interesting. Based on online
images, however, they do seem rather distinctive).
    Please e-mail any images, links or whatever to me privately, no point
in clogging up this group!
                                   Regards,
                                        Harry Hussey, Cork, Ireland


 

Virus-free.
www.avast.com

 

<#DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Within Range for NA Mew Gull?
From: Robert O'Brien <baro AT PDX.EDU>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 21:52:19 -0700
Years ago i photographed a 'mew' with a tail just like this in a flock of
100 or so at a large grassy park in flight in portland in winter.  ID
unknown.  Bob obrien. Carver.  (Slide so very hard to find).

On Thursday, May 12, 2016, Matthew G Hunter 
wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>   I've been going through "older" photos from the last few years and
> uploading some to my "old" eBird checklists for those years. I have these
> photos of a gull that I recall wondering about in the field, and it has me
> wondering now. Taken Dec 22, 2013 on the central Oregon Coast. This is a
> first-winter type "Mew" Gull. Reason for my head-scratching is the very
> banded tail. My first general impression of bird on water was a Mew Gull
> (vs Ring-billed Gull) because of darker gray mantle, generally
> non-contrasty plumage including on spread wings, brownish vs blackish dark
> areas of wingtips and tail, dull brown/gray breast and belly, and smudgy
> versus sharp contrast on the bill. But, look at that tail!!!   Is this
> "banded" tail in the normal range of variation for North American Mew
Gull?
> Other than the tail, it doesn't seem to have many other features of
> Kamchatka Gull; in other words, the body plumage seems smudgey versus more
> distinct spots/bars; although the bill is fairly robust. I have no field
> experience with any of these except Ring-billed and Mew; looking at
> Howell/Dunn Gulls.  Thoughts?
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/matthewghunter/albums/72157667601597900
>
> Matt Hunter
> SW Oregon
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Within Range for NA Mew Gull?
From: Matthew G Hunter <matthewghunter AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 16:27:49 -0700
Hi Folks,
  I've been going through "older" photos from the last few years and
uploading some to my "old" eBird checklists for those years. I have these
photos of a gull that I recall wondering about in the field, and it has me
wondering now. Taken Dec 22, 2013 on the central Oregon Coast. This is a
first-winter type "Mew" Gull. Reason for my head-scratching is the very
banded tail. My first general impression of bird on water was a Mew Gull
(vs Ring-billed Gull) because of darker gray mantle, generally
non-contrasty plumage including on spread wings, brownish vs blackish dark
areas of wingtips and tail, dull brown/gray breast and belly, and smudgy
versus sharp contrast on the bill. But, look at that tail!!!   Is this
"banded" tail in the normal range of variation for North American Mew Gull?
Other than the tail, it doesn't seem to have many other features of
Kamchatka Gull; in other words, the body plumage seems smudgey versus more
distinct spots/bars; although the bill is fairly robust. I have no field
experience with any of these except Ring-billed and Mew; looking at
Howell/Dunn Gulls.  Thoughts?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/matthewghunter/albums/72157667601597900

Matt Hunter
SW Oregon

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: RFI- Samuel Patten's Dissertation
From: Amar Ayyash <amarayyash AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 12:25:44 -0500
Samuel Patten published a number of papers on the gulls in the Anchorage
area. One paper I'm not able to find anywhere in the literature is his
dissertation from Johns Hopkins University on hybridization of Herring and
Glaucous-winged Gulls. I would be greatly appreciative in any help finding
this piece. Thanks in advance.

*Patten, S.J. 1980. Interbreeding and evolution in the Larus
glaucescens–Larus*

*argentatus complex on the south coast of Alaska. Ph.D. dissertation, Johns*

*Hopkins University.*



Regards,

Amar Ayyash

Orland Park, IL - USA

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: NYC Central Park Hermit Warbler (1 May 2016): Updated Photo Gallery
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao AT COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 08:49:47 -0700
Karen, 
 This is either a Hermit Warbler, or mostly a Hermit Warbler...but definitely 
on the Hermit Warbler side if it is of mixed genes. I see more streaking on 
this bird that I see on classic Hermit Warblers. The key would be to assess the 
back color and pattern, grayish or greenish etc. I can't get a good sense of 
that from the photos. 

 Regarding song, these birds have variable songs, as well as different song 
types. I do not think they "copy" each other's songs. Songs of Hermit vs 
Townsend's are not necessarily separable with confidence. In some areas songs 
are more similar than they should be between Townsend's and Black-throated Gray 
given that these two are not closely related. The songs are buzzy and may 
resemble Black-throated Green to some extent, but my guess is that given the 
overall noted similarity may be due to your experience with Black-throated 
Green and that this species is similar enough in some songs that it "triggered" 
the ID of Black-throated Green. There is really no natural situation that is 
likely where a Hermit Warbler may be learning songs from Black-throated Green 
in the breeding period. 


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

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

Sent: Friday, May 6, 2016 4:33 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] NYC Central Park Hermit Warbler (1 May 2016): Updated Photo 
Gallery 


Many thanks to all who responded earlier to my queries, both on- and off-line. 
Comments from those who have spent time on the west coast and have direct 
experience studying the Hermit/Townsend's species complex were extremely 
helpful, since I have never seen a Hermit or Townsend's Warbler (or 
Golden-cheeked, for that matter...). It was especially useful to hear that 
adult male Hermit Warblers with complete black bibs can sometimes have dusky 
auriculars (one reader sent me a photo of such a specimen from a museum 
collection, showing this feature), and that the species in this complex can 
copy other warblers' songs fairly often. 


I reviewed all my photos again after reading the NYSARC guidelines for 
submitting a good report. The goal was to see if I could come up with better 
representations of the bird's plumage, specifically the dusky auriculars and 
the underside. The results are in a separate gallery: 


http://www.birdsiviews.com/Birds/Hermit-Warbler/

The photos are more heavily cropped and may not reveal anything new, but I'm 
just trying to be as thorough as possible with my documentation of the bird's 
appearance. There is one additional photo, along with some descriptive 
commentary. 


The new photos will be added to my eBird checklist (which was posted with the 
old photos, but not reviewed yet) and will be submitted to NYSARC along with a 
report. 


Feel free to share your thoughts if you feel so inclined, either on- or 
off-list. 


Thanks again,
Karen Fung
NYC
http://www.birdsiviews.com

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: NYC Central Park Hermit Warbler (1 May 2016): Updated Photo Gallery
From: Karen Fung <easternbluebird AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 10:49:17 -0400
Thank you, Alvaro.
All three of us agreed that the back of the bird did not show any green.
It was actually the dark back that Alexis zeroed in on when he first looked
at the bird in the field and pointed it out to me, and then to Anthony who
showed up later.  The nape was black, and we could clearly see how it
tapered to a black line going up the back of the head. I don't know if the
dark back had a pattern but there was no olive tone to it from our vantage
point.  It appeared to be dark gray.  The first photo in the series shows
this the best, but a view of the full back would've been ideal.

Regarding streaking, the photo of the museum specimen of an adult male
Hermit showed streaking as well, so apparently that can occur.

Regarding song, someone floated the idea that maybe this warbler came east
last Spring and picked up the song then.  I listened to recordings of
Hermit and Townsend's on the Sibley app and then on xeno-canto that
evening, and they were totally unfamiliar to me.  I'm not sure if I
would've noticed them in the field, as listening conditions were not
optimal.

I still hope that the bird will be refound so that others can take a look
and document with more photos and some recordings.  This has been a
valuable educational experience for me, regardless of the outcome on ID.

Best,
Karen

On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Alvaro Jaramillo 
wrote:

> Karen,
>    This is either a Hermit Warbler, or mostly a Hermit Warbler...but
> definitely on the Hermit Warbler side if it is of mixed genes. I see more
> streaking on this bird that I see on classic Hermit Warblers. The key would
> be to assess the back color and pattern, grayish or greenish etc. I can't
> get a good sense of that from the photos.
>    Regarding song, these birds have variable songs, as well as different
> song types. I do not think they "copy" each other's songs. Songs of Hermit
> vs Townsend's are not necessarily separable with confidence. In some areas
> songs are more similar than they should be between Townsend's and
> Black-throated Gray given that these two are not closely related. So that
> suggests some more complex process is going on there. The songs of Hermit
> or Townsend's are buzzy and may resemble Black-throated Green to some
> extent, but my guess is that the noted similarity you heard may be due to
> your experience with Black-throated  Green and that this species (Hermit)
> is similar enough in some songs that it "triggered" the ID of
> Black-throated Green. There is really no natural situation that is likely
> where a Hermit Warbler may be learning songs from Black-throated Green in
> the breeding period.
>    Great find, whatever it is!!!
> Alvaro
>
> Alvaro Jaramillo
> alvaro AT alvarosadventures.com
> www.alvarosadventures.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification [mailto:
> BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Karen Fung
> Sent: Friday, May 6, 2016 4:33 AM
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] NYC Central Park Hermit Warbler (1 May 2016): Updated
> Photo Gallery
>
> Many thanks to all who responded earlier to my queries, both on- and
> off-line. Comments from those who have spent time on the west coast and
> have direct experience studying the Hermit/Townsend's species complex were
> extremely helpful, since I have never seen a Hermit or Townsend's Warbler
> (or Golden-cheeked, for that matter...).  It was especially useful to hear
> that adult male Hermit Warblers with complete black bibs can sometimes have
> dusky auriculars (one reader sent me a photo of such a specimen from a
> museum collection, showing this feature), and that the species in this
> complex can copy other warblers' songs fairly often.
>
> I reviewed all my photos again after reading the NYSARC guidelines for
> submitting a good report.  The goal was to see if I could come up with
> better representations of the bird's plumage, specifically the dusky
> auriculars and the underside.  The results are in a separate gallery:
>
> http://www.birdsiviews.com/Birds/Hermit-Warbler/
>
> The photos are more heavily cropped and may not reveal anything new, but
> I'm just trying to be as thorough as possible with my documentation of  the
> bird's appearance.  There is one additional photo, along with some
> descriptive commentary.
>
> The new photos will be added to my eBird checklist (which was posted with
> the old photos, but not reviewed yet) and will be submitted to NYSARC along
> with a report.
>
> Feel free to share your thoughts if you feel so inclined, either on- or
> off-list.
>
> Thanks again,
> Karen Fung
> NYC
> http://www.birdsiviews.com
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>
>

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: NYC Central Park Hermit Warbler (1 May 2016): Updated Photo Gallery
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao AT COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 07:16:20 -0700
Karen, 
 This is either a Hermit Warbler, or mostly a Hermit Warbler...but definitely 
on the Hermit Warbler side if it is of mixed genes. I see more streaking on 
this bird that I see on classic Hermit Warblers. The key would be to assess the 
back color and pattern, grayish or greenish etc. I can't get a good sense of 
that from the photos. 

 Regarding song, these birds have variable songs, as well as different song 
types. I do not think they "copy" each other's songs. Songs of Hermit vs 
Townsend's are not necessarily separable with confidence. In some areas songs 
are more similar than they should be between Townsend's and Black-throated Gray 
given that these two are not closely related. So that suggests some more 
complex process is going on there. The songs of Hermit or Townsend's are buzzy 
and may resemble Black-throated Green to some extent, but my guess is that the 
noted similarity you heard may be due to your experience with Black-throated 
Green and that this species (Hermit) is similar enough in some songs that it 
"triggered" the ID of Black-throated Green. There is really no natural 
situation that is likely where a Hermit Warbler may be learning songs from 
Black-throated Green in the breeding period. 

   Great find, whatever it is!!! 
Alvaro

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

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

Sent: Friday, May 6, 2016 4:33 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] NYC Central Park Hermit Warbler (1 May 2016): Updated Photo 
Gallery 


Many thanks to all who responded earlier to my queries, both on- and off-line. 
Comments from those who have spent time on the west coast and have direct 
experience studying the Hermit/Townsend's species complex were extremely 
helpful, since I have never seen a Hermit or Townsend's Warbler (or 
Golden-cheeked, for that matter...). It was especially useful to hear that 
adult male Hermit Warblers with complete black bibs can sometimes have dusky 
auriculars (one reader sent me a photo of such a specimen from a museum 
collection, showing this feature), and that the species in this complex can 
copy other warblers' songs fairly often. 


I reviewed all my photos again after reading the NYSARC guidelines for 
submitting a good report. The goal was to see if I could come up with better 
representations of the bird's plumage, specifically the dusky auriculars and 
the underside. The results are in a separate gallery: 


http://www.birdsiviews.com/Birds/Hermit-Warbler/

The photos are more heavily cropped and may not reveal anything new, but I'm 
just trying to be as thorough as possible with my documentation of the bird's 
appearance. There is one additional photo, along with some descriptive 
commentary. 


The new photos will be added to my eBird checklist (which was posted with the 
old photos, but not reviewed yet) and will be submitted to NYSARC along with a 
report. 


Feel free to share your thoughts if you feel so inclined, either on- or 
off-list. 


Thanks again,
Karen Fung
NYC
http://www.birdsiviews.com

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: NYC Central Park Hermit Warbler (1 May 2016): Updated Photo Gallery
From: Karen Fung <easternbluebird AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 07:32:58 -0400
Many thanks to all who responded earlier to my queries, both on- and
off-line. Comments from those who have spent time on the west coast and
have direct experience studying the Hermit/Townsend's species complex were
extremely helpful, since I have never seen a Hermit or Townsend's Warbler
(or Golden-cheeked, for that matter...).  It was especially useful to hear
that adult male Hermit Warblers with complete black bibs can sometimes have
dusky auriculars (one reader sent me a photo of such a specimen from a
museum collection, showing this feature), and that the species in this
complex can copy other warblers' songs fairly often.

I reviewed all my photos again after reading the NYSARC guidelines for
submitting a good report.  The goal was to see if I could come up with
better representations of the bird's plumage, specifically the dusky
auriculars and the underside.  The results are in a separate gallery:

http://www.birdsiviews.com/Birds/Hermit-Warbler/

The photos are more heavily cropped and may not reveal anything new, but
I'm just trying to be as thorough as possible with my documentation of  the
bird's appearance.  There is one additional photo, along with some
descriptive commentary.

The new photos will be added to my eBird checklist (which was posted with
the old photos, but not reviewed yet) and will be submitted to NYSARC along
with a report.

Feel free to share your thoughts if you feel so inclined, either on- or
off-list.

Thanks again,
Karen Fung
NYC
http://www.birdsiviews.com

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Tanager ID
From: Russ Ruffing <ruff2 AT VERIZON.NET>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 05:16:58 -0500
 Hi All,

I'd be interested in your opinions on the ID of this tanager. The picture was 
taken on 8/22/15 and is admittedly back lit and not the greatest. I do not want 
to bias anyone by revealing the location. I have only cropped the photo, 
otherwise it is as it came right out of the camera. The one preceding it in my 
queue has been brightened a bit. 


https://www.flickr.com/photos/yawncelot/20598117398/in/datetaken-public/

thanks,

Russ Ruffing

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: NYC: Central Park mystery warbler with Hermit appearance, BTGreen song
From: David Irons <llsdirons AT MSN.COM>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 16:54:30 -0700
The traditional description of a Black-throated Green song could also describe 
many local dialects of the Hermit Warbler song, which is comprised of a 
sequence fast "zee" notes and concludes with an emphatic up slurred two-note 
phrase that often sounds like the"zoo-zee" ending of a BT Green. This bird 
looks like a pure Hermit with no obvious indications of hybridization. 
Geographic variation in the songs of Hermit, BT Gray and Townsend's are well 
known and persist in confounding even the the most experienced western birders 
at times. I don't think that vocalization similarity can be used as an 
indicator of hybridization within this species complex. Unless there are 
intermediate plumage characteristics, this warbler should be presumed to be a 
non-hybrid. As Kevin Karlson indicated, male Hermits can show some dark 
feathering in the auriculars. 


Dave Irons
Portland, OR

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 1, 2016, at 8:44 PM, Karen Fung  wrote:
> 
> Four photos from this morning (1 May 2016) are in this gallery:
> 
> http://www.birdsiviews.com/Birds/Warblers/
> 
> Appearance points to Hermit Warbler based on the yellow head, dark
> upperparts, dark nape, neat black triangular bib, white underparts with no
> yellow and almost no streaking, lack of yellow in the vent.  The bird had a
> yellow eye-ring, but some folks are saying that the auricular patch looks
> little dark for a Hermit with a solid black bib like this one.
> 
> The bird occasionally sang the Zee-Zee-Zee-Zoo-Zee song of the
> Black-throated Green, or some song very close to it.
> 
> I apologize for the quality of the pics, which are blurry and heavily
> cropped, but am hoping that someone who has expertise in Hermit and
> Townsend's can weigh in on whether a Hermit Warbler vocalizations ever
> approach this particular BTGreen song and if not, whether this is some sort
> of hybrid.  Hermits and BTGreens do not overlap in their breeding ranges
> and this warbler did not really show any Townsend's features, so what
> scenarios might lead to this result?  One person suggested that perhaps a
> Hermit showed up in the East during breeding season last year, which seems
> like a plausible explanation.
> 
> More info on the discovery of this bird can be found in Anthony Collerton's
> blog:
> 
> http://welshbirder.blogspot.com/
> 
> Many thanks,
> 
> Karen Fung
> NYC
> 
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: NYC: Central Park mystery warbler with Hermit appearance, BTGreen song
From: karlson3 AT COMCAST.NET
Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 23:08:44 +0000
Karen,female or young male Hermit Warblers have dark markings on the cheek,but 
the complete black throat and bold mostly yellow face suggests a male, plus it 
was singing,so probably a male.I am not familiar with Hermit song variations, 
but nothing in the photos suggests a hybrid. Looks like a good Hermit Warbler. 
Congratulations on the good photos. Kevin Karlson 

----- Original Message -----
From: Karen Fung 
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Sent: Mon, 02 May 2016 03:34:20 -0000 (UTC)
Subject: [BIRDWG01] NYC: Central Park mystery warbler with Hermit appearance, 
BTGreen song 


Four photos from this morning (1 May 2016) are in this gallery:

http://www.birdsiviews.com/Birds/Warblers/

Appearance points to Hermit Warbler based on the yellow head, dark
upperparts, dark nape, neat black triangular bib, white underparts with no
yellow and almost no streaking, lack of yellow in the vent.  The bird had a
yellow eye-ring, but some folks are saying that the auricular patch looks
little dark for a Hermit with a solid black bib like this one.

The bird occasionally sang the Zee-Zee-Zee-Zoo-Zee song of the
Black-throated Green, or some song very close to it.

I apologize for the quality of the pics, which are blurry and heavily
cropped, but am hoping that someone who has expertise in Hermit and
Townsend's can weigh in on whether a Hermit Warbler vocalizations ever
approach this particular BTGreen song and if not, whether this is some sort
of hybrid.  Hermits and BTGreens do not overlap in their breeding ranges
and this warbler did not really show any Townsend's features, so what
scenarios might lead to this result?  One person suggested that perhaps a
Hermit showed up in the East during breeding season last year, which seems
like a plausible explanation.

More info on the discovery of this bird can be found in Anthony Collerton's
blog:

http://welshbirder.blogspot.com/

Many thanks,

Karen Fung
NYC

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: NYC: Central Park mystery warbler with Hermit appearance, BTGreen song
From: Karen Fung <easternbluebird AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Sun, 1 May 2016 23:34:20 -0400
Four photos from this morning (1 May 2016) are in this gallery:

http://www.birdsiviews.com/Birds/Warblers/

Appearance points to Hermit Warbler based on the yellow head, dark
upperparts, dark nape, neat black triangular bib, white underparts with no
yellow and almost no streaking, lack of yellow in the vent.  The bird had a
yellow eye-ring, but some folks are saying that the auricular patch looks
little dark for a Hermit with a solid black bib like this one.

The bird occasionally sang the Zee-Zee-Zee-Zoo-Zee song of the
Black-throated Green, or some song very close to it.

I apologize for the quality of the pics, which are blurry and heavily
cropped, but am hoping that someone who has expertise in Hermit and
Townsend's can weigh in on whether a Hermit Warbler vocalizations ever
approach this particular BTGreen song and if not, whether this is some sort
of hybrid.  Hermits and BTGreens do not overlap in their breeding ranges
and this warbler did not really show any Townsend's features, so what
scenarios might lead to this result?  One person suggested that perhaps a
Hermit showed up in the East during breeding season last year, which seems
like a plausible explanation.

More info on the discovery of this bird can be found in Anthony Collerton's
blog:

http://welshbirder.blogspot.com/

Many thanks,

Karen Fung
NYC

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Song Sparrow Subspecies identification
From: Steve Hampton <stevechampton AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 12:12:50 -0700
I want to make people aware of a Facebook group dedicated to sharing Song
Sparrow photos and discussing subspecific id at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/489482811234717/

There's also a Fox Sparrow Facebook group at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/447117322159681/



On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Dan A  wrote:

> Good day, all!
> As a long-time lurker, I've followed many a discussion on the listserv
> with great interest and learned a lot. I finally have a bird to submit for
> subspecies identification. This Song Sparrow was photographed at Frank
> Lake, in southern Alberta, Canada in early March, and managed to
> successfully overwinter in our extremely temperate cold season at a water
> outflow channel, and was observed by several birders throughout the season.
> What caught my eye was the overall grayish and reddish-brown tones to the
> bird, which is more typical of the western subspecies complex, rather than
> the eastern Melospiza melodia montana subspecies, which is much paler and
> browner overall.
> I've got a few ideas of what subspecies this bird belongs to, but I look
> forward to your expert opinions!
> Photo 1:https://flic.kr/p/E3MXk6
> Photo 2:https://flic.kr/p/Ey3S5E
> Photo 3:https://flic.kr/p/F1aUFB
> Daniel Arndt
>
> Cell: (403) 836-7405
>
> bowvalleytours.com
>
> Flickr.com/photos/ubermoogle
>
> www.birdscalgary.com
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>



-- 
Steve Hampton
Davis, CA

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Song Sparrow Subspecies identification
From: Dan A <danielarndt AT HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 12:05:41 -0600
Good day, all!
As a long-time lurker, I've followed many a discussion on the listserv with 
great interest and learned a lot. I finally have a bird to submit for 
subspecies identification. This Song Sparrow was photographed at Frank Lake, in 
southern Alberta, Canada in early March, and managed to successfully overwinter 
in our extremely temperate cold season at a water outflow channel, and was 
observed by several birders throughout the season. 

What caught my eye was the overall grayish and reddish-brown tones to the bird, 
which is more typical of the western subspecies complex, rather than the 
eastern Melospiza melodia montana subspecies, which is much paler and browner 
overall. 

I've got a few ideas of what subspecies this bird belongs to, but I look 
forward to your expert opinions! 

Photo 1:https://flic.kr/p/E3MXk6
Photo 2:https://flic.kr/p/Ey3S5E
Photo 3:https://flic.kr/p/F1aUFB
Daniel Arndt

Cell: (403) 836-7405

bowvalleytours.com

Flickr.com/photos/ubermoogle

www.birdscalgary.com 		 	   		  
Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: hawk question
From: Steve Hampton <stevechampton AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 15:25:14 -0700
Thanks all.  A wide variety of answers (Broad-winged, Swainson's, and
possible hybrid) but the consensus is over-exposed Swainson's in the wind,
based on the a combination of plumage features.

Here is the most detailed and informative response, from Louis Bevier:

This is a Swainson’s Hawk. The fine barring in the remiges is too narrow
for Broad-winged of any age. It’s an adult by virtue of the dark band along
the trailing edge of those remiges, and adult Broad-wings have a few pale
bars in the emarginated tips of P9-8. Swainson’s shows all dark in those
“fingers” as you can see in the photo.

Also, if an adult, then the tail is obviously wrong for Broad-winged, and
you don’t see 1st year Broad-wings ever showing the dark breast like an
adult yet with wings of an adult and tail of juvenile. Moreover the
spotting below the breast is typical of Swainson’s Hawk. An adult-ish
(looking) Broad-wing has dark spade-shaped marks or bars down there and on
the leg feathers.

I think the wings are pulled up and away from the plane of the camera,
making it look short winged (and that may have been an impression enhanced
by the wind). Everything else fits adult Swainson’s.

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Brian Sullivan 
wrote:

> Hi Steve et al.
>
> This bird is consistent with an adult Swainson's Hawk, likely female given
> the uniform brown head and breast. The strong light, and wind, are
> affecting how we perceive both its plumage and shape.
>
> Thanks
>
> Brian
>
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Steve Hampton 
> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> This hawk was photographed April 16 near Davis, CA by Mark Sawyer.
>>
>> Expected species in this area are Swainson's and Red-tailed.
>>
>> This hawk was thought to be a possible Broad-winged, as it seemed smaller
>> than adjacent Swainson's and with widespread primaries (although it was
>> windy at the time).
>>
>> https://flic.kr/p/Gx1bY2
>>
>> Comments are welcome.
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steve Hampton
>> Davis, CA
>>
>> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ===========
>
>
> *Brian L. SullivaneBird Project Leader *
> www.ebird.org
>
> *Photo Editor*
> Birds of North America Online
> http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/BNA
> -------------------------------
>



-- 
Steve Hampton
Davis, CA

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: hawk question
From: Brian Sullivan <heraldpetrel AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 11:15:22 -0700
Hi Steve et al.

This bird is consistent with an adult Swainson's Hawk, likely female given
the uniform brown head and breast. The strong light, and wind, are
affecting how we perceive both its plumage and shape.

Thanks

Brian

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 9:45 AM, Steve Hampton 
wrote:

> All,
>
> This hawk was photographed April 16 near Davis, CA by Mark Sawyer.
>
> Expected species in this area are Swainson's and Red-tailed.
>
> This hawk was thought to be a possible Broad-winged, as it seemed smaller
> than adjacent Swainson's and with widespread primaries (although it was
> windy at the time).
>
> https://flic.kr/p/Gx1bY2
>
> Comments are welcome.
>
> thanks,
>
>
> --
> Steve Hampton
> Davis, CA
>
> Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
>



-- 
===========


*Brian L. SullivaneBird Project Leader *
www.ebird.org

*Photo Editor*
Birds of North America Online
http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/BNA
-------------------------------

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: hawk question
From: Steve Hampton <stevechampton AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 09:45:01 -0700
All,

This hawk was photographed April 16 near Davis, CA by Mark Sawyer.

Expected species in this area are Swainson's and Red-tailed.

This hawk was thought to be a possible Broad-winged, as it seemed smaller
than adjacent Swainson's and with widespread primaries (although it was
windy at the time).

https://flic.kr/p/Gx1bY2

Comments are welcome.

thanks,


-- 
Steve Hampton
Davis, CA

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: RFI: Audio recording of Myrtle Warbler in Britain
From: Ted Floyd <tedfloyd57 AT HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 19:34:52 +0000
Hi, Everybody.


Just a quick request: Can anybody point me to a sound recording of a Myrtle 
[Yellow-rumped] Warbler, Setophaga coronata, from Britain? (Or anywhere else in 
the Palearctic.) 



Many thanks,


Ted Floyd

Boulder County, Colorado, USA

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Odd Harrier in Nebraska
From: Noah Arthur <semirelicta AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 17:50:29 -0500
Hey everyone! Potential vagrants are few and far between in Nebraska spring
migration (unlike winter), but there was an interesting harrier at Waco
Waterfowl Area in Waco, NE, on April 1st.

The underwing of this female/immature harrier strikes me as having
unusually thick, widely-spaced dark bars on the primaries, and it looks
like there are only 4 bars on each primary -- potentially characteristic of
Eurasian Hen Harrier. And the wings also look a little bit large, long and
narrow to me.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/73989529 AT N02/sets/72157666826712212

Am I (as usual) freaking out over nothing, or could this be a (state
first) Hen Harrier?

Noah Arthur
Lincoln, NE/Oakland, CA
semirelicta AT gmail.com

Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Gestalt Keys - A Possible Solution to Gestalt from Digital Images
From: Mike O'Keeffe <okeeffeml AT EIRCOM.NET>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 20:06:29 +0100
Hi,

 

As everyone knows gestalt or ‘jizz’ is very hard to describe and even 
harder to nail down, especially from still digital images. I have come up with 
a solution which I think will vastly improve the accuracy of measurements 
currently taken from digital images including such standard ones as primary 
projection, bill-eye ratio, tibia-tarsus ratio and structural angle measurement 
such as the gular pouch angle used for identifying Cormorants by race in Europe 
or the Dowitcher Loral Angle used in North America. 


 

The concept is simple enough – a mask or stencil is placed over an image and 
scaled/rotated into position. Provided certain key ‘loci’ match up with 
their position on the subject image an accurate measurement is possible. If 
there is no alignment then the image us unsuitable for the test. So in that way 
the gestalt key serves not only to encourage accurate measurement but also to 
educate about the fundamental requirements and nature of the measurement 
itself. 


 

I have produced a couple of simple prototype Gestalt Keys which I have 
incorporated in the introductory post. I hope to produce better keys and make 
them freely available through the blog for people to test and critique in time. 
Hope people here find this useful. 


 


http://birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2016/04/gestalt-gestalt-keys-introduction.html 


 

Regards

 

Mike O’Keeffe

Ireland 


This email has been scanned by BullGuard antivirus protection.
For more info visit www.bullguard.com 
 


Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Techniques for assessing gestalt from photos
From: Mike O'Keeffe <okeeffeml AT EIRCOM.NET>
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2016 15:00:06 +0000
All,

 

Further thought on these techniques and also final thoughts on that incredibly 
challenging Dublin Bay Swift. 


 


http://www.birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2016/03/gestalt-limitations-of-cpa-and-3d.html 


 

Regards

 

Mike

 

From: Mike O'Keeffe [mailto:okeeffeml AT eircom.net] 
Sent: 12 March 2016 21:05
To: 'BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU'; 'Irish Bird Network'
Subject: Techniques for assessing gestalt from photos

 

Hi all,

 

We all use jizz or gestalt as part of our everyday bird identification toolbag. 
It includes elements of movement and behaviour as well as a bird’s 
distinctive size and shape characteristics. A photo freezes not only a bird’s 
fieldmarks but also it’s gestalt. Whereas we are all accustomed to readily 
identifying a bird in a photo from its fieldmarks, most however would consider 
any attempt to study gestalt through the analysis of individual digital images 
as a pretty futile exercise. Even something as apparently simple as taking 
accurate size measurements from photographs is extremely difficult due to the 
fact an image is a two-dimensional projection of the three-dimensional world. 
We cannot simply recreate that third dimension. All that data has been 
compressed and is irretrievable. We may not be able to completely unlock 
gestalt from still images but are there ways of unlocking more information from 
images than we normally appreciate? I have been trying to address this question 
in a couple of recent postings on the blog. Hope you find some of this of 
interest. 


 

Comparative Photographic Analysis (CPA)


http://www.birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2016/02/gestalt-comparative-photographic.html 


 

3D Modelling


http://www.birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2016/03/gestalt-3d-modelling.html 


 

Regards

 

Mike O’Keeffe

Ireland

 

 

This email has been scanned by BullGuard antivirus protection.

For more info visit www.bullguard.com 
 



This email has been scanned by BullGuard antivirus protection.
For more info visit www.bullguard.com 
 


Archives: https://listserv.ksu.edu/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: "Interesting" juvenile Petrochelidon Swallow in Nebraska
From: mitch AT UTOPIANATURE.COM
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 20:37:18 -0700
Hi all,

Sorry to be sooo slow on this.  Had to mine some pix
and whip a page together...  Nothing to add regarding
the original bird in question, but below is a link to
photos and discussion of some hybrid Petrochelidon.

http://www.utopianature.com/CLAVE.html

happy hybrids,

Mitch Heindel
Utopia, Texas

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Techniques for assessing gestalt from photos
From: "Mike O'Keeffe" <okeeffeml AT EIRCOM.NET>
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 21:05:09 +0000
Hi all,

 

We all use jizz or gestalt as part of our everyday bird identification toolbag. 
It includes elements of movement and behaviour as well as a bird’s 
distinctive size and shape characteristics. A photo freezes not only a bird’s 
fieldmarks but also it’s gestalt. Whereas we are all accustomed to readily 
identifying a bird in a photo from its fieldmarks, most however would consider 
any attempt to study gestalt through the analysis of individual digital images 
as a pretty futile exercise. Even something as apparently simple as taking 
accurate size measurements from photographs is extremely difficult due to the 
fact an image is a two-dimensional projection of the three-dimensional world. 
We cannot simply recreate that third dimension. All that data has been 
compressed and is irretrievable. We may not be able to completely unlock 
gestalt from still images but are there ways of unlocking more information from 
images than we normally appreciate? I have been trying to address this question 
in a couple of recent postings on the blog. Hope you find some of this of 
interest. 


 

Comparative Photographic Analysis (CPA)


http://www.birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2016/02/gestalt-comparative-photographic.html 


 

3D Modelling


http://www.birdingimagequalitytool.blogspot.ie/2016/03/gestalt-3d-modelling.html 


 

Regards

 

Mike O’Keeffe

Ireland


This email has been scanned by BullGuard antivirus protection.
For more info visit www.bullguard.com 
 


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: West Virginia white goose identification
From: Terry Bronson <bronsonwv AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 06:54:24 -0500
I received 7 comments in response to my recent query, with 6 out of the 7
seeing the bird as a pure Ross's Goose, so I have validated it as such.
Thanks to all for their input.

-- 
Terry Bronson
Morgantown, WV
WV eBird reviewer

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Ross's Goose or hybrid?
From: David Irons <llsdirons AT MSN.COM>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 03:04:56 +0000
Hi Terry,

I really see nothing about this bird that suggests it's a hybrid. The bill may 
be on the long end of the spectrum for a Ross's, some of which have extremely 
stubby, steep-sloped bills. That said, I have photos of a number of Ross's with 
very similar bill lengths. Here in Oregon, there have been a couple of out of 
place Ross's this winter with similar bill length (with only Cackling Geese for 
comparison). Some observers who saw them were trying to call these birds 
hybrids. Contrary to what some think, Ross's can show a slight gap along the 
cutting edge of the bill where the mandible and maxilla meet. It is nothing 
like the "grin patch" of a Snow Goose. However, when seen, this slight gap on a 
longer-billed Ross's may lead some to think hybrid. When identifying a hybrid, 
there should be more than one intermediate feature and I don't see any on this 
bird. To my eye, this bird is small-headed and has a very rounded or domed 
crown profile. The bill length seems only slightly longer than its height at 
the base and the overall shape is still suggestive of a right triangle. The 
line where the feathering meets the base of the bill is quite straight and 
almost perfectly vertical. Finally, the base of the bill is grayish pink. All 
of these features point to pure Ross's in my opinion. 


In addition to the grin patch, Snow Geese have a much flatter crown profile, a 
bill that is considerably longer than it is tall (thus not suggestive of right 
triangle in shape), and a curved line where the feathering meets the base of 
the bill. The head and bill shape and features of Ross's X Snow are usually 
intermediate. 


Dave Irons
Portland, OR

> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2016 17:24:54 -0500
> From: bronsonwv AT GMAIL.COM
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Ross's Goose or hybrid?
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> 
> On Feb. 27, a white goose was reported in Hardy County, WV in the eastern
> part of the state. The observer reported it as a Ross's Goose. As eBird
> reviewer for WV, I had doubts and solicited the views of other WV birders.
> The only 2 that responded thought it was a Snow X Ross's hybrid. The
> observer agreed to change it to a hybrid, but reported that an
> ornithologist from Alabama thought it was a Ross's. On Mar. 5, a very
> experienced VA birder who frequently birds in WV saw the bird and also
> reported it as a Ross's.
> 
> Because of this disagreement, I am soliciting other opinions. Ross's Goose
> is quite rare in WV, being well to the east of its normal range, but there
> have been several birds reported in recent years, as well as Snow X Ross's
> hybrids, including one a couple of months ago.
> 
> The observer posted 15 photos at the following link. There are some
> intervening non-bird photos, so just skip past them. Included are a few
> with Canada Geese in the frame for comparison.
> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/89922350 AT N06/24717068813/in/dateposted-public/
> 
> I will note the following:
> 
> In the photos with the Canada Geese, the bird, to me at least, appears
> greater than half the size of the Canadas. A Ross's should be about half
> the size, unless the Canada is a real runt.
> 
> In some photos, the head appears rounded; in others more sloping.
> 
> Although the base of the bill is basically vertical, favoring Ross's, the
> top noticeably extends backward towards the eyes, which is more
> characteristic of Snow Geese.
> 
> The size of the bill appears in some photos to be larger than I would
> expect from a Ross's, being almost half as long as the distance from the
> bill's base to the nape. The Sibley Guide to Birds shows a more petite bill
> that looks be somewhat shorter than half that distance.
> 
> Some of us see a small grin patch, while others don't. There is clearly
> some blue-gray color near the base of the bill.
> 
> The neck does appear somewhat thick.
> 
> I'd appreciate any opinions from those with much more experience with
> Ross's and its hybrids.
> 
> -- 
> Terry Bronson
> Morgantown, WV
> 
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
 		 	   		  
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark-eyed Junco with white wing-bars
From: David Irons <llsdirons AT MSN.COM>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 02:43:33 +0000
Hi Paul,

Have you considered Slate-colored Dark-eyed Junco X White-throated Sparrow? 
This cross occurs with some regularity in the northeast. My friend Mark 
Szantyr, who lives in CT., has documented a couple of these. A few years back 
he wrote an informative article on this topic for www.birdfellow.com, for which 
I am the contend editor. The color and pattern in the wing of your bird, along 
with the rather bold wingbars (which are suggestive of a Zonotrichia wing 
pattern) do not fit any form of "pure" junco. Here is a link to the article, 
which includes some photos. The art in the junco plate is Mark's. He is as 
studied on the topic of junco variation as anyone I know. 



http://www.birdfellow.com/journal/2009/09/06/probable_dark_eyed_junco_x_white_throated_sparrow_hybrids 


Dave Irons
Portland, OR

> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2016 16:25:20 -0500
> From: hheveran AT HOTMAIL.COM
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Dark-eyed Junco with white wing-bars
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> 
> Hello ID Experts,
> I observed a Dark-eyed Junco with white wing-bars at my eastern Pennsylvania 
feeders from November 13th to November 14th, 2015 (last year). I took several 
poor-to-average photos and consulted with a few experienced birders in my area. 
Their consensus was that there was not enough evidence to point to either a 
"Slate-colored" Junco with white wing-bars or a "White-winged" Junco. My Sibley 
guide says that one in 200 "Slate-colored" Juncos show prominent wing-bars. 
I'll start by mentioning the traits that point to "White-winged" Junco and then 
the traits that point against it. 

> 
> This junco was observed on the same day that the Franklin's Gull invasion 
occured, and a few other Western birds were seen in the East. The bird was seen 
the afternoon of the 13th, briefly the next morning, and has not been seen 
since. Perhaps it would have been seen regularly if it were a local bird. In my 
photos I have included a normal "Slate-colored" Junco (the first photo) for 
comparison. The bird in question seems to have a longer/larger bill than the 
junco included for comparison. This bird also seems to show a good amount of 
white in the tail, but that can't be confirmed unless I had a picture of its 
tail while in flight (which I don't have, unfortunately). 

> While observing this junco, I didn't think it was unusually large or pale 
compared to the other juncos. I don't have any side-by-side comparison photos, 
as juncos are very territorial at my feeders and prefer one at a time. A photo 
of its tail in flight would have been extremely valuable. 

> All opinions on this bird are welcome. I'm fine with an undecided answer, 
too. I am just looking for more opinions. 

> Here are the photos on Flickr:
> https://flic.kr/s/aHskpExua8
> Thank you very much in advance!
> Sincerely,
> Paul Heveran 		 	   		  
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
 		 	   		  
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Ross's Goose or hybrid?
From: Terry Bronson <bronsonwv AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2016 17:24:54 -0500
On Feb. 27, a white goose was reported in Hardy County, WV in the eastern
part of the state. The observer reported it as a Ross's Goose. As eBird
reviewer for WV, I had doubts and solicited the views of other WV birders.
The only 2 that responded thought it was a Snow X Ross's hybrid. The
observer agreed to change it to a hybrid, but reported that an
ornithologist from Alabama thought it was a Ross's. On Mar. 5, a very
experienced VA birder who frequently birds in WV saw the bird and also
reported it as a Ross's.

Because of this disagreement, I am soliciting other opinions. Ross's Goose
is quite rare in WV, being well to the east of its normal range, but there
have been several birds reported in recent years, as well as Snow X Ross's
hybrids, including one a couple of months ago.

The observer posted 15 photos at the following link. There are some
intervening non-bird photos, so just skip past them. Included are a few
with Canada Geese in the frame for comparison.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/89922350 AT N06/24717068813/in/dateposted-public/

I will note the following:

In the photos with the Canada Geese, the bird, to me at least, appears
greater than half the size of the Canadas. A Ross's should be about half
the size, unless the Canada is a real runt.

In some photos, the head appears rounded; in others more sloping.

Although the base of the bill is basically vertical, favoring Ross's, the
top noticeably extends backward towards the eyes, which is more
characteristic of Snow Geese.

The size of the bill appears in some photos to be larger than I would
expect from a Ross's, being almost half as long as the distance from the
bill's base to the nape. The Sibley Guide to Birds shows a more petite bill
that looks be somewhat shorter than half that distance.

Some of us see a small grin patch, while others don't. There is clearly
some blue-gray color near the base of the bill.

The neck does appear somewhat thick.

I'd appreciate any opinions from those with much more experience with
Ross's and its hybrids.

-- 
Terry Bronson
Morgantown, WV

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark-eyed Junco with white wing-bars
From: Tony Leukering <greatgrayowl AT AOL.COM>
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2016 16:51:26 -0500
 Hi Paul:

While I agree that the bird looks a bit big-billed, I would ID the bird as a 
Slate-colored Junco with white wing bars. The lack of a black mask contrasting 
with a paler gray head points away from White-winged. Note that the appearance 
of black in the lores presented by the second and third pictures is typical of 
all juncos facing toward the observer, but that this apparent black is absent 
from pictures in which the head is in profile (as is typical of Slate-colored). 
Had the pictures been sharp enough, the tail pattern may have been discernible, 
but I find it not so (as you noted). 


Enjoy,

Tony

 


Tony Leukering
Largo, FL
http://cowyebird.blogspot.com/

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

http://aba.org/photoquiz/

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Heveran . 
To: BIRDWG01 
Sent: Sun, Mar 6, 2016 4:37 pm
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Dark-eyed Junco with white wing-bars

Hello ID Experts,
I observed a Dark-eyed Junco with white wing-bars at my eastern Pennsylvania 
feeders from November 13th to November 14th, 2015 (last year). I took several 
poor-to-average photos and consulted with a few experienced birders in my area. 
Their consensus was that there was not enough evidence to point to either a 
"Slate-colored" Junco with white wing-bars or a "White-winged" Junco. My Sibley 
guide says that one in 200 "Slate-colored" Juncos show prominent wing-bars. 
I'll start by mentioning the traits that point to "White-winged" Junco and then 
the traits that point against it. 


This junco was observed on the same day that the Franklin's Gull invasion 
occured, and a few other Western birds were seen in the East. The bird was seen 
the afternoon of the 13th, briefly the next morning, and has not been seen 
since. Perhaps it would have been seen regularly if it were a local bird. In my 
photos I have included a normal "Slate-colored" Junco (the first photo) for 
comparison. The bird in question seems to have a longer/larger bill than the 
junco included for comparison. This bird also seems to show a good amount of 
white in the tail, but that can't be confirmed unless I had a picture of its 
tail while in flight (which I don't have, unfortunately). 

While observing this junco, I didn't think it was unusually large or pale 
compared to the other juncos. I don't have any side-by-side comparison photos, 
as juncos are very territorial at my feeders and prefer one at a time. A photo 
of its tail in flight would have been extremely valuable. 

All opinions on this bird are welcome. I'm fine with an undecided answer, too. 
I am just looking for more opinions. 

Here are the photos on Flickr:
https://flic.kr/s/aHskpExua8
Thank you very much in advance!
Sincerely,
Paul Heveran 		 	   		  
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Dark-eyed Junco with white wing-bars
From: "Heveran ." <hheveran AT HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2016 16:25:20 -0500
Hello ID Experts,
I observed a Dark-eyed Junco with white wing-bars at my eastern Pennsylvania 
feeders from November 13th to November 14th, 2015 (last year). I took several 
poor-to-average photos and consulted with a few experienced birders in my area. 
Their consensus was that there was not enough evidence to point to either a 
"Slate-colored" Junco with white wing-bars or a "White-winged" Junco. My Sibley 
guide says that one in 200 "Slate-colored" Juncos show prominent wing-bars. 
I'll start by mentioning the traits that point to "White-winged" Junco and then 
the traits that point against it. 


This junco was observed on the same day that the Franklin's Gull invasion 
occured, and a few other Western birds were seen in the East. The bird was seen 
the afternoon of the 13th, briefly the next morning, and has not been seen 
since. Perhaps it would have been seen regularly if it were a local bird. In my 
photos I have included a normal "Slate-colored" Junco (the first photo) for 
comparison. The bird in question seems to have a longer/larger bill than the 
junco included for comparison. This bird also seems to show a good amount of 
white in the tail, but that can't be confirmed unless I had a picture of its 
tail while in flight (which I don't have, unfortunately). 

While observing this junco, I didn't think it was unusually large or pale 
compared to the other juncos. I don't have any side-by-side comparison photos, 
as juncos are very territorial at my feeders and prefer one at a time. A photo 
of its tail in flight would have been extremely valuable. 

All opinions on this bird are welcome. I'm fine with an undecided answer, too. 
I am just looking for more opinions. 

Here are the photos on Flickr:
https://flic.kr/s/aHskpExua8
Thank you very much in advance!
Sincerely,
Paul Heveran 		 	   		  
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Thank you
From: Peter Post <pwpost AT NYC.RR.COM>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:48:31 -0500
Many thanks to all those who gave of their time and expertise to  
reply to my enquiry concerning the ID of the Central Park goose.

Peter Post

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Fwd: NY GOOSE
From: Declan Troy <declan.troy AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2016 13:45:13 -0900
There  is good reason you may see some similarity between the Anchorage
geese and  Dusky Canada Geese. The genetic evidence shows good demarcation
between large and small white-cheeked geese (aka Canada and Cackling
groups) but little support for recognized subspecies, especially among
versions of Canadas among which there is considerable overlap among
neighboring populations. In the case of southern Alaska there is overlap
among the Anchorage "parvipes," Duskies, and even fulva. For more detail
check out (or recheck):

Scribner, K.T., Talbot, SL, Pearce, JM, Pierson, BJ, Bollinger, KS, &
Derksen, DV. 2003 Phylogeography of Canada Geese (Branta canadensis) in
western North America. Auk 120(3):889-907.


As to hybridization along Hudson Bay the evidence shows a narrow zone of
overlaps where most individuals are readily assigned to species based on
morphology and genetics but for which there is some genetic evidence of
limited historical introgression.  See:

Leafloor, J.O., Jennifer A. Moore and Kim T. Scribner. 2013 A hybrid zone
between Canada Geese (Branta canadensis) and Cackling Geese (B.
hutchinsii).  Auk 130 (3): 487-500


Declan


On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Alvaro Jaramillo 
wrote:

> I am now even more confused:
>
> Steve M. said :
> 4) Who knows what the Anchorage birds are. Hybrids seem ever the better
> answer, especially as we know that there is a hybrid swarm of Richy x Bc
> interior on w. slope of Hudson Bay. The Anchorage birds likely account for
> some of the confusing "West Coast parvipes" as well as tweeners (Tav vs
> parvipes) seen in w. coast wintering grounds.
>
> How does a population of geese (in Anchorage) that looks like Dusky Canada
> Goose, become "tweener" Taverners vs Lesser? That makes absolutely no sense
> to me, was Steve mixing up what is going on in Nome with what is going in
> Anchorage.
>
> Alvaro
>
> Alvaro Jaramillo
> alvaro AT alvarosadventures.com
> www.alvarosadventures.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification [mailto:
> BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Tony Leukering
> Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 11:06 AM
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Fwd: NY GOOSE
>
>  All:
>
> I have forwarded Steve Mlodinow's thoughts on this goose.  For those bits
> about which I have strong experience, I agree with Steve's comments.  (I
> have cleaned up spelling and formatting problems, but in no way changed any
> substantive comments.)
>
> I have one comment to add, myself, about movement of goose populations,
> relative to movement of individually marked geese, a feature brought up in
> this discussion by others.  While there may not be any evidence of
> banded/collared "Lesser" Canadas moving as far east as the East Coast, that
> does not prove that none occur there, it simply suggests that either most
> don't or the the majority of the population where banding/collaring takes
> place don't.
>
> It seems odd that birders are perfectly fine accepting some medium- or
> long-distance migrant species as long-distance vagrants, yet not others.
> Considering the distance that Lesser Canadas travel to reach Colorado (or
> Texas), having one wind up in Michigan or Kentucky or New York is not at
> all outlandish.
>
> Note:  For clarity's sake, I here provide a glossary of terms.
>
> Canada Goose (Branta canadensis; CANG) subspecies mentioned (currently
> "accepted" taxonomy and nomenclature):
>      Lesser Canada Goose -- B. c. parvipes
>      Interior Canada Goose -- B. c. interior
>      Canada Canada Goose (for lack of a better name) -- B. c. canadensis
> Cackling Goose (Branta hutchinsii; CACG) subspecies mentioned (see comment
> above):
>      Richardson's Cackling Goose -- B. h. hutchinsii -- "Richy"
>      Taverner's Cackling Goose -- B. h. taverneri -- "Tav"
>      Ridgway's Cackling Goose -- B. h. minima
>      Aleutian Cackling Goose -- B. h. leucopareia
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Tony
>
>
>
>
> Tony Leukering
> Largo, FL
> http://cowyebird.blogspot.com/
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering/
>
> http://aba.org/photoquiz/
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 1) There is (mtDNA) genetic evidence that some of the geese breeding on
> the n. slope of AK (i.e., CACG not CANG habitat) are Canadas. Probably this
> should be confirmed by additional studies. However, radio-collared young
> from these nests all migrated to winter on the Great Plains to the Rockies
> (e.g., CO, NE, KS). Since this is a moderately long-distance migration to
> the southeast, the occurrence of these birds (whatever you wanna label 'em,
> but they are not Cacklers) might occasionally stray farther east. True,
> these north-slope breeding Canadas might be Moffitt's, but it seems rather
> unlikely.
>
>
> 2) There is a wintering population of small Canada Geese in Washington's
> Columbia Basin and, presumably, the Klamath Basin. These birds are very
> similar to the birds called parvipes in Colorado. I don't know if anyone
> knows where these things breed. There is a population of small-bodied,
> taiga-breeding geese in The Yukon that have been labelled parvipes, and
> perhaps these are the source of the e. WA birds. Also, Whistling Swans from
> the Seward Pen migrate through the Columbia Basin and Klamath, so perhaps
> any parvipes that breed in/near the Seward Pen might be the source.
>
>
> 3) Some of the "parvipes" in w. WA are like the ones in e. WA, but there
> are  these weird dark things that are small and shape like parvipes. They
> are ????. We've been labeling them parvipes for lack of a better term.
>
>
> 4) Who knows what the Anchorage birds are. Hybrids seem ever the better
> answer, especially as we know that there is a hybrid swarm of Richy x Bc
> interior on w. slope of Hudson Bay. The Anchorage birds likely account for
> some of the confusing "West Coast parvipes" as well as tweeners (Tav vs
> parvipes) seen in w. coast wintering grounds.
>
>
> 5) What the heck is a Taverner's Goose? The discussion on Frontiers seems
> to focus on the lack of cohesion in Lesser Canada (parvipes). The same lack
> of cohesion exists in Taverner's. Though "Tavs" breeding in w. AK are
> structurally similar to those breeding in n. AK (from what I can tell),
> though they are colored very differently and have totally different
> migrations and wintering grounds. Indeed, I doubt the two ever meet except
> for occasional vagrants.
>
>
> 6) What the heck is Taverner's Goose? The closer one looks at flocks of
> Cackling Geese in CO, the more birds one sees that look intermediate
> between Tav and Richy. Since Tav and Richy seem to breed in the same
> habitat, I am guessing that there is a continuum of phenotypes from east to
> west, and that these two "subspecies" are not... subspecies... but the same
> thing. I don't know what to do with the w. AK taverneri. There is
> absolutely no consensus on where Tav ends and Richy begins on the n. slope
> of N America.
>
>
> 7) Hybrids. While waterfowl aren't gulls, they do hybridize a lot.
> Leafloor uncovered a several hundred km long (if I remember the size
> correctly) hybrid zone between Richys and Bc interior along the w. shore of
> Hudson Bay (note that Leafloor lumps Bc interior and Bc canadensis, so that
> the article refers to the Canadas involved as Bc canadensis). This most
> likely explains the birds that in Colorado that look, well, like hybrid
> Canada x Cacklings. The presence of this large hybrid population (with
> hybrid measurements ranging from "normal" Richy to "normal" Bc interior)
> should scare the Hell out of all of us. Leafloor seems to think bill shape
> is irrelevant (not bill length). So, bill length:height was never measured.
> Therefore, we are at a loss as to the phenotypical variation of these
> hybrids. Since this hybrid zone appears to have been present for a very
> long time (as I recall, at least 100s of years), I suspect genotypic
> hybrids might look like a typical Richy, a typical !
>  interior, and everything in between (much as is true with Glaucous-winged
> and Western Gulls). I think the easiest way to suss a hybrid, if possible
> for a given individual, would be bill shape. In any case, one of the
> conclusions one can draw from Leafloor's work is that any given bird that
> looks like a Richardson's Goose could be a hybrid. You just can't tell.
>
>
> 8) Hybrids. If Bc interior breeds with Bh hutchinsii, then why not Bc
> parvipes with Bh taverneri (using current terminology) on the n. slope??
> And why not in w. AK??  That's more to be afraid of.  The pics that I've
> seen from the n. slope include birds that look, well, like hybrids. Not
> surprised now, was then.
>
>
> 9) And just think about the miscegenation between what we call parvipes
> and interior....
>
>
> 10) The NY bird. I love Tweit's analysis, can't improve upon it much. That
> bird is not a Cackling.
>
>
> I don't like the back shape mark some alluded to for separating Cackling
> from Canada.  Cathy Sheeter did some further digging into images, and she
> also does not like that mark. I am not at all certain whence it arises. The
> relative wing length ... I think is proportional to size, not dependent on
> taxon directly.
>
>
> So, if the NY bird is not a Cackling Goose, then what?  Hybrid is
> possible, but the bill looks well within range of normal Canada. Cathy
> Sheeter mentioned the possibility of a "runt" Canada.
>
>
> Ahhh. The NY Bird is distinctly on the dark side (coloration wise, not
> referring to an allegiance to messrs Voldemort or Vader). Why would a
> hybrid be dark? For that matter, why would a parvipes be dark (the ones in
> Colorado are no darker on average than the Richys). However, the interior
> that breed on islands in s. Hudson Bay (or is it James Bay?) are known to
> be smaller and darker than those that breed on the adjacent coast (btw,
> these differences have been proven by Leafloor to be entirely due to diet:
> amount and content). This bird is small and dark.
>
>
> So, the answer is unknowable in my mind. I would lean toward, in order, a
> small, dark Bc interior; parvipes, CANG x CACG. Those are my guesses. The
> one thing that I feel confident of is that this is NOT a Cackling Goose.
>
>
> OTHER MUSINGS
> Not only is parvipes a confused taxon needing reconsideration, the
> entirety of Canada Goose is in need of such scrutiny. The more southerly
> breeding Canadas almost certainly were less fragmented by the ice ages,
> causing less differentiation. Add to that the amount of mixing caused by
> human "re-introductions" of subspecies far away from point of origin,
> Canada Goose taxonomy is an utter mess. The whole thing needs to be looked
> at with fresh eyes, and I doubt that there are more than 2-3 "good"
> subspecies:  fulva/occidentalis (together or separate, since life style is
> quite different, even if appearance isn't) and then ????
>
>
> Cackling Geese are far better separated by phenotype and habitat, with
> better separated breeding and wintering zones. I would think that there are
> three taxa here: minima, leucopareia, and taverneri/hutchinsii. These three
> groupings tend to be rather distinctive visually, and there is anecdotal
> evidence that mixing between minima and taverneri is limited where they
> meet, and they like different habitats. Nuclear DNA analysis using recent
> techniques might be quite illuminating here.
>
>
> This was written quickly and somewhat off the cuff, so there might be some
> mis-statements, certainly misspellings.
>
>
> Best Wishes
> Steve Mlodinow
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Fwd: NY GOOSE
From: Ardith Bondi <ardbon AT EARTHLINK.NET>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 21:38:47 -0500
FWIW, there are two pictures in my website of a small Canada Goose that 
I photographed in Anchorage in June, 2009. If I recall correctly, it was 
part of an isolated pair. I called it Cackling because it was very small 
and I didn't know better. 
http://www.ardithbondi.com/pictures/slide1882.jpg and 
http://www.ardithbondi.com/pictures/slide1881.jpg

Any ideas about where it would fit in your nomenclature?

Ardith Bondi

On 2/19/16 11:55 PM, David Irons wrote:
> Greetings All,
>
> One of the issues that I consistently run into in trying to find images of 
Lesser Canada Geese is that most of what is labeled as such is either totally 
misidentified, or the birds are ambiguous in appearance and more suggestive of 
what we typically call Taverner's Cackling Goose here in the PNW. 

>
> If any of you have photos of birds that you think/know/believe to be Lessers, 
I would love to have a look at them. Simply send them to me as jpgs. Yesterday 
I sent Bruce Deuel a group of 10 photos of birds found here in w. Oregon. Some 
seem to be pretty straight forward Taverner's, while others may have bills that 
are long enough and thin enough to bring Lesser into the discussion. Bruce felt 
most were Tavs and was on the fence about a couple others. 

>
> Dave Irons
> Portland, OR
>
>
>
>
>> Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 17:19:15 -0800
>> From: chucao AT COASTSIDE.NET
>> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Fwd: NY GOOSE
>> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
>>
>> I am now even more confused:
>>
>> Steve M. said :
>> 4) Who knows what the Anchorage birds are. Hybrids seem ever the better 
answer, especially as we know that there is a hybrid swarm of Richy x Bc 
interior on w. slope of Hudson Bay. The Anchorage birds likely account for some 
of the confusing "West Coast parvipes" as well as tweeners (Tav vs parvipes) 
seen in w. coast wintering grounds. 

>>
>> How does a population of geese (in Anchorage) that looks like Dusky Canada 
Goose, become "tweener" Taverners vs Lesser? That makes absolutely no sense to 
me, was Steve mixing up what is going on in Nome with what is going in 
Anchorage. 

>>
>> Alvaro
>>
>> Alvaro Jaramillo
>> alvaro AT alvarosadventures.com
>> www.alvarosadventures.com
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification 
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Tony Leukering 

>> Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 11:06 AM
>> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
>> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Fwd: NY GOOSE
>>
>>   All:
>>
>> I have forwarded Steve Mlodinow's thoughts on this goose. For those bits 
about which I have strong experience, I agree with Steve's comments. (I have 
cleaned up spelling and formatting problems, but in no way changed any 
substantive comments.) 

>>
>> I have one comment to add, myself, about movement of goose populations, 
relative to movement of individually marked geese, a feature brought up in this 
discussion by others. While there may not be any evidence of banded/collared 
"Lesser" Canadas moving as far east as the East Coast, that does not prove that 
none occur there, it simply suggests that either most don't or the the majority 
of the population where banding/collaring takes place don't. 

>>
>> It seems odd that birders are perfectly fine accepting some medium- or 
long-distance migrant species as long-distance vagrants, yet not others. 
Considering the distance that Lesser Canadas travel to reach Colorado (or 
Texas), having one wind up in Michigan or Kentucky or New York is not at all 
outlandish. 

>>
>> Note:  For clarity's sake, I here provide a glossary of terms.
>>
>> Canada Goose (Branta canadensis; CANG) subspecies mentioned (currently 
"accepted" taxonomy and nomenclature): 

>>       Lesser Canada Goose -- B. c. parvipes
>>       Interior Canada Goose -- B. c. interior
>> Canada Canada Goose (for lack of a better name) -- B. c. canadensis Cackling 
Goose (Branta hutchinsii; CACG) subspecies mentioned (see comment above): 

>>       Richardson's Cackling Goose -- B. h. hutchinsii -- "Richy"
>>       Taverner's Cackling Goose -- B. h. taverneri -- "Tav"
>>       Ridgway's Cackling Goose -- B. h. minima
>>       Aleutian Cackling Goose -- B. h. leucopareia
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Tony
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Tony Leukering
>> Largo, FL
>> http://cowyebird.blogspot.com/
>>
>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering/
>>
>> http://aba.org/photoquiz/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 1) There is (mtDNA) genetic evidence that some of the geese breeding on the 
n. slope of AK (i.e., CACG not CANG habitat) are Canadas. Probably this should 
be confirmed by additional studies. However, radio-collared young from these 
nests all migrated to winter on the Great Plains to the Rockies (e.g., CO, NE, 
KS). Since this is a moderately long-distance migration to the southeast, the 
occurrence of these birds (whatever you wanna label 'em, but they are not 
Cacklers) might occasionally stray farther east. True, these north-slope 
breeding Canadas might be Moffitt's, but it seems rather unlikely. 

>>
>>
>> 2) There is a wintering population of small Canada Geese in Washington's 
Columbia Basin and, presumably, the Klamath Basin. These birds are very similar 
to the birds called parvipes in Colorado. I don't know if anyone knows where 
these things breed. There is a population of small-bodied, taiga-breeding geese 
in The Yukon that have been labelled parvipes, and perhaps these are the source 
of the e. WA birds. Also, Whistling Swans from the Seward Pen migrate through 
the Columbia Basin and Klamath, so perhaps any parvipes that breed in/near the 
Seward Pen might be the source. 

>>
>>
>> 3) Some of the "parvipes" in w. WA are like the ones in e. WA, but there are 
these weird dark things that are small and shape like parvipes. They are ????. 
We've been labeling them parvipes for lack of a better term. 

>>
>>
>> 4) Who knows what the Anchorage birds are. Hybrids seem ever the better 
answer, especially as we know that there is a hybrid swarm of Richy x Bc 
interior on w. slope of Hudson Bay. The Anchorage birds likely account for some 
of the confusing "West Coast parvipes" as well as tweeners (Tav vs parvipes) 
seen in w. coast wintering grounds. 

>>
>>
>> 5) What the heck is a Taverner's Goose? The discussion on Frontiers seems to 
focus on the lack of cohesion in Lesser Canada (parvipes). The same lack of 
cohesion exists in Taverner's. Though "Tavs" breeding in w. AK are structurally 
similar to those breeding in n. AK (from what I can tell), though they are 
colored very differently and have totally different migrations and wintering 
grounds. Indeed, I doubt the two ever meet except for occasional vagrants. 

>>
>>
>> 6) What the heck is Taverner's Goose? The closer one looks at flocks of 
Cackling Geese in CO, the more birds one sees that look intermediate between 
Tav and Richy. Since Tav and Richy seem to breed in the same habitat, I am 
guessing that there is a continuum of phenotypes from east to west, and that 
these two "subspecies" are not... subspecies... but the same thing. I don't 
know what to do with the w. AK taverneri. There is absolutely no consensus on 
where Tav ends and Richy begins on the n. slope of N America. 

>>
>>
>> 7) Hybrids. While waterfowl aren't gulls, they do hybridize a lot. Leafloor 
uncovered a several hundred km long (if I remember the size correctly) hybrid 
zone between Richys and Bc interior along the w. shore of Hudson Bay (note that 
Leafloor lumps Bc interior and Bc canadensis, so that the article refers to the 
Canadas involved as Bc canadensis). This most likely explains the birds that in 
Colorado that look, well, like hybrid Canada x Cacklings. The presence of this 
large hybrid population (with hybrid measurements ranging from "normal" Richy 
to "normal" Bc interior) should scare the Hell out of all of us. Leafloor seems 
to think bill shape is irrelevant (not bill length). So, bill length:height was 
never measured. Therefore, we are at a loss as to the phenotypical variation of 
these hybrids. Since this hybrid zone appears to have been present for a very 
long time (as I recall, at least 100s of years), I suspect genotypic hybrids 
might look like a typical Richy, a typic! 

 al !
>> interior, and everything in between (much as is true with Glaucous-winged 
and Western Gulls). I think the easiest way to suss a hybrid, if possible for a 
given individual, would be bill shape. In any case, one of the conclusions one 
can draw from Leafloor's work is that any given bird that looks like a 
Richardson's Goose could be a hybrid. You just can't tell. 

>>
>>
>> 8) Hybrids. If Bc interior breeds with Bh hutchinsii, then why not Bc 
parvipes with Bh taverneri (using current terminology) on the n. slope?? And 
why not in w. AK?? That's more to be afraid of. The pics that I've seen from 
the n. slope include birds that look, well, like hybrids. Not surprised now, 
was then. 

>>
>>
>> 9) And just think about the miscegenation between what we call parvipes and 
interior.... 

>>
>>
>> 10) The NY bird. I love Tweit's analysis, can't improve upon it much. That 
bird is not a Cackling. 

>>
>>
>> I don't like the back shape mark some alluded to for separating Cackling 
from Canada. Cathy Sheeter did some further digging into images, and she also 
does not like that mark. I am not at all certain whence it arises. The relative 
wing length ... I think is proportional to size, not dependent on taxon 
directly. 

>>
>>
>> So, if the NY bird is not a Cackling Goose, then what? Hybrid is possible, 
but the bill looks well within range of normal Canada. Cathy Sheeter mentioned 
the possibility of a "runt" Canada. 

>>
>>
>> Ahhh. The NY Bird is distinctly on the dark side (coloration wise, not 
referring to an allegiance to messrs Voldemort or Vader). Why would a hybrid be 
dark? For that matter, why would a parvipes be dark (the ones in Colorado are 
no darker on average than the Richys). However, the interior that breed on 
islands in s. Hudson Bay (or is it James Bay?) are known to be smaller and 
darker than those that breed on the adjacent coast (btw, these differences have 
been proven by Leafloor to be entirely due to diet: amount and content). This 
bird is small and dark. 

>>
>>
>> So, the answer is unknowable in my mind. I would lean toward, in order, a 
small, dark Bc interior; parvipes, CANG x CACG. Those are my guesses. The one 
thing that I feel confident of is that this is NOT a Cackling Goose. 

>>
>>
>> OTHER MUSINGS
>> Not only is parvipes a confused taxon needing reconsideration, the entirety 
of Canada Goose is in need of such scrutiny. The more southerly breeding 
Canadas almost certainly were less fragmented by the ice ages, causing less 
differentiation. Add to that the amount of mixing caused by human 
"re-introductions" of subspecies far away from point of origin, Canada Goose 
taxonomy is an utter mess. The whole thing needs to be looked at with fresh 
eyes, and I doubt that there are more than 2-3 "good" subspecies: 
fulva/occidentalis (together or separate, since life style is quite different, 
even if appearance isn't) and then ???? 

>>
>>
>> Cackling Geese are far better separated by phenotype and habitat, with 
better separated breeding and wintering zones. I would think that there are 
three taxa here: minima, leucopareia, and taverneri/hutchinsii. These three 
groupings tend to be rather distinctive visually, and there is anecdotal 
evidence that mixing between minima and taverneri is limited where they meet, 
and they like different habitats. Nuclear DNA analysis using recent techniques 
might be quite illuminating here. 

>>
>>
>> This was written quickly and somewhat off the cuff, so there might be some 
mis-statements, certainly misspellings. 

>>
>>
>> Best Wishes
>> Steve Mlodinow
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>>
>> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>   		 	   		
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Fwd: NY GOOSE
From: David Irons <llsdirons AT MSN.COM>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 04:55:35 +0000
Greetings All,

One of the issues that I consistently run into in trying to find images of 
Lesser Canada Geese is that most of what is labeled as such is either totally 
misidentified, or the birds are ambiguous in appearance and more suggestive of 
what we typically call Taverner's Cackling Goose here in the PNW. 


If any of you have photos of birds that you think/know/believe to be Lessers, I 
would love to have a look at them. Simply send them to me as jpgs. Yesterday I 
sent Bruce Deuel a group of 10 photos of birds found here in w. Oregon. Some 
seem to be pretty straight forward Taverner's, while others may have bills that 
are long enough and thin enough to bring Lesser into the discussion. Bruce felt 
most were Tavs and was on the fence about a couple others. 


Dave Irons
Portland, OR




> Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 17:19:15 -0800
> From: chucao AT COASTSIDE.NET
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Fwd: NY GOOSE
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> 
> I am now even more confused: 
> 
> Steve M. said : 
> 4) Who knows what the Anchorage birds are. Hybrids seem ever the better 
answer, especially as we know that there is a hybrid swarm of Richy x Bc 
interior on w. slope of Hudson Bay. The Anchorage birds likely account for some 
of the confusing "West Coast parvipes" as well as tweeners (Tav vs parvipes) 
seen in w. coast wintering grounds. 

> 
> How does a population of geese (in Anchorage) that looks like Dusky Canada 
Goose, become "tweener" Taverners vs Lesser? That makes absolutely no sense to 
me, was Steve mixing up what is going on in Nome with what is going in 
Anchorage. 

> 
> Alvaro
> 
> Alvaro Jaramillo
> alvaro AT alvarosadventures.com
> www.alvarosadventures.com
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NBHC ID-FRONTIERS Frontiers of Field Identification 
[mailto:BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU] On Behalf Of Tony Leukering 

> Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 11:06 AM
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> Subject: [BIRDWG01] Fwd: NY GOOSE
> 
>  All:
> 
> I have forwarded Steve Mlodinow's thoughts on this goose. For those bits 
about which I have strong experience, I agree with Steve's comments. (I have 
cleaned up spelling and formatting problems, but in no way changed any 
substantive comments.) 

> 
> I have one comment to add, myself, about movement of goose populations, 
relative to movement of individually marked geese, a feature brought up in this 
discussion by others. While there may not be any evidence of banded/collared 
"Lesser" Canadas moving as far east as the East Coast, that does not prove that 
none occur there, it simply suggests that either most don't or the the majority 
of the population where banding/collaring takes place don't. 

> 
> It seems odd that birders are perfectly fine accepting some medium- or 
long-distance migrant species as long-distance vagrants, yet not others. 
Considering the distance that Lesser Canadas travel to reach Colorado (or 
Texas), having one wind up in Michigan or Kentucky or New York is not at all 
outlandish. 

> 
> Note:  For clarity's sake, I here provide a glossary of terms.
> 
> Canada Goose (Branta canadensis; CANG) subspecies mentioned (currently 
"accepted" taxonomy and nomenclature): 

>      Lesser Canada Goose -- B. c. parvipes
>      Interior Canada Goose -- B. c. interior
> Canada Canada Goose (for lack of a better name) -- B. c. canadensis Cackling 
Goose (Branta hutchinsii; CACG) subspecies mentioned (see comment above): 

>      Richardson's Cackling Goose -- B. h. hutchinsii -- "Richy"
>      Taverner's Cackling Goose -- B. h. taverneri -- "Tav"
>      Ridgway's Cackling Goose -- B. h. minima
>      Aleutian Cackling Goose -- B. h. leucopareia     
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Tony
> 
>  
> 
> 
> Tony Leukering
> Largo, FL
> http://cowyebird.blogspot.com/
> 
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/tony_leukering/
> 
> http://aba.org/photoquiz/
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 1) There is (mtDNA) genetic evidence that some of the geese breeding on the 
n. slope of AK (i.e., CACG not CANG habitat) are Canadas. Probably this should 
be confirmed by additional studies. However, radio-collared young from these 
nests all migrated to winter on the Great Plains to the Rockies (e.g., CO, NE, 
KS). Since this is a moderately long-distance migration to the southeast, the 
occurrence of these birds (whatever you wanna label 'em, but they are not 
Cacklers) might occasionally stray farther east. True, these north-slope 
breeding Canadas might be Moffitt's, but it seems rather unlikely. 

> 
> 
> 2) There is a wintering population of small Canada Geese in Washington's 
Columbia Basin and, presumably, the Klamath Basin. These birds are very similar 
to the birds called parvipes in Colorado. I don't know if anyone knows where 
these things breed. There is a population of small-bodied, taiga-breeding geese 
in The Yukon that have been labelled parvipes, and perhaps these are the source 
of the e. WA birds. Also, Whistling Swans from the Seward Pen migrate through 
the Columbia Basin and Klamath, so perhaps any parvipes that breed in/near the 
Seward Pen might be the source. 

> 
> 
> 3) Some of the "parvipes" in w. WA are like the ones in e. WA, but there are 
these weird dark things that are small and shape like parvipes. They are ????. 
We've been labeling them parvipes for lack of a better term. 

> 
> 
> 4) Who knows what the Anchorage birds are. Hybrids seem ever the better 
answer, especially as we know that there is a hybrid swarm of Richy x Bc 
interior on w. slope of Hudson Bay. The Anchorage birds likely account for some 
of the confusing "West Coast parvipes" as well as tweeners (Tav vs parvipes) 
seen in w. coast wintering grounds. 

> 
> 
> 5) What the heck is a Taverner's Goose? The discussion on Frontiers seems to 
focus on the lack of cohesion in Lesser Canada (parvipes). The same lack of 
cohesion exists in Taverner's. Though "Tavs" breeding in w. AK are structurally 
similar to those breeding in n. AK (from what I can tell), though they are 
colored very differently and have totally different migrations and wintering 
grounds. Indeed, I doubt the two ever meet except for occasional vagrants. 

> 
> 
> 6) What the heck is Taverner's Goose? The closer one looks at flocks of 
Cackling Geese in CO, the more birds one sees that look intermediate between 
Tav and Richy. Since Tav and Richy seem to breed in the same habitat, I am 
guessing that there is a continuum of phenotypes from east to west, and that 
these two "subspecies" are not... subspecies... but the same thing. I don't 
know what to do with the w. AK taverneri. There is absolutely no consensus on 
where Tav ends and Richy begins on the n. slope of N America. 

> 
> 
> 7) Hybrids. While waterfowl aren't gulls, they do hybridize a lot. Leafloor 
uncovered a several hundred km long (if I remember the size correctly) hybrid 
zone between Richys and Bc interior along the w. shore of Hudson Bay (note that 
Leafloor lumps Bc interior and Bc canadensis, so that the article refers to the 
Canadas involved as Bc canadensis). This most likely explains the birds that in 
Colorado that look, well, like hybrid Canada x Cacklings. The presence of this 
large hybrid population (with hybrid measurements ranging from "normal" Richy 
to "normal" Bc interior) should scare the Hell out of all of us. Leafloor seems 
to think bill shape is irrelevant (not bill length). So, bill length:height was 
never measured. Therefore, we are at a loss as to the phenotypical variation of 
these hybrids. Since this hybrid zone appears to have been present for a very 
long time (as I recall, at least 100s of years), I suspect genotypic hybrids 
might look like a typical Richy, a typical ! 

> interior, and everything in between (much as is true with Glaucous-winged and 
Western Gulls). I think the easiest way to suss a hybrid, if possible for a 
given individual, would be bill shape. In any case, one of the conclusions one 
can draw from Leafloor's work is that any given bird that looks like a 
Richardson's Goose could be a hybrid. You just can't tell. 

> 
> 
> 8) Hybrids. If Bc interior breeds with Bh hutchinsii, then why not Bc 
parvipes with Bh taverneri (using current terminology) on the n. slope?? And 
why not in w. AK?? That's more to be afraid of. The pics that I've seen from 
the n. slope include birds that look, well, like hybrids. Not surprised now, 
was then. 

> 
> 
> 9) And just think about the miscegenation between what we call parvipes and 
interior.... 

> 
> 
> 10) The NY bird. I love Tweit's analysis, can't improve upon it much. That 
bird is not a Cackling. 

> 
> 
> I don't like the back shape mark some alluded to for separating Cackling from 
Canada. Cathy Sheeter did some further digging into images, and she also does 
not like that mark. I am not at all certain whence it arises. The relative wing 
length ... I think is proportional to size, not dependent on taxon directly. 

> 
> 
> So, if the NY bird is not a Cackling Goose, then what? Hybrid is possible, 
but the bill looks well within range of normal Canada. Cathy Sheeter mentioned 
the possibility of a "runt" Canada. 

> 
> 
> Ahhh. The NY Bird is distinctly on the dark side (coloration wise, not 
referring to an allegiance to messrs Voldemort or Vader). Why would a hybrid be 
dark? For that matter, why would a parvipes be dark (the ones in Colorado are 
no darker on average than the Richys). However, the interior that breed on 
islands in s. Hudson Bay (or is it James Bay?) are known to be smaller and 
darker than those that breed on the adjacent coast (btw, these differences have 
been proven by Leafloor to be entirely due to diet: amount and content). This 
bird is small and dark. 

> 
> 
> So, the answer is unknowable in my mind. I would lean toward, in order, a 
small, dark Bc interior; parvipes, CANG x CACG. Those are my guesses. The one 
thing that I feel confident of is that this is NOT a Cackling Goose. 

> 
> 
> OTHER MUSINGS
> Not only is parvipes a confused taxon needing reconsideration, the entirety 
of Canada Goose is in need of such scrutiny. The more southerly breeding 
Canadas almost certainly were less fragmented by the ice ages, causing less 
differentiation. Add to that the amount of mixing caused by human 
"re-introductions" of subspecies far away from point of origin, Canada Goose 
taxonomy is an utter mess. The whole thing needs to be looked at with fresh 
eyes, and I doubt that there are more than 2-3 "good" subspecies: 
fulva/occidentalis (together or separate, since life style is quite different, 
even if appearance isn't) and then ???? 

> 
> 
> Cackling Geese are far better separated by phenotype and habitat, with better 
separated breeding and wintering zones. I would think that there are three taxa 
here: minima, leucopareia, and taverneri/hutchinsii. These three groupings tend 
to be rather distinctive visually, and there is anecdotal evidence that mixing 
between minima and taverneri is limited where they meet, and they like 
different habitats. Nuclear DNA analysis using recent techniques might be quite 
illuminating here. 

> 
> 
> This was written quickly and somewhat off the cuff, so there might be some 
mis-statements, certainly misspellings. 

> 
> 
> Best Wishes
> Steve Mlodinow
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
> 
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
 		 	   		  
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Fwd: [nwcalbird] Bear River Ridge Raptor ID
From: Elias Elias <fabflockfinder AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 19:15:08 -0800
Hi John,

Whether Tristan is totally correct, partially correct or completely off
base, his arguments are novel and based in logic and I think deserve to be
given some thought by the larger birding community. I, at least, have a
sympathetic ear. In part, because I think hybrid swarms are incredibly
fascinating.





Flock on!

Elias Elias
Arcata CA/San Diego CA
walkie-talkie primero 707-633-8833
last ditch alternate 559-433-7254

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 2:26 PM, John Sterling 
wrote:

> I disagree with Tristan’s assessment below of the “discussion” on ID
> Frontiers that he posted to NW CA Birds after moving the thread from that
> forum to ID Frontiers.
>
> John Sterling
> VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
>
> 26 Palm Ave
> Woodland, CA 95695
> 530 908-3836
> jsterling AT wavecable.com
> www.sterlingbirds.com
>
>
>
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: "Tristan McKee atmckee AT gmail.com [nwcalbird]" <
> nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [nwcalbird] Bear River Ridge Raptor ID
> > Date: February 19, 2016 at 11:25:43 AM PST
> > To: "nwcalbird AT yahoogroups.com" 
> > Reply-To: Tristan McKee 
> >
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I just wanted to let you all know that the Bear River Ridge Raptor has
> been an interesting topic of discussion on ID-Frontiers:
> >
> > http://birding.aba.org/maillist/IDF  >
> >
> > I have learned several things:
> >
> > --Nobody thinks wrist-crescents, patagial bars, or primary windows have
> any significance whatsoever.
> >
> > --Jerry Liguori has beautiful photos of Red-tailed x Ferruginous hybrids
> from Utah.
> >
> > --It is considered normal nowadays to call juvenile birds with petite
> proportions and dark flight-feathers Ferruginous Hawks, despite all the
> traditional assertions in the literature that they are massive with very
> pale flight feathers.
> >
> > Cathy Sheeter was kind enough to collect some Ferruginous Hawk images to
> illustrate that the Humboldt bird, and the Utah bird from the Cornell site
> I mentioned earlier, fit in well with other Ferruginous Hawks in terms of
> structure.
> >
> > https://www.flickr.com/photos/aphelionart/24760908089/ <
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/aphelionart/24760908089/>
> >
> > Unfortunately, the Humboldt bird is not at a comparative angle and its
> overall size is inflated compared to the other silhouettes (measuring
> bill-tail length); she corrected for the latter issue but the bird's
> bill-tail length is still significantly longer than any of the others--I
> don't understand why she does not just make it to scale. But that is beside
> the point. What is much more interesting to me is that one of the other
> birds stands out as clearly different in proportions than the others--it
> has shorter wings with bulging secondaries and rounded wingtips and a
> shorter tail. I.e., it's a Red-tail. It turns out that this is the Utah
> bird I had concluded was a Red-tailed or hybrid, but which Sullivan and
> Sheeter consider a "typical" Ferruginous. I repeatedly asked for examples
> of petite, identifiable, light-morph Ferruginous Hawks, but these requests
> were completely ignored.
> >
> > This Utah bird seems to have set the precedent that allows folks to call
> dainty birds with dark flight feathers Ferruginous Hawks. At least, there
> are no other photos of similar "Ferruginous Hawks" on the web.
> >
> > This all has much more wide-ranging implications than just field ID of
> odd birds. Ferruginous is specialist that is very sensitive to human
> disturbance. Red-tailed is a generalist that loves habitat fragmentation.
> Sound familiar? We are losing the Spotted Owl as a species because we made
> a societal choice to allow the Barred Owl to genetically swamp it. The best
> way to repeat this mistake with another magnificent raptor is to turn a
> blind eye to it. When a newer generation of birders is willing to call a
> dark, petite creature with Red-tailed traits--which the older generation
> views with suspicion--a "pure Ferruginous Hawk", we have just made the
> first step toward accepting that the magnificent hawks which fully deserved
> the name regalis are in fact going to go extinct at our hand--and it is
> okay, because we still have these small, dark creatures with some
> Ferruginous traits.
> >
> > Many thanks for a truly stimulating discussion, which I hope will
> continue on and be further fueled by more photos of the Bear River Ridge
> bird.
> >
> > Best,
> > Tristan
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Tristan McKee  > wrote:
> > Thanks for keeping the great discussion alive, Chris! A few issues:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Chris Heys <
> kingletkingfisherkingbird AT yahoo.com  kingletkingfisherkingbird AT yahoo.com>> wrote:
> >
> > I feel like only one photo depicts a small head:
> >
> >
> >
> > This one. The others show adequate head size for FEHA. Am I wrong?
> >
> > Yes, I'm afraid so. All the photos depict a head too small for
> Ferruginous, and it looks especially striking in the last one of it on the
> ground. There is only one bird here, right? Then it only has one head size.
> The skeletal structure of birds is not wildly variable like plumage in
> raptors. No Ferruginous has a head this small, and they always show a
> distinct eagle-like "brow".
> >
> > This photo:
> >
> >
> > Shows the classic Ferruginous 'window' in the primaries. Granted,
> Harlans Hawk has some varying levels of white in the upper parts of their
> wings, it's usually more irregular and much less extensive than what we see
> here, and more commonly in my experience up nearer to the shoulder.
> >
> > I agree about the typical pattern of Harlan's. Remember though that
> Rough-legged shows the same pattern as Ferruginous. I have received a
> couple of private replies from experts that think the bird is a
> Rough-legged.
> >
> >  This photo and one other show the narrow white crescent which dark
> morph FEHA's have on the under sides of their wrists:
> >
> >
> > The reliance on this trait appears to be a big part of the problem here.
> Here's a Harlan's with even bolder crescents than our bird:
> >
> >
> 
http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/51519-Juvenile-Harlan-s-Dark-Morph-Red-tailed-Hawk 

> <
> 
http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/51519-Juvenile-Harlan-s-Dark-Morph-Red-tailed-Hawk 

> >
> >
> > I wonder how much this photo on the Cornell site influences people's
> willingness to call our bird a Ferruginous?
> >
> > https://www.allaboutbirds.org/  >guide/Ferruginous_Hawk/id
> >
> > Think about your field experience with dark Ferrugs. Does the Cornell
> bird match? How many dark Ferrugs have you seen that have obviously darker
> patagial bars and a classic juvenile RTHA wing shape and tail pattern,
> along with a smallish head and bill? This bird is a mislabeled Red-tail or,
> based again on the white crescents at the wrist, perhaps a Red-tailed x
> Ferruginous hybrid.
> >
> > I feel the problem here is that folks are typing "dark Ferrruginous
> Hawk" into Google and then thinking they are looking at a bunch of dark
> Ferruginous Hawks. This is a lot like typing "Thayer's Gull" in Google. Try
> that for fun sometime! Less than 50% of the first hits are Thayer's Gulls.
> >
> > There is a strange admixturephobia within the raptor world which ignores
> that 10% of bird species are KNOWN to hybridize (Grant and Grant 1992:
> Hybridization of bird species), hybridization has been practiced by
> falconers for many centuries, and there are numerous examples of e.g.,
> Red-tailed x Red-shouldered hybrids in the wild. And we all know how picky
> vagrant black-hawks are in choosing their mates... there are black-hawk x
> Red-shouldered hybrids wandering around in Northern California.
> >
> > >Lastly, this photo documents the deep yellow 'gape', or smile as
> someone earlier has nicely described it, of a FEHA:
> >
> > I agree that this is a good trait in adults, but all juvenile birds show
> a more prominent gape.
> >
> > Conconsus is nice, three major issues loom over this ID:
> >
> > 1) Despite mixed traits, hybridization is being ignored as a possibility.
> >
> > 2) Rough-legged has been tossed aside with no one clearly addressing why
> it isn't one.
> >
> > 3) No one has provided any clear evidence that Ferruginous can appear
> this small-headed or dark in the flight feathers (ignoring the Cornell
> photo until someone can explain the patagial bars and wing shape of that
> bird).
> >
> > I don't see how we can be satisfied with this bird's ID until at least
> those three issues are addressed.
> >
> > Better yet, let's get more photos!
> >
> > Tristan
> >
> >
> > On Feb 17, 2016, at 6:19 PM, Tristan McKee atmckee AT gmail.com  atmckee AT gmail.com> [nwcalbird]  nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com>> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Chris,
> >>
> >> I very much appreciate your email, and it stood out in that you backed
> up your identification with a solid analysis.
> >>
> >> Trying to keep to that spirit, I believe the arguments for a juvenile
> Harlan's Hawk or Harlan's x calurus intergrade are even stronger. This was
> my initial thought upon viewing the photos because of the very small head,
> but I quickly dismissed it because juvenile Harlan's is a one-trick pony,
> traditionally: it either has bars towards the primary tips or it doesn't,
> right? Wrong. This trait is variable, and this bird is ambiguous on second
> glance, in terms of that trait, due to the very low lighting. But
> everything else actually fits, even down to a little white mottling on the
> breast and the thick wavy barring on the flight feathers. White patches on
> the uppersides of the flight feathers are also regular in Harlan's (
> https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/wb/v06n02/p0055-p0062.pdf
> <
> https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/wb/v06n02/p0055-p0062.pdf>
> ). That small head and bill are among the most notable things I have picked
> up on in the small handful of adult Harlan's and the one juvenile I've seen
> in California. I must say I still disagree with the assertions that this
> bird has feathered tarsi: at the very least, we'd might best dismiss that
> trait because we are perceiving it so differently. Look at how far the
> tibia feathers extend down on this Harlan's (plus a shadow makes one leg
> look dark):
> >>
> >> http://raptorsoftherockies.blogspot.com/2014_10_01_archive.html <
> http://raptorsoftherockies.blogspot.com/2014_10_01_archive.html>
> >>
> >> How often does a given mysterious Buteo turn out to be a Red-tail?
> Almost always.
> >>
> >> How many times have each of us been momentarily tricked into thinking a
> juvie Red-tail was something else because of the differences between adult
> and juvenile structural traits? Countless times, surely.
> >>
> >> Why did Lucas and Rob state that it was a Red-tail? Because it is. ;-)
> >>
> >> Tristan
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Chris Heys <
> kingletkingfisherkingbird AT yahoo.com  kingletkingfisherkingbird AT yahoo.com>> wrote:
> >> feel that we are looking at a dark ferruginous hawk. Tristan, I see
> where you are coming from as a couple of the photos, one in particular
> makes this bird appear to have a proportionally small head, but, I believe,
> when comparing it to the other photos posted of this bird, I think it's
> possible that it's apparent head size is an effect of a combination of
> posture and perspective. The third photo posted in particular shows the
> bird in flight with an adequately large head for FEHA.
> >>
> >> I think similar could be said about the appearance of wing tips in the
> photo of the bird on the ground which don't meet the tail tip. The posture
> of the bird, movement of the bird and perspective could very well account
> for this.
> >>
> >> Also, thin legs could easily be an illusion caused by a bright
> background and a low profile, dark subject. And while it's tough to tell,
> there is a distinct color difference and nearly discernible textural
> difference between tarsi and feet.
> >>
> >> Primary windows, flight posture and wing shape, on the other hand, are
> pretty well documented in these photos and point directly towards FEHA.
> >>
> >> Take my input with a grain of salt, please, I have fewer years on this
> earth than most of you but I've been waiting all day for a moment to chime
> in.
> >>
> >> Chris Heys
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Feb 16, 2016, at 8:20 PM, Rob Fowler migratoriusfwlr AT gmail.com
>  [nwcalbird] <
> nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com  nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I shared these photos with Jerry Ligouri and Brian Sullivan, some of
> the most respected raptor ID experts in North America. Jerry has replied so
> far and says it is a juvenile Ferruginous Hawk. I think I will take his
> opinion.
> >>>
> >>> The Mendocino shrike is very different from this bird, Ken. There is
> nothing to make anybody think it is a hybrid.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Rob Fowler
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPhone
> >>>
> >>> On Feb 16, 2016, at 7:49 PM, 'Ken Burton' shrikethree AT gmail.com
>  [nwcalbird] <
> nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com  nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone at this point, but the
> Mendocino shrike got me thinking about hybrid vagrancy, and it makes sense
> to me that hybrids, while usually relatively rare, might be
> disproportionately prone to vagrancy.  A dark-morph FEHA could be
> considered a vagrant here, but of course if it is a hybrid, the dark part
> could’ve come from the other parent.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ken Burton
> >>>> Arcata
> >>>>
> >>>> From: mailto:nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com  nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com>
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 6:52 PM
> >>>> To: nwcalbird AT yahoogroups.com 
> >>>> Subject: Re: [nwcalbird] Bear River Ridge Raptor ID
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I agree that the wing shape resembles Ferruginous strongly (as it
> does in Long-legged), although Ferruginous typically does not look this
> long and narrow-winged, and the outer two primaries are unusually long on
> this bird; but the small head and relatively long, thin bill are not even
> close, and the long, thin tarsi and small feet are all wrong. I wouldn't
> count out, say, a Red-tailed x Ferruginous hybrid. As I have learned all to
> often, looking perfect for a species on account of one or a handful of
> traits does not always make an identification correct.
> >>>>
> >>>> Compare this dark-morph Ferruginous Hawk, especially the massive
> head, short, heavy bill, shorter tail, and very pale bases to the flight
> feathers:
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/36042017 AT N06/11484331123 <
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/36042017 AT N06/11484331123>
> >>>>
> >>>> Another dark immature; note again the bull-headed appearance,
> shorter, broader wings, and much paler flight feathers:
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ned_harris/12171521963/sizes/l <
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ned_harris/12171521963/sizes/l>
> >>>>
> >>>> I certainly don't know what this bird is, but having seen quite a
> decent number of dark morph Ferruginous Hawks of various ages at communal
> roosts, I am confident that it is not a (pure) Ferruginous. My experience
> pretty much agrees with Sibley in that Ferruginous "Always has very pale
> flight feathers with very small dark tips." His illustration shows a
> typical dark-morph juvenile, with boldly white bases to the flight feathers
> (although the tail is not always that white).
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for keeping the discussion going,
> >>>> Tristan
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 2:41 PM, John Sterling <
> jsterling AT wavecable.com > wrote:
> >>>> The shape in flight is perfect for Ferruginous.  I see no reason to
> doubt that it is that species.
> >>>>
> >>>> John Sterling
> >>>> VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
> >>>>
> >>>> 26 Palm Ave
> >>>> Woodland, CA 95695
> >>>> 530 908-3836 
> >>>> jsterling AT wavecable.com 
> >>>> www.sterlingbirds.com 
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Feb 16, 2016, at 2:31 PM, Tristan McKee atmckee AT gmail.com
>  [nwcalbird]  > wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Revisiting the raptor:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/44858774 AT N00/sets/72157664682598225 <
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/44858774 AT N00/sets/72157664682598225>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As Elias suggested, let's keep this discussion going. If there's one
> thing I feel comfortable saying about Ferruginous, it's that they have a
> huge head. They look like eagles. Also, the wingtips should extend at least
> to the tail tip in Ferruginous, and both Ferruginous and Rough-legged
> should have obviously "furry"-looking tarsi.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Compare the dark-morph Ferruginous Greg photographed in Ferndale:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/20378246 AT N02/albums/72157664016881119
> 
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Structurally, the BRR bird is unlike any raptor I have ever seen. I
> seriously considered Swainson's for a minute, to throw a fourth species
> into the mix! But it's not one, and it's not a Red-tail. I'm pretty sure
> it's not a Rough-legged. I don't know what it is. When this happens with
> raptors, even in the absence of jesses, it is good to keep in mind exotic
> species kept by falconers, as well as hybrids. The bird's strangely small
> head, long tarsi, "interesting" wing shape, big gape, and the fact that the
> wingtips do not appear to reach the tail tip, along with the barred
> under-primaries and tail, all give it an uncanny resemblance to a
> dark-morph Long-legged Buzzard; e.g.,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> http://ibc.lynxeds.com/photo/long-legged-buzzard-buteo-rufinus/dark-morph-0
> <
> http://ibc.lynxeds.com/photo/long-legged-buzzard-buteo-rufinus/dark-morph-0
> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>> or
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/rashed11112/3151200791/ <
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/rashed11112/3151200791/>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tristan
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by
> Avast.
> >>>> www.avast.com 
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > __._,_.___
> > Posted by: Tristan McKee >
> > Reply via web post <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/nwcalbird/conversations/messages/6577;_ylc=X3oDMTJwbDV1ZDRsBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BG1zZ0lkAzY1NzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDcnBseQRzdGltZQMxNDU1OTA5OTQ1?act=reply&messageNum=6577> 

> • Reply to sender 
 

> • Reply to group 
 

> •       Start a New Topic <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/nwcalbird/conversations/newtopic;_ylc=X3oDMTJlZGZ2aHVjBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTQ1NTkwOTk0NQ--> 

>     •       Messages in this topic <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/nwcalbird/conversations/topics/6552;_ylc=X3oDMTM0NmYyaWkzBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BG1zZ0lkAzY1NzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDU1OTA5OTQ1BHRwY0lkAzY1NTI-> 

> (12)
> > VISIT YOUR GROUP <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/nwcalbird/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMnNybTljBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTQ1NTkwOTk0NQ--> 

> New Members <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/nwcalbird/members/all;_ylc=X3oDMTJmajJ0c3RhBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZtYnJzBHN0aW1lAzE0NTU5MDk5NDU-> 

> 4 New Photos <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/nwcalbird/photos/photostream;_ylc=X3oDMTJmczE3bjRkBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZwaG90BHN0aW1lAzE0NTU5MDk5NDU-> 

> 1
> >  <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJkOTE3MmZvBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxNDU1OTA5OTQ1>• 

> Privacy  •
> Unsubscribe 
 

> • Terms of Use 
> > .
> >
> >
> > __,_._,___
>
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Fwd: [nwcalbird] Bear River Ridge Raptor ID
From: Tristan McKee <atmckee AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 18:29:59 -0800
John,

Please do elaborate.

Tristan

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 2:26 PM, John Sterling 
wrote:

> I disagree with Tristan’s assessment below of the “discussion” on ID
> Frontiers that he posted to NW CA Birds after moving the thread from that
> forum to ID Frontiers.
>
> John Sterling
> VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
>
> 26 Palm Ave
> Woodland, CA 95695
> 530 908-3836
> jsterling AT wavecable.com
> www.sterlingbirds.com
>
>
>
> > Begin forwarded message:
> >
> > From: "Tristan McKee atmckee AT gmail.com [nwcalbird]" <
> nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [nwcalbird] Bear River Ridge Raptor ID
> > Date: February 19, 2016 at 11:25:43 AM PST
> > To: "nwcalbird AT yahoogroups.com" 
> > Reply-To: Tristan McKee 
> >
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I just wanted to let you all know that the Bear River Ridge Raptor has
> been an interesting topic of discussion on ID-Frontiers:
> >
> > http://birding.aba.org/maillist/IDF  >
> >
> > I have learned several things:
> >
> > --Nobody thinks wrist-crescents, patagial bars, or primary windows have
> any significance whatsoever.
> >
> > --Jerry Liguori has beautiful photos of Red-tailed x Ferruginous hybrids
> from Utah.
> >
> > --It is considered normal nowadays to call juvenile birds with petite
> proportions and dark flight-feathers Ferruginous Hawks, despite all the
> traditional assertions in the literature that they are massive with very
> pale flight feathers.
> >
> > Cathy Sheeter was kind enough to collect some Ferruginous Hawk images to
> illustrate that the Humboldt bird, and the Utah bird from the Cornell site
> I mentioned earlier, fit in well with other Ferruginous Hawks in terms of
> structure.
> >
> > https://www.flickr.com/photos/aphelionart/24760908089/ <
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/aphelionart/24760908089/>
> >
> > Unfortunately, the Humboldt bird is not at a comparative angle and its
> overall size is inflated compared to the other silhouettes (measuring
> bill-tail length); she corrected for the latter issue but the bird's
> bill-tail length is still significantly longer than any of the others--I
> don't understand why she does not just make it to scale. But that is beside
> the point. What is much more interesting to me is that one of the other
> birds stands out as clearly different in proportions than the others--it
> has shorter wings with bulging secondaries and rounded wingtips and a
> shorter tail. I.e., it's a Red-tail. It turns out that this is the Utah
> bird I had concluded was a Red-tailed or hybrid, but which Sullivan and
> Sheeter consider a "typical" Ferruginous. I repeatedly asked for examples
> of petite, identifiable, light-morph Ferruginous Hawks, but these requests
> were completely ignored.
> >
> > This Utah bird seems to have set the precedent that allows folks to call
> dainty birds with dark flight feathers Ferruginous Hawks. At least, there
> are no other photos of similar "Ferruginous Hawks" on the web.
> >
> > This all has much more wide-ranging implications than just field ID of
> odd birds. Ferruginous is specialist that is very sensitive to human
> disturbance. Red-tailed is a generalist that loves habitat fragmentation.
> Sound familiar? We are losing the Spotted Owl as a species because we made
> a societal choice to allow the Barred Owl to genetically swamp it. The best
> way to repeat this mistake with another magnificent raptor is to turn a
> blind eye to it. When a newer generation of birders is willing to call a
> dark, petite creature with Red-tailed traits--which the older generation
> views with suspicion--a "pure Ferruginous Hawk", we have just made the
> first step toward accepting that the magnificent hawks which fully deserved
> the name regalis are in fact going to go extinct at our hand--and it is
> okay, because we still have these small, dark creatures with some
> Ferruginous traits.
> >
> > Many thanks for a truly stimulating discussion, which I hope will
> continue on and be further fueled by more photos of the Bear River Ridge
> bird.
> >
> > Best,
> > Tristan
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Tristan McKee  > wrote:
> > Thanks for keeping the great discussion alive, Chris! A few issues:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Chris Heys <
> kingletkingfisherkingbird AT yahoo.com  kingletkingfisherkingbird AT yahoo.com>> wrote:
> >
> > I feel like only one photo depicts a small head:
> >
> >
> >
> > This one. The others show adequate head size for FEHA. Am I wrong?
> >
> > Yes, I'm afraid so. All the photos depict a head too small for
> Ferruginous, and it looks especially striking in the last one of it on the
> ground. There is only one bird here, right? Then it only has one head size.
> The skeletal structure of birds is not wildly variable like plumage in
> raptors. No Ferruginous has a head this small, and they always show a
> distinct eagle-like "brow".
> >
> > This photo:
> >
> >
> > Shows the classic Ferruginous 'window' in the primaries. Granted,
> Harlans Hawk has some varying levels of white in the upper parts of their
> wings, it's usually more irregular and much less extensive than what we see
> here, and more commonly in my experience up nearer to the shoulder.
> >
> > I agree about the typical pattern of Harlan's. Remember though that
> Rough-legged shows the same pattern as Ferruginous. I have received a
> couple of private replies from experts that think the bird is a
> Rough-legged.
> >
> >  This photo and one other show the narrow white crescent which dark
> morph FEHA's have on the under sides of their wrists:
> >
> >
> > The reliance on this trait appears to be a big part of the problem here.
> Here's a Harlan's with even bolder crescents than our bird:
> >
> >
> 
http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/51519-Juvenile-Harlan-s-Dark-Morph-Red-tailed-Hawk 

> <
> 
http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/51519-Juvenile-Harlan-s-Dark-Morph-Red-tailed-Hawk 

> >
> >
> > I wonder how much this photo on the Cornell site influences people's
> willingness to call our bird a Ferruginous?
> >
> > https://www.allaboutbirds.org/  >guide/Ferruginous_Hawk/id
> >
> > Think about your field experience with dark Ferrugs. Does the Cornell
> bird match? How many dark Ferrugs have you seen that have obviously darker
> patagial bars and a classic juvenile RTHA wing shape and tail pattern,
> along with a smallish head and bill? This bird is a mislabeled Red-tail or,
> based again on the white crescents at the wrist, perhaps a Red-tailed x
> Ferruginous hybrid.
> >
> > I feel the problem here is that folks are typing "dark Ferrruginous
> Hawk" into Google and then thinking they are looking at a bunch of dark
> Ferruginous Hawks. This is a lot like typing "Thayer's Gull" in Google. Try
> that for fun sometime! Less than 50% of the first hits are Thayer's Gulls.
> >
> > There is a strange admixturephobia within the raptor world which ignores
> that 10% of bird species are KNOWN to hybridize (Grant and Grant 1992:
> Hybridization of bird species), hybridization has been practiced by
> falconers for many centuries, and there are numerous examples of e.g.,
> Red-tailed x Red-shouldered hybrids in the wild. And we all know how picky
> vagrant black-hawks are in choosing their mates... there are black-hawk x
> Red-shouldered hybrids wandering around in Northern California.
> >
> > >Lastly, this photo documents the deep yellow 'gape', or smile as
> someone earlier has nicely described it, of a FEHA:
> >
> > I agree that this is a good trait in adults, but all juvenile birds show
> a more prominent gape.
> >
> > Conconsus is nice, three major issues loom over this ID:
> >
> > 1) Despite mixed traits, hybridization is being ignored as a possibility.
> >
> > 2) Rough-legged has been tossed aside with no one clearly addressing why
> it isn't one.
> >
> > 3) No one has provided any clear evidence that Ferruginous can appear
> this small-headed or dark in the flight feathers (ignoring the Cornell
> photo until someone can explain the patagial bars and wing shape of that
> bird).
> >
> > I don't see how we can be satisfied with this bird's ID until at least
> those three issues are addressed.
> >
> > Better yet, let's get more photos!
> >
> > Tristan
> >
> >
> > On Feb 17, 2016, at 6:19 PM, Tristan McKee atmckee AT gmail.com  atmckee AT gmail.com> [nwcalbird]  nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com>> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Chris,
> >>
> >> I very much appreciate your email, and it stood out in that you backed
> up your identification with a solid analysis.
> >>
> >> Trying to keep to that spirit, I believe the arguments for a juvenile
> Harlan's Hawk or Harlan's x calurus intergrade are even stronger. This was
> my initial thought upon viewing the photos because of the very small head,
> but I quickly dismissed it because juvenile Harlan's is a one-trick pony,
> traditionally: it either has bars towards the primary tips or it doesn't,
> right? Wrong. This trait is variable, and this bird is ambiguous on second
> glance, in terms of that trait, due to the very low lighting. But
> everything else actually fits, even down to a little white mottling on the
> breast and the thick wavy barring on the flight feathers. White patches on
> the uppersides of the flight feathers are also regular in Harlan's (
> https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/wb/v06n02/p0055-p0062.pdf
> <
> https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/wb/v06n02/p0055-p0062.pdf>
> ). That small head and bill are among the most notable things I have picked
> up on in the small handful of adult Harlan's and the one juvenile I've seen
> in California. I must say I still disagree with the assertions that this
> bird has feathered tarsi: at the very least, we'd might best dismiss that
> trait because we are perceiving it so differently. Look at how far the
> tibia feathers extend down on this Harlan's (plus a shadow makes one leg
> look dark):
> >>
> >> http://raptorsoftherockies.blogspot.com/2014_10_01_archive.html <
> http://raptorsoftherockies.blogspot.com/2014_10_01_archive.html>
> >>
> >> How often does a given mysterious Buteo turn out to be a Red-tail?
> Almost always.
> >>
> >> How many times have each of us been momentarily tricked into thinking a
> juvie Red-tail was something else because of the differences between adult
> and juvenile structural traits? Countless times, surely.
> >>
> >> Why did Lucas and Rob state that it was a Red-tail? Because it is. ;-)
> >>
> >> Tristan
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Chris Heys <
> kingletkingfisherkingbird AT yahoo.com  kingletkingfisherkingbird AT yahoo.com>> wrote:
> >> feel that we are looking at a dark ferruginous hawk. Tristan, I see
> where you are coming from as a couple of the photos, one in particular
> makes this bird appear to have a proportionally small head, but, I believe,
> when comparing it to the other photos posted of this bird, I think it's
> possible that it's apparent head size is an effect of a combination of
> posture and perspective. The third photo posted in particular shows the
> bird in flight with an adequately large head for FEHA.
> >>
> >> I think similar could be said about the appearance of wing tips in the
> photo of the bird on the ground which don't meet the tail tip. The posture
> of the bird, movement of the bird and perspective could very well account
> for this.
> >>
> >> Also, thin legs could easily be an illusion caused by a bright
> background and a low profile, dark subject. And while it's tough to tell,
> there is a distinct color difference and nearly discernible textural
> difference between tarsi and feet.
> >>
> >> Primary windows, flight posture and wing shape, on the other hand, are
> pretty well documented in these photos and point directly towards FEHA.
> >>
> >> Take my input with a grain of salt, please, I have fewer years on this
> earth than most of you but I've been waiting all day for a moment to chime
> in.
> >>
> >> Chris Heys
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Feb 16, 2016, at 8:20 PM, Rob Fowler migratoriusfwlr AT gmail.com
>  [nwcalbird] <
> nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com  nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I shared these photos with Jerry Ligouri and Brian Sullivan, some of
> the most respected raptor ID experts in North America. Jerry has replied so
> far and says it is a juvenile Ferruginous Hawk. I think I will take his
> opinion.
> >>>
> >>> The Mendocino shrike is very different from this bird, Ken. There is
> nothing to make anybody think it is a hybrid.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Rob Fowler
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPhone
> >>>
> >>> On Feb 16, 2016, at 7:49 PM, 'Ken Burton' shrikethree AT gmail.com
>  [nwcalbird] <
> nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com  nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone at this point, but the
> Mendocino shrike got me thinking about hybrid vagrancy, and it makes sense
> to me that hybrids, while usually relatively rare, might be
> disproportionately prone to vagrancy.  A dark-morph FEHA could be
> considered a vagrant here, but of course if it is a hybrid, the dark part
> could’ve come from the other parent.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ken Burton
> >>>> Arcata
> >>>>
> >>>> From: mailto:nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com  nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com>
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 6:52 PM
> >>>> To: nwcalbird AT yahoogroups.com 
> >>>> Subject: Re: [nwcalbird] Bear River Ridge Raptor ID
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I agree that the wing shape resembles Ferruginous strongly (as it
> does in Long-legged), although Ferruginous typically does not look this
> long and narrow-winged, and the outer two primaries are unusually long on
> this bird; but the small head and relatively long, thin bill are not even
> close, and the long, thin tarsi and small feet are all wrong. I wouldn't
> count out, say, a Red-tailed x Ferruginous hybrid. As I have learned all to
> often, looking perfect for a species on account of one or a handful of
> traits does not always make an identification correct.
> >>>>
> >>>> Compare this dark-morph Ferruginous Hawk, especially the massive
> head, short, heavy bill, shorter tail, and very pale bases to the flight
> feathers:
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/36042017 AT N06/11484331123 <
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/36042017 AT N06/11484331123>
> >>>>
> >>>> Another dark immature; note again the bull-headed appearance,
> shorter, broader wings, and much paler flight feathers:
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ned_harris/12171521963/sizes/l <
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ned_harris/12171521963/sizes/l>
> >>>>
> >>>> I certainly don't know what this bird is, but having seen quite a
> decent number of dark morph Ferruginous Hawks of various ages at communal
> roosts, I am confident that it is not a (pure) Ferruginous. My experience
> pretty much agrees with Sibley in that Ferruginous "Always has very pale
> flight feathers with very small dark tips." His illustration shows a
> typical dark-morph juvenile, with boldly white bases to the flight feathers
> (although the tail is not always that white).
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for keeping the discussion going,
> >>>> Tristan
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 2:41 PM, John Sterling <
> jsterling AT wavecable.com > wrote:
> >>>> The shape in flight is perfect for Ferruginous.  I see no reason to
> doubt that it is that species.
> >>>>
> >>>> John Sterling
> >>>> VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
> >>>>
> >>>> 26 Palm Ave
> >>>> Woodland, CA 95695
> >>>> 530 908-3836 
> >>>> jsterling AT wavecable.com 
> >>>> www.sterlingbirds.com 
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Feb 16, 2016, at 2:31 PM, Tristan McKee atmckee AT gmail.com
>  [nwcalbird]  > wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Revisiting the raptor:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/44858774 AT N00/sets/72157664682598225 <
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/44858774 AT N00/sets/72157664682598225>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As Elias suggested, let's keep this discussion going. If there's one
> thing I feel comfortable saying about Ferruginous, it's that they have a
> huge head. They look like eagles. Also, the wingtips should extend at least
> to the tail tip in Ferruginous, and both Ferruginous and Rough-legged
> should have obviously "furry"-looking tarsi.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Compare the dark-morph Ferruginous Greg photographed in Ferndale:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/20378246 AT N02/albums/72157664016881119
> 
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Structurally, the BRR bird is unlike any raptor I have ever seen. I
> seriously considered Swainson's for a minute, to throw a fourth species
> into the mix! But it's not one, and it's not a Red-tail. I'm pretty sure
> it's not a Rough-legged. I don't know what it is. When this happens with
> raptors, even in the absence of jesses, it is good to keep in mind exotic
> species kept by falconers, as well as hybrids. The bird's strangely small
> head, long tarsi, "interesting" wing shape, big gape, and the fact that the
> wingtips do not appear to reach the tail tip, along with the barred
> under-primaries and tail, all give it an uncanny resemblance to a
> dark-morph Long-legged Buzzard; e.g.,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> http://ibc.lynxeds.com/photo/long-legged-buzzard-buteo-rufinus/dark-morph-0
> <
> http://ibc.lynxeds.com/photo/long-legged-buzzard-buteo-rufinus/dark-morph-0
> >
> >>>>>
> >>>>> or
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/rashed11112/3151200791/ <
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/rashed11112/3151200791/>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tristan
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by
> Avast.
> >>>> www.avast.com 
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > __._,_.___
> > Posted by: Tristan McKee >
> > Reply via web post <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/nwcalbird/conversations/messages/6577;_ylc=X3oDMTJwbDV1ZDRsBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BG1zZ0lkAzY1NzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDcnBseQRzdGltZQMxNDU1OTA5OTQ1?act=reply&messageNum=6577> 

> • Reply to sender 
 

> • Reply to group 
 

> •       Start a New Topic <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/nwcalbird/conversations/newtopic;_ylc=X3oDMTJlZGZ2aHVjBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTQ1NTkwOTk0NQ--> 

>     •       Messages in this topic <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/nwcalbird/conversations/topics/6552;_ylc=X3oDMTM0NmYyaWkzBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BG1zZ0lkAzY1NzcEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDU1OTA5OTQ1BHRwY0lkAzY1NTI-> 

> (12)
> > VISIT YOUR GROUP <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/nwcalbird/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJlMnNybTljBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTQ1NTkwOTk0NQ--> 

> New Members <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/nwcalbird/members/all;_ylc=X3oDMTJmajJ0c3RhBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZtYnJzBHN0aW1lAzE0NTU5MDk5NDU-> 

> 4 New Photos <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/nwcalbird/photos/photostream;_ylc=X3oDMTJmczE3bjRkBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZwaG90BHN0aW1lAzE0NTU5MDk5NDU-> 

> 1
> >  <
> 
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJkOTE3MmZvBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzI0NTIyNTEEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDY1Nzg3BHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxNDU1OTA5OTQ1>• 

> Privacy  •
> Unsubscribe 
 

> • Terms of Use 
> > .
> >
> >
> > __,_._,___
>
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Fwd: NY GOOSE
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao AT COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 17:19:15 -0800
I am now even more confused: 

Steve M. said : 
4) Who knows what the Anchorage birds are. Hybrids seem ever the better answer, 
especially as we know that there is a hybrid swarm of Richy x Bc interior on w. 
slope of Hudson Bay. The Anchorage birds likely account for some of the 
confusing "West Coast parvipes" as well as tweeners (Tav vs parvipes) seen in 
w. coast wintering grounds. 


How does a population of geese (in Anchorage) that looks like Dusky Canada 
Goose, become "tweener" Taverners vs Lesser? That makes absolutely no sense to 
me, was Steve mixing up what is going on in Nome with what is going in 
Anchorage. 


Alvaro

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

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

Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 11:06 AM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Fwd: NY GOOSE

 All:

I have forwarded Steve Mlodinow's thoughts on this goose. For those bits about 
which I have strong experience, I agree with Steve's comments. (I have cleaned 
up spelling and formatting problems, but in no way changed any substantive 
comments.) 


I have one comment to add, myself, about movement of goose populations, 
relative to movement of individually marked geese, a feature brought up in this 
discussion by others. While there may not be any evidence of banded/collared 
"Lesser" Canadas moving as far east as the East Coast, that does not prove that 
none occur there, it simply suggests that either most don't or the the majority 
of the population where banding/collaring takes place don't. 


It seems odd that birders are perfectly fine accepting some medium- or 
long-distance migrant species as long-distance vagrants, yet not others. 
Considering the distance that Lesser Canadas travel to reach Colorado (or 
Texas), having one wind up in Michigan or Kentucky or New York is not at all 
outlandish. 


Note:  For clarity's sake, I here provide a glossary of terms.

Canada Goose (Branta canadensis; CANG) subspecies mentioned (currently 
"accepted" taxonomy and nomenclature): 

     Lesser Canada Goose -- B. c. parvipes
     Interior Canada Goose -- B. c. interior
 Canada Canada Goose (for lack of a better name) -- B. c. canadensis Cackling 
Goose (Branta hutchinsii; CACG) subspecies mentioned (see comment above): 

     Richardson's Cackling Goose -- B. h. hutchinsii -- "Richy"
     Taverner's Cackling Goose -- B. h. taverneri -- "Tav"
     Ridgway's Cackling Goose -- B. h. minima
     Aleutian Cackling Goose -- B. h. leucopareia     

Sincerely,

Tony

 


Tony Leukering
Largo, FL
http://cowyebird.blogspot.com/

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

http://aba.org/photoquiz/

 

 


1) There is (mtDNA) genetic evidence that some of the geese breeding on the n. 
slope of AK (i.e., CACG not CANG habitat) are Canadas. Probably this should be 
confirmed by additional studies. However, radio-collared young from these nests 
all migrated to winter on the Great Plains to the Rockies (e.g., CO, NE, KS). 
Since this is a moderately long-distance migration to the southeast, the 
occurrence of these birds (whatever you wanna label 'em, but they are not 
Cacklers) might occasionally stray farther east. True, these north-slope 
breeding Canadas might be Moffitt's, but it seems rather unlikely. 



2) There is a wintering population of small Canada Geese in Washington's 
Columbia Basin and, presumably, the Klamath Basin. These birds are very similar 
to the birds called parvipes in Colorado. I don't know if anyone knows where 
these things breed. There is a population of small-bodied, taiga-breeding geese 
in The Yukon that have been labelled parvipes, and perhaps these are the source 
of the e. WA birds. Also, Whistling Swans from the Seward Pen migrate through 
the Columbia Basin and Klamath, so perhaps any parvipes that breed in/near the 
Seward Pen might be the source. 



3) Some of the "parvipes" in w. WA are like the ones in e. WA, but there are 
these weird dark things that are small and shape like parvipes. They are ????. 
We've been labeling them parvipes for lack of a better term. 



4) Who knows what the Anchorage birds are. Hybrids seem ever the better answer, 
especially as we know that there is a hybrid swarm of Richy x Bc interior on w. 
slope of Hudson Bay. The Anchorage birds likely account for some of the 
confusing "West Coast parvipes" as well as tweeners (Tav vs parvipes) seen in 
w. coast wintering grounds. 



5) What the heck is a Taverner's Goose? The discussion on Frontiers seems to 
focus on the lack of cohesion in Lesser Canada (parvipes). The same lack of 
cohesion exists in Taverner's. Though "Tavs" breeding in w. AK are structurally 
similar to those breeding in n. AK (from what I can tell), though they are 
colored very differently and have totally different migrations and wintering 
grounds. Indeed, I doubt the two ever meet except for occasional vagrants. 



6) What the heck is Taverner's Goose? The closer one looks at flocks of 
Cackling Geese in CO, the more birds one sees that look intermediate between 
Tav and Richy. Since Tav and Richy seem to breed in the same habitat, I am 
guessing that there is a continuum of phenotypes from east to west, and that 
these two "subspecies" are not... subspecies... but the same thing. I don't 
know what to do with the w. AK taverneri. There is absolutely no consensus on 
where Tav ends and Richy begins on the n. slope of N America. 



7) Hybrids. While waterfowl aren't gulls, they do hybridize a lot. Leafloor 
uncovered a several hundred km long (if I remember the size correctly) hybrid 
zone between Richys and Bc interior along the w. shore of Hudson Bay (note that 
Leafloor lumps Bc interior and Bc canadensis, so that the article refers to the 
Canadas involved as Bc canadensis). This most likely explains the birds that in 
Colorado that look, well, like hybrid Canada x Cacklings. The presence of this 
large hybrid population (with hybrid measurements ranging from "normal" Richy 
to "normal" Bc interior) should scare the Hell out of all of us. Leafloor seems 
to think bill shape is irrelevant (not bill length). So, bill length:height was 
never measured. Therefore, we are at a loss as to the phenotypical variation of 
these hybrids. Since this hybrid zone appears to have been present for a very 
long time (as I recall, at least 100s of years), I suspect genotypic hybrids 
might look like a typical Richy, a typical ! 

 interior, and everything in between (much as is true with Glaucous-winged and 
Western Gulls). I think the easiest way to suss a hybrid, if possible for a 
given individual, would be bill shape. In any case, one of the conclusions one 
can draw from Leafloor's work is that any given bird that looks like a 
Richardson's Goose could be a hybrid. You just can't tell. 



8) Hybrids. If Bc interior breeds with Bh hutchinsii, then why not Bc parvipes 
with Bh taverneri (using current terminology) on the n. slope?? And why not in 
w. AK?? That's more to be afraid of. The pics that I've seen from the n. slope 
include birds that look, well, like hybrids. Not surprised now, was then. 



9) And just think about the miscegenation between what we call parvipes and 
interior.... 



10) The NY bird. I love Tweit's analysis, can't improve upon it much. That bird 
is not a Cackling. 



I don't like the back shape mark some alluded to for separating Cackling from 
Canada. Cathy Sheeter did some further digging into images, and she also does 
not like that mark. I am not at all certain whence it arises. The relative wing 
length ... I think is proportional to size, not dependent on taxon directly. 



So, if the NY bird is not a Cackling Goose, then what? Hybrid is possible, but 
the bill looks well within range of normal Canada. Cathy Sheeter mentioned the 
possibility of a "runt" Canada. 



Ahhh. The NY Bird is distinctly on the dark side (coloration wise, not 
referring to an allegiance to messrs Voldemort or Vader). Why would a hybrid be 
dark? For that matter, why would a parvipes be dark (the ones in Colorado are 
no darker on average than the Richys). However, the interior that breed on 
islands in s. Hudson Bay (or is it James Bay?) are known to be smaller and 
darker than those that breed on the adjacent coast (btw, these differences have 
been proven by Leafloor to be entirely due to diet: amount and content). This 
bird is small and dark. 



So, the answer is unknowable in my mind. I would lean toward, in order, a 
small, dark Bc interior; parvipes, CANG x CACG. Those are my guesses. The one 
thing that I feel confident of is that this is NOT a Cackling Goose. 



OTHER MUSINGS
Not only is parvipes a confused taxon needing reconsideration, the entirety of 
Canada Goose is in need of such scrutiny. The more southerly breeding Canadas 
almost certainly were less fragmented by the ice ages, causing less 
differentiation. Add to that the amount of mixing caused by human 
"re-introductions" of subspecies far away from point of origin, Canada Goose 
taxonomy is an utter mess. The whole thing needs to be looked at with fresh 
eyes, and I doubt that there are more than 2-3 "good" subspecies: 
fulva/occidentalis (together or separate, since life style is quite different, 
even if appearance isn't) and then ???? 



Cackling Geese are far better separated by phenotype and habitat, with better 
separated breeding and wintering zones. I would think that there are three taxa 
here: minima, leucopareia, and taverneri/hutchinsii. These three groupings tend 
to be rather distinctive visually, and there is anecdotal evidence that mixing 
between minima and taverneri is limited where they meet, and they like 
different habitats. Nuclear DNA analysis using recent techniques might be quite 
illuminating here. 



This was written quickly and somewhat off the cuff, so there might be some 
mis-statements, certainly misspellings. 



Best Wishes
Steve Mlodinow
























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

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Fwd: [nwcalbird] Bear River Ridge Raptor ID
From: John Sterling <jsterling AT WAVECABLE.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 14:26:33 -0800
I disagree with Tristan’s assessment below of the “discussion” on ID 
Frontiers that he posted to NW CA Birds after moving the thread from that forum 
to ID Frontiers. 


John Sterling
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV

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



> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: "Tristan McKee atmckee AT gmail.com [nwcalbird]" 
 

> Subject: Re: [nwcalbird] Bear River Ridge Raptor ID
> Date: February 19, 2016 at 11:25:43 AM PST
> To: "nwcalbird AT yahoogroups.com" 
> Reply-To: Tristan McKee 
> 
> 
> Hi folks,
> 
> I just wanted to let you all know that the Bear River Ridge Raptor has been 
an interesting topic of discussion on ID-Frontiers: 

> 
> http://birding.aba.org/maillist/IDF 
> 
> I have learned several things:
> 
> --Nobody thinks wrist-crescents, patagial bars, or primary windows have any 
significance whatsoever. 

> 
> --Jerry Liguori has beautiful photos of Red-tailed x Ferruginous hybrids from 
Utah. 

> 
> --It is considered normal nowadays to call juvenile birds with petite 
proportions and dark flight-feathers Ferruginous Hawks, despite all the 
traditional assertions in the literature that they are massive with very pale 
flight feathers. 

> 
> Cathy Sheeter was kind enough to collect some Ferruginous Hawk images to 
illustrate that the Humboldt bird, and the Utah bird from the Cornell site I 
mentioned earlier, fit in well with other Ferruginous Hawks in terms of 
structure. 

> 
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/aphelionart/24760908089/ 
 

> 
> Unfortunately, the Humboldt bird is not at a comparative angle and its 
overall size is inflated compared to the other silhouettes (measuring bill-tail 
length); she corrected for the latter issue but the bird's bill-tail length is 
still significantly longer than any of the others--I don't understand why she 
does not just make it to scale. But that is beside the point. What is much more 
interesting to me is that one of the other birds stands out as clearly 
different in proportions than the others--it has shorter wings with bulging 
secondaries and rounded wingtips and a shorter tail. I.e., it's a Red-tail. It 
turns out that this is the Utah bird I had concluded was a Red-tailed or 
hybrid, but which Sullivan and Sheeter consider a "typical" Ferruginous. I 
repeatedly asked for examples of petite, identifiable, light-morph Ferruginous 
Hawks, but these requests were completely ignored. 

> 
> This Utah bird seems to have set the precedent that allows folks to call 
dainty birds with dark flight feathers Ferruginous Hawks. At least, there are 
no other photos of similar "Ferruginous Hawks" on the web. 

> 
> This all has much more wide-ranging implications than just field ID of odd 
birds. Ferruginous is specialist that is very sensitive to human disturbance. 
Red-tailed is a generalist that loves habitat fragmentation. Sound familiar? We 
are losing the Spotted Owl as a species because we made a societal choice to 
allow the Barred Owl to genetically swamp it. The best way to repeat this 
mistake with another magnificent raptor is to turn a blind eye to it. When a 
newer generation of birders is willing to call a dark, petite creature with 
Red-tailed traits--which the older generation views with suspicion--a "pure 
Ferruginous Hawk", we have just made the first step toward accepting that the 
magnificent hawks which fully deserved the name regalis are in fact going to go 
extinct at our hand--and it is okay, because we still have these small, dark 
creatures with some Ferruginous traits. 

> 
> Many thanks for a truly stimulating discussion, which I hope will continue on 
and be further fueled by more photos of the Bear River Ridge bird. 

> 
> Best,
> Tristan
> 
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Tristan McKee > wrote: 

> Thanks for keeping the great discussion alive, Chris! A few issues:
> 
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Chris Heys 
> wrote: 

> 
> I feel like only one photo depicts a small head:
> 
> 
> 
> This one. The others show adequate head size for FEHA. Am I wrong?
> 
> Yes, I'm afraid so. All the photos depict a head too small for Ferruginous, 
and it looks especially striking in the last one of it on the ground. There is 
only one bird here, right? Then it only has one head size. The skeletal 
structure of birds is not wildly variable like plumage in raptors. No 
Ferruginous has a head this small, and they always show a distinct eagle-like 
"brow". 

> 
> This photo:
> 
> 
> Shows the classic Ferruginous 'window' in the primaries. Granted, Harlans 
Hawk has some varying levels of white in the upper parts of their wings, it's 
usually more irregular and much less extensive than what we see here, and more 
commonly in my experience up nearer to the shoulder. 

> 
> I agree about the typical pattern of Harlan's. Remember though that 
Rough-legged shows the same pattern as Ferruginous. I have received a couple of 
private replies from experts that think the bird is a Rough-legged. 

> 
> This photo and one other show the narrow white crescent which dark morph 
FEHA's have on the under sides of their wrists: 

> 
>  
> The reliance on this trait appears to be a big part of the problem here. 
Here's a Harlan's with even bolder crescents than our bird: 

> 
> 
http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/51519-Juvenile-Harlan-s-Dark-Morph-Red-tailed-Hawk 
 

> 
> I wonder how much this photo on the Cornell site influences people's 
willingness to call our bird a Ferruginous? 

> 
> https://www.allaboutbirds.org/ 
guide/Ferruginous_Hawk/id 

> 
> Think about your field experience with dark Ferrugs. Does the Cornell bird 
match? How many dark Ferrugs have you seen that have obviously darker patagial 
bars and a classic juvenile RTHA wing shape and tail pattern, along with a 
smallish head and bill? This bird is a mislabeled Red-tail or, based again on 
the white crescents at the wrist, perhaps a Red-tailed x Ferruginous hybrid. 

> 
> I feel the problem here is that folks are typing "dark Ferrruginous Hawk" 
into Google and then thinking they are looking at a bunch of dark Ferruginous 
Hawks. This is a lot like typing "Thayer's Gull" in Google. Try that for fun 
sometime! Less than 50% of the first hits are Thayer's Gulls. 

> 
> There is a strange admixturephobia within the raptor world which ignores that 
10% of bird species are KNOWN to hybridize (Grant and Grant 1992: Hybridization 
of bird species), hybridization has been practiced by falconers for many 
centuries, and there are numerous examples of e.g., Red-tailed x Red-shouldered 
hybrids in the wild. And we all know how picky vagrant black-hawks are in 
choosing their mates... there are black-hawk x Red-shouldered hybrids wandering 
around in Northern California. 

> 
> >Lastly, this photo documents the deep yellow 'gape', or smile as someone 
earlier has nicely described it, of a FEHA: 

> 
> I agree that this is a good trait in adults, but all juvenile birds show a 
more prominent gape. 

> 
> Conconsus is nice, three major issues loom over this ID:
> 
> 1) Despite mixed traits, hybridization is being ignored as a possibility.
> 
> 2) Rough-legged has been tossed aside with no one clearly addressing why it 
isn't one. 

> 
> 3) No one has provided any clear evidence that Ferruginous can appear this 
small-headed or dark in the flight feathers (ignoring the Cornell photo until 
someone can explain the patagial bars and wing shape of that bird). 

> 
> I don't see how we can be satisfied with this bird's ID until at least those 
three issues are addressed. 

> 
> Better yet, let's get more photos!
> 
> Tristan
> 
> 
> On Feb 17, 2016, at 6:19 PM, Tristan McKee atmckee AT gmail.com 
 [nwcalbird] > wrote: 

> 
>>  
>> 
>> Chris,
>> 
>> I very much appreciate your email, and it stood out in that you backed up 
your identification with a solid analysis. 

>> 
>> Trying to keep to that spirit, I believe the arguments for a juvenile 
Harlan's Hawk or Harlan's x calurus intergrade are even stronger. This was my 
initial thought upon viewing the photos because of the very small head, but I 
quickly dismissed it because juvenile Harlan's is a one-trick pony, 
traditionally: it either has bars towards the primary tips or it doesn't, 
right? Wrong. This trait is variable, and this bird is ambiguous on second 
glance, in terms of that trait, due to the very low lighting. But everything 
else actually fits, even down to a little white mottling on the breast and the 
thick wavy barring on the flight feathers. White patches on the uppersides of 
the flight feathers are also regular in Harlan's ( 
https://sora.unm.edu/sites/default/files/journals/wb/v06n02/p0055-p0062.pdf 
 
). That small head and bill are among the most notable things I have picked up 
on in the small handful of adult Harlan's and the one juvenile I've seen in 
California. I must say I still disagree with the assertions that this bird has 
feathered tarsi: at the very least, we'd might best dismiss that trait because 
we are perceiving it so differently. Look at how far the tibia feathers extend 
down on this Harlan's (plus a shadow makes one leg look dark): 

>> 
>> http://raptorsoftherockies.blogspot.com/2014_10_01_archive.html 
 

>> 
>> How often does a given mysterious Buteo turn out to be a Red-tail? Almost 
always. 

>> 
>> How many times have each of us been momentarily tricked into thinking a 
juvie Red-tail was something else because of the differences between adult and 
juvenile structural traits? Countless times, surely. 

>> 
>> Why did Lucas and Rob state that it was a Red-tail? Because it is. ;-)
>> 
>> Tristan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 8:52 PM, Chris Heys 
> wrote: 

>> feel that we are looking at a dark ferruginous hawk. Tristan, I see where 
you are coming from as a couple of the photos, one in particular makes this 
bird appear to have a proportionally small head, but, I believe, when comparing 
it to the other photos posted of this bird, I think it's possible that it's 
apparent head size is an effect of a combination of posture and perspective. 
The third photo posted in particular shows the bird in flight with an 
adequately large head for FEHA. 

>> 
>> I think similar could be said about the appearance of wing tips in the photo 
of the bird on the ground which don't meet the tail tip. The posture of the 
bird, movement of the bird and perspective could very well account for this. 

>> 
>> Also, thin legs could easily be an illusion caused by a bright background 
and a low profile, dark subject. And while it's tough to tell, there is a 
distinct color difference and nearly discernible textural difference between 
tarsi and feet. 

>> 
>> Primary windows, flight posture and wing shape, on the other hand, are 
pretty well documented in these photos and point directly towards FEHA. 

>> 
>> Take my input with a grain of salt, please, I have fewer years on this earth 
than most of you but I've been waiting all day for a moment to chime in. 

>> 
>> Chris Heys
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Feb 16, 2016, at 8:20 PM, Rob Fowler migratoriusfwlr AT gmail.com 
 [nwcalbird] 
> 
wrote: 

>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> I shared these photos with Jerry Ligouri and Brian Sullivan, some of the 
most respected raptor ID experts in North America. Jerry has replied so far and 
says it is a juvenile Ferruginous Hawk. I think I will take his opinion. 

>>> 
>>> The Mendocino shrike is very different from this bird, Ken. There is 
nothing to make anybody think it is a hybrid. 

>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Rob Fowler
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>> On Feb 16, 2016, at 7:49 PM, 'Ken Burton' shrikethree AT gmail.com 
 [nwcalbird] > wrote: 

>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> Not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone at this point, but the Mendocino 
shrike got me thinking about hybrid vagrancy, and it makes sense to me that 
hybrids, while usually relatively rare, might be disproportionately prone to 
vagrancy. A dark-morph FEHA could be considered a vagrant here, but of course 
if it is a hybrid, the dark part could’ve come from the other parent. 

>>>>  
>>>> Ken Burton
>>>> Arcata
>>>>  
>>>> From: mailto:nwcalbird-noreply AT yahoogroups.com 
 

>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 6:52 PM
>>>> To: nwcalbird AT yahoogroups.com 
>>>> Subject: Re: [nwcalbird] Bear River Ridge Raptor ID
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> I agree that the wing shape resembles Ferruginous strongly (as it does in 
Long-legged), although Ferruginous typically does not look this long and 
narrow-winged, and the outer two primaries are unusually long on this bird; but 
the small head and relatively long, thin bill are not even close, and the long, 
thin tarsi and small feet are all wrong. I wouldn't count out, say, a 
Red-tailed x Ferruginous hybrid. As I have learned all to often, looking 
perfect for a species on account of one or a handful of traits does not always 
make an identification correct. 

>>>>  
>>>> Compare this dark-morph Ferruginous Hawk, especially the massive head, 
short, heavy bill, shorter tail, and very pale bases to the flight feathers: 

>>>>  
>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/36042017 AT N06/11484331123 
 

>>>>  
>>>> Another dark immature; note again the bull-headed appearance, shorter, 
broader wings, and much paler flight feathers: 

>>>>  
>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ned_harris/12171521963/sizes/l 
 

>>>>  
>>>> I certainly don't know what this bird is, but having seen quite a decent 
number of dark morph Ferruginous Hawks of various ages at communal roosts, I am 
confident that it is not a (pure) Ferruginous. My experience pretty much agrees 
with Sibley in that Ferruginous "Always has very pale flight feathers with very 
small dark tips." His illustration shows a typical dark-morph juvenile, with 
boldly white bases to the flight feathers (although the tail is not always that 
white). 

>>>>  
>>>> Thanks for keeping the discussion going,
>>>> Tristan
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 2:41 PM, John Sterling > wrote: 

>>>> The shape in flight is perfect for Ferruginous. I see no reason to doubt 
that it is that species. 

>>>>  
>>>> John Sterling
>>>> VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
>>>> 
>>>> 26 Palm Ave
>>>> Woodland, CA 95695
>>>> 530 908-3836 
>>>> jsterling AT wavecable.com 
>>>> www.sterlingbirds.com 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>> On Feb 16, 2016, at 2:31 PM, Tristan McKee atmckee AT gmail.com 
 [nwcalbird] > wrote: 

>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>> Revisiting the raptor:
>>>>>  
>>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/44858774 AT N00/sets/72157664682598225 
 

>>>>>  
>>>>> As Elias suggested, let's keep this discussion going. If there's one 
thing I feel comfortable saying about Ferruginous, it's that they have a huge 
head. They look like eagles. Also, the wingtips should extend at least to the 
tail tip in Ferruginous, and both Ferruginous and Rough-legged should have 
obviously "furry"-looking tarsi. 

>>>>>  
>>>>> Compare the dark-morph Ferruginous Greg photographed in Ferndale:
>>>>>  
>>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/20378246 AT N02/albums/72157664016881119 
 

>>>>>  
>>>>> Structurally, the BRR bird is unlike any raptor I have ever seen. I 
seriously considered Swainson's for a minute, to throw a fourth species into 
the mix! But it's not one, and it's not a Red-tail. I'm pretty sure it's not a 
Rough-legged. I don't know what it is. When this happens with raptors, even in 
the absence of jesses, it is good to keep in mind exotic species kept by 
falconers, as well as hybrids. The bird's strangely small head, long tarsi, 
"interesting" wing shape, big gape, and the fact that the wingtips do not 
appear to reach the tail tip, along with the barred under-primaries and tail, 
all give it an uncanny resemblance to a dark-morph Long-legged Buzzard; e.g., 

>>>>>  
>>>>> 
http://ibc.lynxeds.com/photo/long-legged-buzzard-buteo-rufinus/dark-morph-0 
 

>>>>>  
>>>>> or
>>>>>  
>>>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/rashed11112/3151200791/ 
 

>>>>>  
>>>>> Tristan
>>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast. 
>>>> www.avast.com 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> __._,_.___
> Posted by: Tristan McKee > 
> Reply via web post 
 
• Reply to sender  
 
• Reply to group  
 
• Start a New Topic 
 
• Messages in this topic 
 
(12) 

> VISIT YOUR GROUP 
 
New Members 
 
4 New Photos 
 
1 

> 
• 
Privacy  • 
Unsubscribe  
• Terms of Use  

> .
>  
> 
> __,_._,___


Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Fwd: NY GOOSE
From: Tony Leukering <greatgrayowl AT AOL.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 14:05:36 -0500
 All:

I have forwarded Steve Mlodinow's thoughts on this goose. For those bits about 
which I have strong experience, I agree with Steve's comments. (I have cleaned 
up spelling and formatting problems, but in no way changed any substantive 
comments.) 


I have one comment to add, myself, about movement of goose populations, 
relative to movement of individually marked geese, a feature brought up in this 
discussion by others. While there may not be any evidence of banded/collared 
"Lesser" Canadas moving as far east as the East Coast, that does not prove that 
none occur there, it simply suggests that either most don't or the the majority 
of the population where banding/collaring takes place don't. 


It seems odd that birders are perfectly fine accepting some medium- or 
long-distance migrant species as long-distance vagrants, yet not others. 
Considering the distance that Lesser Canadas travel to reach Colorado (or 
Texas), having one wind up in Michigan or Kentucky or New York is not at all 
outlandish. 


Note:  For clarity's sake, I here provide a glossary of terms.

Canada Goose (Branta canadensis; CANG) subspecies mentioned (currently 
"accepted" taxonomy and nomenclature): 

     Lesser Canada Goose -- B. c. parvipes
     Interior Canada Goose -- B. c. interior
     Canada Canada Goose (for lack of a better name) -- B. c. canadensis
Cackling Goose (Branta hutchinsii; CACG) subspecies mentioned (see comment 
above): 

     Richardson's Cackling Goose -- B. h. hutchinsii -- "Richy"
     Taverner's Cackling Goose -- B. h. taverneri -- "Tav"
     Ridgway's Cackling Goose -- B. h. minima
     Aleutian Cackling Goose -- B. h. leucopareia     

Sincerely,

Tony

 


Tony Leukering
Largo, FL
http://cowyebird.blogspot.com/

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

http://aba.org/photoquiz/

 

 


1) There is (mtDNA) genetic evidence that some of the geese breeding on the n. 
slope of AK (i.e., CACG not CANG habitat) are Canadas. Probably this should be 
confirmed by additional studies. However, radio-collared young from these nests 
all migrated to winter on the Great Plains to the Rockies (e.g., CO, NE, KS). 
Since this is a moderately long-distance migration to the southeast, the 
occurrence of these birds (whatever you wanna label 'em, but they are not 
Cacklers) might occasionally stray farther east. True, these north-slope 
breeding Canadas might be Moffitt's, but it seems rather unlikely. 



2) There is a wintering population of small Canada Geese in Washington's 
Columbia Basin and, presumably, the Klamath Basin. These birds are very similar 
to the birds called parvipes in Colorado. I don't know if anyone knows where 
these things breed. There is a population of small-bodied, taiga-breeding geese 
in The Yukon that have been labelled parvipes, and perhaps these are the source 
of the e. WA birds. Also, Whistling Swans from the Seward Pen migrate through 
the Columbia Basin and Klamath, so perhaps any parvipes that breed in/near the 
Seward Pen might be the source. 



3) Some of the "parvipes" in w. WA are like the ones in e. WA, but there are 
these weird dark things that are small and shape like parvipes. They are ????. 
We've been labeling them parvipes for lack of a better term. 



4) Who knows what the Anchorage birds are. Hybrids seem ever the better answer, 
especially as we know that there is a hybrid swarm of Richy x Bc interior on w. 
slope of Hudson Bay. The Anchorage birds likely account for some of the 
confusing "West Coast parvipes" as well as tweeners (Tav vs parvipes) seen in 
w. coast wintering grounds. 



5) What the heck is a Taverner's Goose? The discussion on Frontiers seems to 
focus on the lack of cohesion in Lesser Canada (parvipes). The same lack of 
cohesion exists in Taverner's. Though "Tavs" breeding in w. AK are structurally 
similar to those breeding in n. AK (from what I can tell), though they are 
colored very differently and have totally different migrations and wintering 
grounds. Indeed, I doubt the two ever meet except for occasional vagrants. 



6) What the heck is Taverner's Goose? The closer one looks at flocks of 
Cackling Geese in CO, the more birds one sees that look intermediate between 
Tav and Richy. Since Tav and Richy seem to breed in the same habitat, I am 
guessing that there is a continuum of phenotypes from east to west, and that 
these two "subspecies" are not... subspecies... but the same thing. I don't 
know what to do with the w. AK taverneri. There is absolutely no consensus on 
where Tav ends and Richy begins on the n. slope of N America. 



7) Hybrids. While waterfowl aren't gulls, they do hybridize a lot. Leafloor 
uncovered a several hundred km long (if I remember the size correctly) hybrid 
zone between Richys and Bc interior along the w. shore of Hudson Bay (note that 
Leafloor lumps Bc interior and Bc canadensis, so that the article refers to the 
Canadas involved as Bc canadensis). This most likely explains the birds that in 
Colorado that look, well, like hybrid Canada x Cacklings. The presence of this 
large hybrid population (with hybrid measurements ranging from "normal" Richy 
to "normal" Bc interior) should scare the Hell out of all of us. Leafloor seems 
to think bill shape is irrelevant (not bill length). So, bill length:height was 
never measured. Therefore, we are at a loss as to the phenotypical variation of 
these hybrids. Since this hybrid zone appears to have been present for a very 
long time (as I recall, at least 100s of years), I suspect genotypic hybrids 
might look like a typical Richy, a typical interior, and everything in between 
(much as is true with Glaucous-winged and Western Gulls). I think the easiest 
way to suss a hybrid, if possible for a given individual, would be bill shape. 
In any case, one of the conclusions one can draw from Leafloor's work is that 
any given bird that looks like a Richardson's Goose could be a hybrid. You just 
can't tell. 



8) Hybrids. If Bc interior breeds with Bh hutchinsii, then why not Bc parvipes 
with Bh taverneri (using current terminology) on the n. slope?? And why not in 
w. AK?? That's more to be afraid of. The pics that I've seen from the n. slope 
include birds that look, well, like hybrids. Not surprised now, was then. 



9) And just think about the miscegenation between what we call parvipes and 
interior.... 



10) The NY bird. I love Tweit's analysis, can't improve upon it much. That bird 
is not a Cackling. 



I don't like the back shape mark some alluded to for separating Cackling from 
Canada. Cathy Sheeter did some further digging into images, and she also does 
not like that mark. I am not at all certain whence it arises. The relative wing 
length ... I think is proportional to size, not dependent on taxon directly. 



So, if the NY bird is not a Cackling Goose, then what? Hybrid is possible, but 
the bill looks well within range of normal Canada. Cathy Sheeter mentioned the 
possibility of a "runt" Canada. 



Ahhh. The NY Bird is distinctly on the dark side (coloration wise, not 
referring to an allegiance to messrs Voldemort or Vader). Why would a hybrid be 
dark? For that matter, why would a parvipes be dark (the ones in Colorado are 
no darker on average than the Richys). However, the interior that breed on 
islands in s. Hudson Bay (or is it James Bay?) are known to be smaller and 
darker than those that breed on the adjacent coast (btw, these differences have 
been proven by Leafloor to be entirely due to diet: amount and content). This 
bird is small and dark. 



So, the answer is unknowable in my mind. I would lean toward, in order, a 
small, dark Bc interior; parvipes, CANG x CACG. Those are my guesses. The one 
thing that I feel confident of is that this is NOT a Cackling Goose. 



OTHER MUSINGS
Not only is parvipes a confused taxon needing reconsideration, the entirety of 
Canada Goose is in need of such scrutiny. The more southerly breeding Canadas 
almost certainly were less fragmented by the ice ages, causing less 
differentiation. Add to that the amount of mixing caused by human 
"re-introductions" of subspecies far away from point of origin, Canada Goose 
taxonomy is an utter mess. The whole thing needs to be looked at with fresh 
eyes, and I doubt that there are more than 2-3 "good" subspecies: 
fulva/occidentalis (together or separate, since life style is quite different, 
even if appearance isn't) and then ???? 



Cackling Geese are far better separated by phenotype and habitat, with better 
separated breeding and wintering zones. I would think that there are three taxa 
here: minima, leucopareia, and taverneri/hutchinsii. These three groupings tend 
to be rather distinctive visually, and there is anecdotal evidence that mixing 
between minima and taverneri is limited where they meet, and they like 
different habitats. Nuclear DNA analysis using recent techniques might be quite 
illuminating here. 



This was written quickly and somewhat off the cuff, so there might be some 
mis-statements, certainly misspellings. 



Best Wishes
Steve Mlodinow
























Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark juvenile Buteos
From: whoffman AT PEAK.ORG
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 11:02:36 -0800
Hi - 

One thing that strikes me whenever I see Ferruginous Hawks is their head shape. 
To me, they look flat-crowned and broad, with much less "dome" above the eyes 
than Red-tails. The view is not ideal for judging this, but the first photo 
seems to show this flat-crowned shape. 


Wayne 


From: "Tristan McKee"  
To: "BIRDWG01"  
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 4:51:45 PM 
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Dark juvenile Buteos 

Identification of dark juvenile Buteos has traditionally been considered 
very difficult, but tremendous confidence often underlies the 
identification of photographed birds these days. I'd like to initiate some 
discussion of these two birds, both widely regarded as juvenile dark-morph 
Ferruginous Hawks. The first is from Utah: 

https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/PHOTO/LARGE/ferghawk_rognan.jpg 

This is the first bird that pops up when Googling "dark Ferruginous Hawk" 
and probably greatly influences birders' perceptions of this species. It 
shows obviously darker patagial bars, dark flight feathers, a classic 
juvenile Red-tailed Hawk wing shape and tail pattern, a fairly small head 
and bill, and small feet. Having spent many years birding and surveying 
raptors in the core of the Ferruginous' wintering range, I feel comfortable 
saying that Ferruginous Hawks consistently have large, eagle-like heads, 
strong brows, and powerful legs and feet. There is only an expected amount 
of sexual dimorphism, nothing to suggest that a Ferruginous can look 
decidedly dainty and small-headed with petite feet. In my experience they 
also have very pale flight feathers in all ages and morphs, as the Sibley 
Guide asserts. The white crescents on the wrists of Ferruginous can be 
shared by some Red-tails, especially Harlan's Hawks: 

http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/ 
51519-Juvenile-Harlan-s-Dark-Morph-Red-tailed-Hawk 

and: 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ned_harris/6584515095 

The second "Ferruginous Hawk", this month in NW California, also has many 
Red-tailed traits: 


https://www.flickr.com/photos/44858774 AT N00/sets/72157664682598225/with/24906145512/ 


Despite its small head, thin bill, thin legs and feet, and dark flight 
feathers, the presence of wrist-crescents and upper-primary windows have 
satisfied most that it is a Ferruginous Hawk. But primary-windows can also 
be shared by Harlan's and are typical of Rough-legged. Structurally many of 
us feel this latter bird is closer to Rough-legged. Can a juvenile 
Rough-legged ever have a tail this dark? 

There is considerable debate about whether these latter photos actually 
show feathered tarsi. 

Hybridization has been practiced in falconry for centuries, and there are 
plenty of examples in the field as well (e.g., Common Black x 
Red-shouldered here in California), so it strikes me as odd that mysterious 
dark raptors are so boldly pigeonholed into species categories. To me, both 
the birds above would better be described as possible Ferruginous x 
Red-tailed hybrids than pure Ferruginous Hawks. Better yet, why are they 
not just Red-tailed Hawks, either harlani, alascensis, or intergrades with 
calurus? 

Many thanks, 

Tristan McKee 
Arcata, CA 

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

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark juvenile Buteos
From: Tony Leukering <greatgrayowl AT AOL.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 10:39:26 -0500
All:

I'm staying out of this one, except that I wanted to make one very minor point. 
Well, two, actually. No, three. [Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!] 


1) Primary formula in Red-tailed and Ferruginous hawks is exceedingly similar, 
with Pyle (2008) reporting Red-tailed as 


"usually p7>p6>p8>p9>p5>p4>p10≈p3"


and Ferruginous as


"usually p8≈p7>p6>p9>p5>p4>p10≈p3"


Of course, that says nothing about the secondaries, so this fact has not all 
that much bearing on the question in hand when considering the strength of 
secondary bulges. 




2) Wing shape in buteos is often quite different between adults and juveniles 
of the same species, with juveniles tending to have longer, more-pointed, and 
narrower wings than do adults. This is certainly and obviously so in Red-tailed 
Hawk, somewhat less so in Ferruginous, in my experience, primarily because 
Ferruginous starts with a relatively narrower wing. 



3) Dark-morph Ferruginous are much darker in various plumage features than are 
light-morph Ferruginous, including flight feathers: they have darker tails and 
darker remiges, in general. 

 

 


Tony Leukering
Largo, FL
http://cowyebird.blogspot.com/

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

http://aba.org/photoquiz/

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Tristan McKee 
To: BIRDWG01 
Sent: Thu, Feb 18, 2016 10:36 pm
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Dark juvenile Buteos

Brain Sullivan wrote:


> The legs appear to be feathered to the toes on this bird.
>>
>
 Hi Brian,

The legs are clearly tucked in on this bird. They are not visible.

Gapes are far more prominent on all juvenile birds, but this does look good
for Ferruginous.

However, pointing out Ferruginous traits does not really address the
question of hybridization. I was not so much looking for impressions of
what these species look like, but rather actual photographic evidence that
known Ferruginous Hawks can appear dainty in the head, bill and feet.

I also thought the patagial bar was a strong indicator of Red-tailed. Is
this really of no significance?

You've described the wing shape of Ferruginous very well, and this bird
does not have it at all, from my perspective. We should be able to agree
that this is somewhat subjective, since I see this as a typical juvenile
Red-tailed wing shape. Unless you want to go into primary formula... which
in terms of p9 and p10 length appears slightly closer to Red-tailed in this
case (Ferruginous has especially short p9 and p10).


 It also appears smallish-headed in flight due to the bulk of the chest and
>> shoulders.
>>
>
I have never heard Ferruginous described as smallish-headed:

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5702/23191382423_ecf6731e55_b.jpg


> We do have a few known cases of Ferruginous hybridizing in the wild with
>> Red-tailed Hawk. Jerry Liguori has some amazing photos of an adult from
>> Utah. That said, nothing here suggests hybrid on these two birds--at least
>> not to me.
>>
>
So we know they hybridize in Utah, yet birds with patagial bars and dainty
appearances are still considered pure Ferruginous Hawks. It seems to me
that we are expanding the known range of Ferruginous variation with
absolutely no evidence that we have excluded hybrids from our sample. This
would certainly never fly with gulls or ducks or any other group well-known
to hybridize.

It would be silly to debate who knows this species best--I assume you have
seen the better part of the world's population, as I have. I agree that
these birds have Ferruginous traits. To move forward we need to examine the
actual evidence that these traits are within the range of variation of pure
Ferruginous Hawks. Saying that they are within the range of variation of
birds we have personally IDed as Ferruginous does not help if we are saying
"don't go there" with hybrids--we have just inadvertently included all the
hybrids in our sample.

Tristan McKee
Arcata, CA

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



Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark juvenile Buteos
From: Tristan McKee <atmckee AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 07:26:57 -0800
Cathy, sorry to be critical--I'm really enjoying sitting back and looking
at this collage. I see a kettle of Ferruginous Hawks with two other birds.
One has a shorter tail, and shorter wings with rounded tips and bulging
secondaries--it looks like a Red-tail. I assume this is the Utah bird. The
other is the California bird, and I am totally mystified. Dropping all
prior impressions, it looks kind of like a Zone-tailed Hawk...

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 7:19 AM, Tristan McKee  wrote:

> I took another look in hopes of figuring it out. Why is the California
> bird's length (bill-tail) much longer than any other bird's? It is not to
> scale with the others at all, so I agree that it's head is much bigger...
>
> Thanks again,
> Tristan
>
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 7:13 AM, Tristan McKee  wrote:
>
>> Cathy, thanks for taking the time. This is a comparison of the depth of
>> one bird's head (CA) to the width of a bunch of other ones.
>>
>> I don't really understand why you would not choose photos demonstrating
>> Ferruginous at the same angle as the California bird. Are you suggesting
>> that (height of head) is linearly correlated with (width of head) over
>> multiple species of Buteos? This is the same as saying that head structure
>> and shape are equal in all Buteo species. We already know that is untrue.
>>
>> Thanks for any clarification,
>> Tristan McKee
>> Arcata, CA
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Cathy Sheeter 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Out of curiosity, (as I am really struggling to see anything abnormal
>>> about the two birds that Tristan had linked to for juvi Ferrug) I decided
>>> to to see if these birds did in fact look unusually small headed.  I
>>> grabbed a bunch of photos off of Flickr of juvi Ferrug and turned them all
>>> into silhouettes.  The sampling was based on only three criteria 1)
>>> juvenile birds (both color morphs are included in the collage) 2) that the
>>> photo had a clean blue background (as those are the ones easy to turn to
>>> silhouettes) and 3) flight image from underneath so that the perspective
>>> was somewhat similar (though we don't have a photo from that angle of the
>>> CA bird).  The birds were holding their heads in a variety of ways, as one
>>> would expect.  No preference was given for a bird's head size...pretty much
>>> the first photos I found meeting those above criteria, so these silhouettes
>>> should represent an average sampling of birds.  Both the Cornell bird and
>>> California bird are included in this collage and all silhouettes represent
>>> different birds.  This was the end result: https://flic.kr/p/DJ38jr .
>>> I think it also shows no abnormality in structure of the wings or body to
>>> suggest anything other than FEHA.
>>>
>>> I know I couldn't say that any one (or two) of these birds appear
>>> 'smaller headed' than any of the others.  Actually the CA bird appears
>>> larger headed, due to the perspective.
>>>
>>> I will erase this off of my Flickr within a week, as most of the images
>>> I used to create it are not ones I took and are only being used for
>>> educational purposes, but I think it perhaps helps see that these birds are
>>> well within the norm for Ferruginous Hawks.
>>>
>>> Good birding!
>>>
>>> Cathy Sheeter
>>> Oradell, NJ (previously of CO)
>>>
>>
>>
>

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark juvenile Buteos
From: Cathy Sheeter <hawkcall AT HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 07:26:37 -0800
Frankly I was too lazy to try and find a bunch of birds all at the same angle 
as the CA bird, so opted to go with the easier and more photographed angle that 
the Cornell bird was at, since you felt it too was small headed and possibly a 
hybrid. I thought there was a shot of the CA bird from more underneath when I 
was compiling this, but there is not. I, in fact, pointed out that the CA bird 
was at a different angle than the rest, if you read what I wrote. Perhaps 
someone else will feel inclined to put together a better composite with the CA 
bird, but I lack the time to go further on this topic, since to me neither of 
those birds looks abnormal to me whatsoever. 

 
Good day-
 
Cathy
 
> Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 07:13:10 -0800
> From: atmckee AT GMAIL.COM
> Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] Dark juvenile Buteos
> To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
> 
> Cathy, thanks for taking the time. This is a comparison of the depth of one
> bird's head (CA) to the width of a bunch of other ones.
> 
> I don't really understand why you would not choose photos demonstrating
> Ferruginous at the same angle as the California bird. Are you suggesting
> that (height of head) is linearly correlated with (width of head) over
> multiple species of Buteos? This is the same as saying that head structure
> and shape are equal in all Buteo species. We already know that is untrue.
> 
> Thanks for any clarification,
> Tristan McKee
> Arcata, CA
> 
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Cathy Sheeter  wrote:
> 
> > Out of curiosity, (as I am really struggling to see anything abnormal
> > about the two birds that Tristan had linked to for juvi Ferrug) I decided
> > to to see if these birds did in fact look unusually small headed.  I
> > grabbed a bunch of photos off of Flickr of juvi Ferrug and turned them all
> > into silhouettes.  The sampling was based on only three criteria 1)
> > juvenile birds (both color morphs are included in the collage) 2) that the
> > photo had a clean blue background (as those are the ones easy to turn to
> > silhouettes) and 3) flight image from underneath so that the perspective
> > was somewhat similar (though we don't have a photo from that angle of the
> > CA bird).  The birds were holding their heads in a variety of ways, as one
> > would expect.  No preference was given for a bird's head size...pretty much
> > the first photos I found meeting those above criteria, so these silhouettes
> > should represent an average sampling of birds.  Both the Cornell bird and
> > California bird are included in this collage and all silhouettes represent
> > different birds.  This was the end result: https://flic.kr/p/DJ38jr .  I
> > think it also shows no abnormality in structure of the wings or body to
> > suggest anything other than FEHA.
> >
> > I know I couldn't say that any one (or two) of these birds appear 'smaller
> > headed' than any of the others.  Actually the CA bird appears larger
> > headed, due to the perspective.
> >
> > I will erase this off of my Flickr within a week, as most of the images I
> > used to create it are not ones I took and are only being used for
> > educational purposes, but I think it perhaps helps see that these birds are
> > well within the norm for Ferruginous Hawks.
> >
> > Good birding!
> >
> > Cathy Sheeter
> > Oradell, NJ (previously of CO)
> >
> 
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
 		 	   		  
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark juvenile Buteos
From: Tristan McKee <atmckee AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 07:19:10 -0800
I took another look in hopes of figuring it out. Why is the California
bird's length (bill-tail) much longer than any other bird's? It is not to
scale with the others at all, so I agree that it's head is much bigger...

Thanks again,
Tristan

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 7:13 AM, Tristan McKee  wrote:

> Cathy, thanks for taking the time. This is a comparison of the depth of
> one bird's head (CA) to the width of a bunch of other ones.
>
> I don't really understand why you would not choose photos demonstrating
> Ferruginous at the same angle as the California bird. Are you suggesting
> that (height of head) is linearly correlated with (width of head) over
> multiple species of Buteos? This is the same as saying that head structure
> and shape are equal in all Buteo species. We already know that is untrue.
>
> Thanks for any clarification,
> Tristan McKee
> Arcata, CA
>
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Cathy Sheeter 
> wrote:
>
>> Out of curiosity, (as I am really struggling to see anything abnormal
>> about the two birds that Tristan had linked to for juvi Ferrug) I decided
>> to to see if these birds did in fact look unusually small headed.  I
>> grabbed a bunch of photos off of Flickr of juvi Ferrug and turned them all
>> into silhouettes.  The sampling was based on only three criteria 1)
>> juvenile birds (both color morphs are included in the collage) 2) that the
>> photo had a clean blue background (as those are the ones easy to turn to
>> silhouettes) and 3) flight image from underneath so that the perspective
>> was somewhat similar (though we don't have a photo from that angle of the
>> CA bird).  The birds were holding their heads in a variety of ways, as one
>> would expect.  No preference was given for a bird's head size...pretty much
>> the first photos I found meeting those above criteria, so these silhouettes
>> should represent an average sampling of birds.  Both the Cornell bird and
>> California bird are included in this collage and all silhouettes represent
>> different birds.  This was the end result: https://flic.kr/p/DJ38jr .  I
>> think it also shows no abnormality in structure of the wings or body to
>> suggest anything other than FEHA.
>>
>> I know I couldn't say that any one (or two) of these birds appear
>> 'smaller headed' than any of the others.  Actually the CA bird appears
>> larger headed, due to the perspective.
>>
>> I will erase this off of my Flickr within a week, as most of the images I
>> used to create it are not ones I took and are only being used for
>> educational purposes, but I think it perhaps helps see that these birds are
>> well within the norm for Ferruginous Hawks.
>>
>> Good birding!
>>
>> Cathy Sheeter
>> Oradell, NJ (previously of CO)
>>
>
>

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark juvenile Buteos
From: Tristan McKee <atmckee AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 07:13:10 -0800
Cathy, thanks for taking the time. This is a comparison of the depth of one
bird's head (CA) to the width of a bunch of other ones.

I don't really understand why you would not choose photos demonstrating
Ferruginous at the same angle as the California bird. Are you suggesting
that (height of head) is linearly correlated with (width of head) over
multiple species of Buteos? This is the same as saying that head structure
and shape are equal in all Buteo species. We already know that is untrue.

Thanks for any clarification,
Tristan McKee
Arcata, CA

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 6:53 AM, Cathy Sheeter  wrote:

> Out of curiosity, (as I am really struggling to see anything abnormal
> about the two birds that Tristan had linked to for juvi Ferrug) I decided
> to to see if these birds did in fact look unusually small headed.  I
> grabbed a bunch of photos off of Flickr of juvi Ferrug and turned them all
> into silhouettes.  The sampling was based on only three criteria 1)
> juvenile birds (both color morphs are included in the collage) 2) that the
> photo had a clean blue background (as those are the ones easy to turn to
> silhouettes) and 3) flight image from underneath so that the perspective
> was somewhat similar (though we don't have a photo from that angle of the
> CA bird).  The birds were holding their heads in a variety of ways, as one
> would expect.  No preference was given for a bird's head size...pretty much
> the first photos I found meeting those above criteria, so these silhouettes
> should represent an average sampling of birds.  Both the Cornell bird and
> California bird are included in this collage and all silhouettes represent
> different birds.  This was the end result: https://flic.kr/p/DJ38jr .  I
> think it also shows no abnormality in structure of the wings or body to
> suggest anything other than FEHA.
>
> I know I couldn't say that any one (or two) of these birds appear 'smaller
> headed' than any of the others.  Actually the CA bird appears larger
> headed, due to the perspective.
>
> I will erase this off of my Flickr within a week, as most of the images I
> used to create it are not ones I took and are only being used for
> educational purposes, but I think it perhaps helps see that these birds are
> well within the norm for Ferruginous Hawks.
>
> Good birding!
>
> Cathy Sheeter
> Oradell, NJ (previously of CO)
>

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark juvenile Buteos
From: Cathy Sheeter <hawkcall AT HOTMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 06:53:28 -0800
Out of curiosity, (as I am really struggling to see anything abnormal about the 
two birds that Tristan had linked to for juvi Ferrug) I decided to to see if 
these birds did in fact look unusually small headed. I grabbed a bunch of 
photos off of Flickr of juvi Ferrug and turned them all into silhouettes. The 
sampling was based on only three criteria 1) juvenile birds (both color morphs 
are included in the collage) 2) that the photo had a clean blue background (as 
those are the ones easy to turn to silhouettes) and 3) flight image from 
underneath so that the perspective was somewhat similar (though we don't have a 
photo from that angle of the CA bird). The birds were holding their heads in a 
variety of ways, as one would expect. No preference was given for a bird's head 
size...pretty much the first photos I found meeting those above criteria, so 
these silhouettes should represent an average sampling of birds. Both the 
Cornell bird and California bird are included in this collage and all 
silhouettes represent different birds. This was the end result: 
https://flic.kr/p/DJ38jr . I think it also shows no abnormality in structure of 
the wings or body to suggest anything other than FEHA. 

 
I know I couldn't say that any one (or two) of these birds appear 'smaller 
headed' than any of the others. Actually the CA bird appears larger headed, due 
to the perspective. 

 
I will erase this off of my Flickr within a week, as most of the images I used 
to create it are not ones I took and are only being used for educational 
purposes, but I think it perhaps helps see that these birds are well within the 
norm for Ferruginous Hawks. 

 
Good birding!
 
Cathy Sheeter
Oradell, NJ (previously of CO)
 		 	   		  
Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark juvenile Buteos
From: Tristan McKee <atmckee AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 20:59:11 -0800
Hi Brain -

I thought we were discussing dark-morph juveniles, but I concede that
patagials are probably as unreliable as wrist-crescents and primary-windows.

It would be impossible to detect atypical characters if you are
categorizing all hybrids as pure birds.

Having looked through all my photos and every one available in my books and
on flickr and Google, I have not found a single "dainty" bird considered a
Ferruginous Hawk, except for these few birds that also have very dark
flight feathers. Why the apparent correlation?

Again, if we are to argue that these birds are pure, we should be able to
find typical (i.e., light-morph) birds that are similarly dainty and
petite. I'm still not seeing that evidence anywhere.

Thanks and best,

Tristan McKee
Arcata, CA

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 8:28 PM, Brian Sullivan 
wrote:

> Hi Tristan
>
> I'm not sure why you're suggesting that dark patagials is an unusual field
> mark for 'pure' Ferruginous Hawks. Many Ferruginous Hawks show this. I
> happened to be looking at quite a few today, and most of the more heavily
> marked adults show this. Red-tailed Hawks aren't the only buteos to show
> dark patagials.
>
> Here's one example of an adult light morph from this afternoon:
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/oceanites/24489884984/in/dateposted-public/
>
> Not sure what else to say here. I don't typically think about ruling out
> hybrids when I don't see any characters that are atypical on a bird. In the
> case of these two buteos, both are well within the typical range of both
> plumage and shape for juvenile Ferruginous Hawk.
>
> It's always great to look for other opinions, but for me, these are
> typical Ferruginous Hawks.
>
> Thanks
>
> Brian
>
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Tristan McKee  wrote:
>
>> Brain Sullivan wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The legs appear to be feathered to the toes on this bird.
>>>>
>>>
>>  Hi Brian,
>>
>> The legs are clearly tucked in on this bird. They are not visible.
>>
>> Gapes are far more prominent on all juvenile birds, but this does look
>> good for Ferruginous.
>>
>> However, pointing out Ferruginous traits does not really address the
>> question of hybridization. I was not so much looking for impressions of
>> what these species look like, but rather actual photographic evidence that
>> known Ferruginous Hawks can appear dainty in the head, bill and feet.
>>
>> I also thought the patagial bar was a strong indicator of Red-tailed. Is
>> this really of no significance?
>>
>> You've described the wing shape of Ferruginous very well, and this bird
>> does not have it at all, from my perspective. We should be able to agree
>> that this is somewhat subjective, since I see this as a typical juvenile
>> Red-tailed wing shape. Unless you want to go into primary formula... which
>> in terms of p9 and p10 length appears slightly closer to Red-tailed in this
>> case (Ferruginous has especially short p9 and p10).
>>
>>
>>  It also appears smallish-headed in flight due to the bulk of the chest
>>>> and shoulders.
>>>>
>>>
>> I have never heard Ferruginous described as smallish-headed:
>>
>> https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5702/23191382423_ecf6731e55_b.jpg
>>
>>
>>> We do have a few known cases of Ferruginous hybridizing in the wild with
>>>> Red-tailed Hawk. Jerry Liguori has some amazing photos of an adult from
>>>> Utah. That said, nothing here suggests hybrid on these two birds--at least
>>>> not to me.
>>>>
>>>
>> So we know they hybridize in Utah, yet birds with patagial bars and
>> dainty appearances are still considered pure Ferruginous Hawks. It seems to
>> me that we are expanding the known range of Ferruginous variation with
>> absolutely no evidence that we have excluded hybrids from our sample. This
>> would certainly never fly with gulls or ducks or any other group well-known
>> to hybridize.
>>
>> It would be silly to debate who knows this species best--I assume you
>> have seen the better part of the world's population, as I have. I agree
>> that these birds have Ferruginous traits. To move forward we need to
>> examine the actual evidence that these traits are within the range of
>> variation of pure Ferruginous Hawks. Saying that they are within the range
>> of variation of birds we have personally IDed as Ferruginous does not help
>> if we are saying "don't go there" with hybrids--we have just inadvertently
>> included all the hybrids in our sample.
>>
>> Tristan McKee
>> Arcata, CA
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ===========
>
>
> *Brian L. SullivaneBird Project Leader *
> www.ebird.org
>
> *Photo Editor*
> Birds of North America Online
> http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/BNA
> -------------------------------
>

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark juvenile Buteos
From: Brian Sullivan <heraldpetrel AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 20:28:10 -0800
Hi Tristan

I'm not sure why you're suggesting that dark patagials is an unusual field
mark for 'pure' Ferruginous Hawks. Many Ferruginous Hawks show this. I
happened to be looking at quite a few today, and most of the more heavily
marked adults show this. Red-tailed Hawks aren't the only buteos to show
dark patagials.

Here's one example of an adult light morph from this afternoon:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/oceanites/24489884984/in/dateposted-public/

Not sure what else to say here. I don't typically think about ruling out
hybrids when I don't see any characters that are atypical on a bird. In the
case of these two buteos, both are well within the typical range of both
plumage and shape for juvenile Ferruginous Hawk.

It's always great to look for other opinions, but for me, these are typical
Ferruginous Hawks.

Thanks

Brian

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Tristan McKee  wrote:

> Brain Sullivan wrote:
>
>
>> The legs appear to be feathered to the toes on this bird.
>>>
>>
>  Hi Brian,
>
> The legs are clearly tucked in on this bird. They are not visible.
>
> Gapes are far more prominent on all juvenile birds, but this does look
> good for Ferruginous.
>
> However, pointing out Ferruginous traits does not really address the
> question of hybridization. I was not so much looking for impressions of
> what these species look like, but rather actual photographic evidence that
> known Ferruginous Hawks can appear dainty in the head, bill and feet.
>
> I also thought the patagial bar was a strong indicator of Red-tailed. Is
> this really of no significance?
>
> You've described the wing shape of Ferruginous very well, and this bird
> does not have it at all, from my perspective. We should be able to agree
> that this is somewhat subjective, since I see this as a typical juvenile
> Red-tailed wing shape. Unless you want to go into primary formula... which
> in terms of p9 and p10 length appears slightly closer to Red-tailed in this
> case (Ferruginous has especially short p9 and p10).
>
>
>  It also appears smallish-headed in flight due to the bulk of the chest
>>> and shoulders.
>>>
>>
> I have never heard Ferruginous described as smallish-headed:
>
> https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5702/23191382423_ecf6731e55_b.jpg
>
>
>> We do have a few known cases of Ferruginous hybridizing in the wild with
>>> Red-tailed Hawk. Jerry Liguori has some amazing photos of an adult from
>>> Utah. That said, nothing here suggests hybrid on these two birds--at least
>>> not to me.
>>>
>>
> So we know they hybridize in Utah, yet birds with patagial bars and dainty
> appearances are still considered pure Ferruginous Hawks. It seems to me
> that we are expanding the known range of Ferruginous variation with
> absolutely no evidence that we have excluded hybrids from our sample. This
> would certainly never fly with gulls or ducks or any other group well-known
> to hybridize.
>
> It would be silly to debate who knows this species best--I assume you have
> seen the better part of the world's population, as I have. I agree that
> these birds have Ferruginous traits. To move forward we need to examine the
> actual evidence that these traits are within the range of variation of pure
> Ferruginous Hawks. Saying that they are within the range of variation of
> birds we have personally IDed as Ferruginous does not help if we are saying
> "don't go there" with hybrids--we have just inadvertently included all the
> hybrids in our sample.
>
> Tristan McKee
> Arcata, CA
>



-- 
===========


*Brian L. SullivaneBird Project Leader *
www.ebird.org

*Photo Editor*
Birds of North America Online
http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/BNA
-------------------------------

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark juvenile Buteos
From: Tristan McKee <atmckee AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:35:20 -0800
Brain Sullivan wrote:


> The legs appear to be feathered to the toes on this bird.
>>
>
 Hi Brian,

The legs are clearly tucked in on this bird. They are not visible.

Gapes are far more prominent on all juvenile birds, but this does look good
for Ferruginous.

However, pointing out Ferruginous traits does not really address the
question of hybridization. I was not so much looking for impressions of
what these species look like, but rather actual photographic evidence that
known Ferruginous Hawks can appear dainty in the head, bill and feet.

I also thought the patagial bar was a strong indicator of Red-tailed. Is
this really of no significance?

You've described the wing shape of Ferruginous very well, and this bird
does not have it at all, from my perspective. We should be able to agree
that this is somewhat subjective, since I see this as a typical juvenile
Red-tailed wing shape. Unless you want to go into primary formula... which
in terms of p9 and p10 length appears slightly closer to Red-tailed in this
case (Ferruginous has especially short p9 and p10).


 It also appears smallish-headed in flight due to the bulk of the chest and
>> shoulders.
>>
>
I have never heard Ferruginous described as smallish-headed:

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5702/23191382423_ecf6731e55_b.jpg


> We do have a few known cases of Ferruginous hybridizing in the wild with
>> Red-tailed Hawk. Jerry Liguori has some amazing photos of an adult from
>> Utah. That said, nothing here suggests hybrid on these two birds--at least
>> not to me.
>>
>
So we know they hybridize in Utah, yet birds with patagial bars and dainty
appearances are still considered pure Ferruginous Hawks. It seems to me
that we are expanding the known range of Ferruginous variation with
absolutely no evidence that we have excluded hybrids from our sample. This
would certainly never fly with gulls or ducks or any other group well-known
to hybridize.

It would be silly to debate who knows this species best--I assume you have
seen the better part of the world's population, as I have. I agree that
these birds have Ferruginous traits. To move forward we need to examine the
actual evidence that these traits are within the range of variation of pure
Ferruginous Hawks. Saying that they are within the range of variation of
birds we have personally IDed as Ferruginous does not help if we are saying
"don't go there" with hybrids--we have just inadvertently included all the
hybrids in our sample.

Tristan McKee
Arcata, CA

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark juvenile Buteos
From: Rob Parsons <parsons8 AT MYMTS.NET>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:55:52 -0600
Hi all,

Doesn't the NW California bird show the extended gape of a Ferruginous Hawk? 
I'm looking primarily at the second last photo:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/44858774 AT N00/24393570854/in/album-72157664682598225/ 

(The one of the bird in flight against the green grassy background.)
If so, that points away from Rough-legged Hawk.

This photo also makes it look as though the bird has feathered tarsi, 
although I admit they aren't as clear as I'd like them to be in order to 
swear to it.

Cheers,


Rob Parsons
Winnipeg, MB
CANADA
parsons8 AT mts.net

-----Original Message----- 
From: Tristan McKee
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 6:51 PM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: [BIRDWG01] Dark juvenile Buteos

Identification of dark juvenile Buteos has traditionally been considered
very difficult, but tremendous confidence often underlies the
identification of photographed birds these days. I'd like to initiate some
discussion of these two birds, both widely regarded as juvenile dark-morph
Ferruginous Hawks. The first is from Utah:

https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/PHOTO/LARGE/ferghawk_rognan.jpg

This is the first bird that pops up when Googling "dark Ferruginous Hawk"
and probably greatly influences birders' perceptions of this species. It
shows obviously darker patagial bars, dark flight feathers, a classic
juvenile Red-tailed Hawk wing shape and tail pattern, a fairly small head
and bill, and small feet. Having spent many years birding and surveying
raptors in the core of the Ferruginous' wintering range, I feel comfortable
saying that Ferruginous Hawks consistently have large, eagle-like heads,
strong brows, and powerful legs and feet. There is only an expected amount
of sexual dimorphism, nothing to suggest that a Ferruginous can look
decidedly dainty and small-headed with petite feet. In my experience they
also have very pale flight feathers in all ages and morphs, as the Sibley
Guide asserts. The white crescents on the wrists of Ferruginous can be
shared by some Red-tails, especially Harlan's Hawks:

http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/
51519-Juvenile-Harlan-s-Dark-Morph-Red-tailed-Hawk

and:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ned_harris/6584515095

The second "Ferruginous Hawk", this month in NW California, also has many
Red-tailed traits:


https://www.flickr.com/photos/44858774 AT N00/sets/72157664682598225/with/24906145512/ 


Despite its small head, thin bill, thin legs and feet, and dark flight
feathers, the presence of wrist-crescents and upper-primary windows have
satisfied most that it is a Ferruginous Hawk. But primary-windows can also
be shared by Harlan's and are typical of Rough-legged. Structurally many of
us feel this latter bird is closer to Rough-legged. Can a juvenile
Rough-legged ever have a tail this dark?

There is considerable debate about whether these latter photos actually
show feathered tarsi.

Hybridization has been practiced in falconry for centuries, and there are
plenty of examples in the field as well (e.g., Common Black x
Red-shouldered here in California), so it strikes me as odd that mysterious
dark raptors are so boldly pigeonholed into species categories. To me, both
the birds above would better be described as possible Ferruginous x
Red-tailed hybrids than pure Ferruginous Hawks. Better yet, why are they
not just Red-tailed Hawks, either harlani, alascensis, or intergrades with
calurus?

Many thanks,

Tristan McKee
Arcata, CA

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

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: Dark juvenile Buteos
From: Brian Sullivan <heraldpetrel AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 17:45:44 -0800
Hi Tristan et al.

Juvenile dark-morph buteos can certainly be tricky and worthy of close
scrutiny, but in both of the birds you've pointed out, I don't see anything
out of the ordinary. Each looks fine for juvenile dark-morph Ferruginous
Hawk, in both shape and plumage. The All About Birds individual's flight
feathers are perfect for juvenile dark-morph Ferruginous in being largely
pale with sparse banding, and mostly white primaries with just the tips
darker (a good distinction from juv dark Rough-legged Hawk). Tail pattern
on this bird is typical for juvenile dark Ferrug in being pale with
widely-spaced dusky bands (I can't think of any subspecies of Red-tailed
Hawk where juvs show this pattern). The legs appear to be feathered to the
toes on this bird. The NW California bird likewise shows characters
completely consistent with Ferruginous, and wrong for Rough-legged. The
flight shots are underexposed, but when lightened-up in Photoshop this bird
shows the same typical flight feather pattern of Ferruginous, as well as
the prominent long gape of that species.

Ferruginous is quite broad-winged, but with more tapered wingtips that
Red-tailed and Rough-legged. It also appears smallish-headed in flight due
to the bulk of the chest and shoulders. Having studied this species a lot,
I just don't see anything amiss here on either bird.

We do have a few known cases of Ferruginous hybridizing in the wild with
Red-tailed Hawk. Jerry Liguori has some amazing photos of an adult from
Utah. That said, nothing here suggests hybrid on these two birds--at least
not to me.

Thanks

Brian

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 4:51 PM, Tristan McKee  wrote:

> Identification of dark juvenile Buteos has traditionally been considered
> very difficult, but tremendous confidence often underlies the
> identification of photographed birds these days. I'd like to initiate some
> discussion of these two birds, both widely regarded as juvenile dark-morph
> Ferruginous Hawks. The first is from Utah:
>
> https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/PHOTO/LARGE/ferghawk_rognan.jpg
>
> This is the first bird that pops up when Googling "dark Ferruginous Hawk"
> and probably greatly influences birders' perceptions of this species. It
> shows obviously darker patagial bars, dark flight feathers, a classic
> juvenile Red-tailed Hawk wing shape and tail pattern, a fairly small head
> and bill, and small feet. Having spent many years birding and surveying
> raptors in the core of the Ferruginous' wintering range, I feel comfortable
> saying that Ferruginous Hawks consistently have large, eagle-like heads,
> strong brows, and powerful legs and feet. There is only an expected amount
> of sexual dimorphism, nothing to suggest that a Ferruginous can look
> decidedly dainty and small-headed with petite feet. In my experience they
> also have very pale flight feathers in all ages and morphs, as the Sibley
> Guide asserts. The white crescents on the wrists of Ferruginous can be
> shared by some Red-tails, especially Harlan's Hawks:
>
> http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/
> 51519-Juvenile-Harlan-s-Dark-Morph-Red-tailed-Hawk
>
> and:
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/ned_harris/6584515095
>
> The second "Ferruginous Hawk", this month in NW California, also has many
> Red-tailed traits:
>
>
> 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/44858774 AT N00/sets/72157664682598225/with/24906145512/ 

>
> Despite its small head, thin bill, thin legs and feet, and dark flight
> feathers, the presence of wrist-crescents and upper-primary windows have
> satisfied most that it is a Ferruginous Hawk. But primary-windows can also
> be shared by Harlan's and are typical of Rough-legged. Structurally many of
> us feel this latter bird is closer to Rough-legged. Can a juvenile
> Rough-legged ever have a tail this dark?
>
> There is considerable debate about whether these latter photos actually
> show feathered tarsi.
>
> Hybridization has been practiced in falconry for centuries, and there are
> plenty of examples in the field as well (e.g., Common Black x
> Red-shouldered here in California), so it strikes me as odd that mysterious
> dark raptors are so boldly pigeonholed into species categories. To me, both
> the birds above would better be described as possible Ferruginous x
> Red-tailed hybrids than pure Ferruginous Hawks. Better yet, why are they
> not just Red-tailed Hawks, either harlani, alascensis, or intergrades with
> calurus?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Tristan McKee
> Arcata, CA
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>



-- 
===========


*Brian L. SullivaneBird Project Leader *
www.ebird.org

*Photo Editor*
Birds of North America Online
http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/BNA
-------------------------------

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Dark juvenile Buteos
From: Tristan McKee <atmckee AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:51:45 -0800
Identification of dark juvenile Buteos has traditionally been considered
very difficult, but tremendous confidence often underlies the
identification of photographed birds these days. I'd like to initiate some
discussion of these two birds, both widely regarded as juvenile dark-morph
Ferruginous Hawks. The first is from Utah:

https://www.allaboutbirds.org/guide/PHOTO/LARGE/ferghawk_rognan.jpg

This is the first bird that pops up when Googling "dark Ferruginous Hawk"
and probably greatly influences birders' perceptions of this species. It
shows obviously darker patagial bars, dark flight feathers, a classic
juvenile Red-tailed Hawk wing shape and tail pattern, a fairly small head
and bill, and small feet. Having spent many years birding and surveying
raptors in the core of the Ferruginous' wintering range, I feel comfortable
saying that Ferruginous Hawks consistently have large, eagle-like heads,
strong brows, and powerful legs and feet. There is only an expected amount
of sexual dimorphism, nothing to suggest that a Ferruginous can look
decidedly dainty and small-headed with petite feet. In my experience they
also have very pale flight feathers in all ages and morphs, as the Sibley
Guide asserts. The white crescents on the wrists of Ferruginous can be
shared by some Red-tails, especially Harlan's Hawks:

http://www.birdphotographers.net/forums/showthread.php/
51519-Juvenile-Harlan-s-Dark-Morph-Red-tailed-Hawk

and:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/ned_harris/6584515095

The second "Ferruginous Hawk", this month in NW California, also has many
Red-tailed traits:


https://www.flickr.com/photos/44858774 AT N00/sets/72157664682598225/with/24906145512/ 


Despite its small head, thin bill, thin legs and feet, and dark flight
feathers, the presence of wrist-crescents and upper-primary windows have
satisfied most that it is a Ferruginous Hawk. But primary-windows can also
be shared by Harlan's and are typical of Rough-legged. Structurally many of
us feel this latter bird is closer to Rough-legged. Can a juvenile
Rough-legged ever have a tail this dark?

There is considerable debate about whether these latter photos actually
show feathered tarsi.

Hybridization has been practiced in falconry for centuries, and there are
plenty of examples in the field as well (e.g., Common Black x
Red-shouldered here in California), so it strikes me as odd that mysterious
dark raptors are so boldly pigeonholed into species categories. To me, both
the birds above would better be described as possible Ferruginous x
Red-tailed hybrids than pure Ferruginous Hawks. Better yet, why are they
not just Red-tailed Hawks, either harlani, alascensis, or intergrades with
calurus?

Many thanks,

Tristan McKee
Arcata, CA

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: the Lesser Canada--Cackling mess
From: Paul Guris <paulagics.com AT GMAIL.COM>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 12:29:10 -0500
*"BUT, I would also add that there seem to be at least a very small number
of valid records of true minima Cacklings (which breed only in sw AK) from
the East (I once saw such a tiny, very dark pinky-brown-breasted bird in
DE, for example), so IF that subspecies can legitimately occur all the way
to the East Coast, then why not parvipes?"*

I'd just like to add one caution on the potential of escaped or released
Canada / Cackling Geese.  Years ago I did some research for some record or
another for the NJ Bird Records Committee.  I stumbled onto a waterfowl
breeder who sold (or claimed to be selling) 6 or 7 different Canada /
Cackling subspecies including *parvipes*.  It stuck in my head because I
thought it was an absolutely insane thing to do, but I guess some people
just like to collect the whole set.  I remember that *minima* Cackling
(then Canada) Geese were available at several farms as well.  The
availability of waterfowl is kind of nuts, and the prices are generally
pretty cheap.

FYI, while there seem to be fewer waterfowl farms online today there are
still some interesting things you can buy.  If you have $400 burning a hole
in your pocket and a pond, one site I just saw has a pair of Smews up for
sale for the bargain price (I guess) of just $400.  Same price for a pair
of Baikal Teal.  Be the first on your block to own a pair!  Interestingly
"Cackler Geese" go for just $200/pair but "Pacific Brant" run $1,500/pair!


-PAG


On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Paul Lehman 
wrote:

> As alluded to by others, and known by virtually all, indeed the situation
> with parvipes (Lesser) Canada Geese and taverneri Cackling Geese in w.
> Alaska and elsewhere is pretty much a mess. And as stated by Alvaro, nobody
> really agrees on what they are seeing in the Nome area, for example. It
> seems most of us identify almost all (or all) birds there as taverneri,
> with some folks also reporting small numbers of parvipes as well. Some of
> these folks are VERY knowledgeable about geese, and many are not. I am also
> the eBird reviewer for the Nome region, so I get to deal with many these
> reports!  And what do I do??  So far I have pretty much punted on all of
> them, and virtually all of the parvipes eBird reports are still languishing
> in the queue!
>
> Given the western Alaska breeding range of parvipes, and the apparent
> variation possible in hutchinsii (Richardson's) Cackling Geese, a number of
> people have suggested that most or almost all of the rare-but-routine
> reports of parvipes in the East are incorrect and are the result of faulty
> conventional wisdom. They may well be largely or entirely correct. Though,
> when I formerly lived on the East Coast, I and others did think we saw
> parvipes on several occasions in NJ and se. PA, for example--though I am
> hardly going to strongly defend those records today.  BUT, I would also add
> that there seem to be at least a very small number of valid records of true
> minima Cacklings (which breed only in sw AK) from the East (I once saw such
> a tiny, very dark pinky-brown-breasted bird in DE, for example), so IF that
> subspecies can legitimately occur all the way to the East Coast, then why
> not parvipes?
>
> And lastly, it might seem an easy way to differentiate Canada ssp.'s from
> Cacklings on the breeding grounds might be that Canadas are forest and
> taiga breeders and that Cacklings are tundra breeders. But that doesn't
> seem to work, either, given the tundra situation in the Nome region and
> also locally farther east in the Canadian Arctic. AND it seems as though
> the fairly recent spread of nesting white-chinned geese to western
> GREENLAND actually involves Canada Geese, even though on the face of it it
> would seem that it "should" involve eastward spreading hutchinsii
> Cacklings.  That is, if the ID is correct....
>
> --Paul Lehman,  San Diego
>
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>



-- 







*Paul A. GurisSee Life PaulagicsPO Box 161Green Lane, PA
18054215-234-6805www.paulagics.com paulagics.com
 AT gmail.com info AT paulagics.com
*

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: the Lesser Canada--Cackling mess
From: Paul Lehman <lehman.paul1 AT VERIZON.NET>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 08:49:06 -0800
As alluded to by others, and known by virtually all, indeed the 
situation with parvipes (Lesser) Canada Geese and taverneri Cackling 
Geese in w. Alaska and elsewhere is pretty much a mess. And as stated by 
Alvaro, nobody really agrees on what they are seeing in the Nome area, 
for example. It seems most of us identify almost all (or all) birds 
there as taverneri, with some folks also reporting small numbers of 
parvipes as well. Some of these folks are VERY knowledgeable about 
geese, and many are not. I am also the eBird reviewer for the Nome 
region, so I get to deal with many these reports!  And what do I do??  
So far I have pretty much punted on all of them, and virtually all of 
the parvipes eBird reports are still languishing in the queue!

Given the western Alaska breeding range of parvipes, and the apparent 
variation possible in hutchinsii (Richardson's) Cackling Geese, a number 
of people have suggested that most or almost all of the rare-but-routine 
reports of parvipes in the East are incorrect and are the result of 
faulty conventional wisdom. They may well be largely or entirely 
correct. Though, when I formerly lived on the East Coast, I and others 
did think we saw parvipes on several occasions in NJ and se. PA, for 
example--though I am hardly going to strongly defend those records 
today.  BUT, I would also add that there seem to be at least a very 
small number of valid records of true minima Cacklings (which breed only 
in sw AK) from the East (I once saw such a tiny, very dark 
pinky-brown-breasted bird in DE, for example), so IF that subspecies can 
legitimately occur all the way to the East Coast, then why not parvipes?

And lastly, it might seem an easy way to differentiate Canada ssp.'s 
from Cacklings on the breeding grounds might be that Canadas are forest 
and taiga breeders and that Cacklings are tundra breeders. But that 
doesn't seem to work, either, given the tundra situation in the Nome 
region and also locally farther east in the Canadian Arctic. AND it 
seems as though the fairly recent spread of nesting white-chinned geese 
to western GREENLAND actually involves Canada Geese, even though on the 
face of it it would seem that it "should" involve eastward spreading 
hutchinsii Cacklings.  That is, if the ID is correct....

--Paul Lehman,  San Diego

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: goose ID
From: whoffman AT PEAK.ORG
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 20:14:41 -0800
Hi - 

I sent a private email to David Irons, but now I think it makes sense to 
discuss this with the whole community, and in greater depth. When the AOU split 
the white-cheeked geese from 2 species into 3, they suggested that further 
splits might happen. I had already been of the opinion that at least one more 
was appropriate. It has been reported by multiple observers, and dating back at 
least into the 1930s that form minima ,which has a small breeding range on the 
Bering Sea Coast of Alaska, nests in close proximity to a somewhat larger (but 
still small) form of goose, without evidence of interbreeding. I think the 
neighboring geese would now be considered taverneri . True "Cackling" Geese 
(i.e. minima ) differ in a variety of ways from the other forms now included in 
the broader-sense Cackling Goose, Branta hutchinsii . Besides being the 
smallest and most compact, they differ in voice, as David pointed out. If I 
remember correctly, they are more colonial in nesting habits than most 
white-cheeked geese - more like Chen . In winter flocks they consistently form 
tighter groups while feeding, enough so that their flocks are recognizable at 
great distance from flocks of other forms wintering in the Willamette Valley 


I believe that minima should be recognized as separate from the rest of the 
mainland forms currently included in hutchinsii . The rub comes in deciding 
what to do with AleutianGeese - Are they closer to minima , or to the remainder 
of hutchinsii ? or are they different enough to be called yet another species? 
[By rules of priority a species including minima + Aleutian Geese would be 
called Branta leucopareia .] 


One important thing to understand about the White-cheeked Geese is that much of 
the range now occupied by the various distinguishable breeding populations was 
glaciated as little as 15,000 years ago. So, evolution of the differences among 
them, whether you recognize them as multiple species or not, has been very 
rapid compared to most other birds. Therefore the molecular criteria that work 
for defining species in most bird groups likely will not be adequate for 
separating biological species here. This is also the case with a few other bird 
groups, including prairie grouse and crossbills. So with these geese we could 
have non-interbreeding, morphologically differentiated populations (i.e. 
biological species) whose genomic separation is as yet unimpressive. 


In the case of these geese, I think the factors that allow this rapid 
evolutionary differentiation are 1) body size and proportions, including wing 
loading, and relative neck length and bill shape are very responsive to 
selection that is related to differences in their food plants in their breeding 
habitat, and also length of breeding season at different latitudes; 2) 
multi-year monogamous pair bonds; 3) the behavior of migrating and wintering in 
flocks that are composed of family units, migrating with neighbor family units, 
and 4) pair formation largely within these wintering flocks of relative 
neighbors. Together, I think these factors facilitate rapid local adaptation of 
size and proportions, and evolution of behavioral isolating mechanisms. 


Wayne Hoffman 


From: "Alvaro Jaramillo"  
To: "BIRDWG01"  
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:15:45 PM 
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] goose ID 

David et al. 
A fresh nomenclatural start is a good idea. There are other issues that require 
some work to sort out what is going on. These two have bugged me for some time 
1) Canada Geese in Anchorage, are listed as "Lesser" Canada Geese. Yet they are 
pretty darn dark on the breast and underparts. I have wondered exactly what 
makes these NOT Dusky Canada Geese, or a northern, paler version (cline?) of 
Dusky Canada Geese. I googled for some images, this newspaper article actually 
has some good photos for you all to see what I am talking about. 
http://www.adn.com/article/20140914/too-many-waterfowl-too-much-foul-water-anchorage 

2) What are the geese in Nome? Those birds look indeterminate to me, Cackling 
or Lesser. What are they? Are these the real Lesser? Are they hybrids? Are they 
the real Taverner's? The answer has never been clear to me, and there seems to 
be many opinions out there, and an annual assortment of tour guide leaders who 
do not know what to do with them. Any thoughts someone? 

Googled some images from Nome, here are some to look at 
http://www.birdspix.com/north-america/ducks-geese-and-swans-anatidae/geese/cackling-goose-2 


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

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

Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 2:55 PM 
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU 
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] goose ID 

I agree with the comments by Ken Abraham and Shai Mitra about the difficulty of 
identifying the Central Park goose, and would only add that there's no way to 
rule out the possibility of a Cackling Goose X Canada Goose hybrid. 


I also wanted to emphasize and expand on the point made by Ken Abraham, that 
"Lesser" Canada Goose simply doesn't exist outside of the westernmost states 
and provinces. This is contrary to virtually all published references 
(including the Sibley Guide to Birds, ahem, but changed in the forthcoming 
revised Eastern and Western guides). The latest evidence suggests that the 
breeding white-cheeked geese of north-central Canada are simply Canada Goose 
(subspecies *interior*) and Cackling Goose (*hutchinsii*), both showing a cline 
of size slightly larger in the south and smaller in the north, and with some 
amount of interbreeding where they meet. There is apparently no widespread and 
uniform population of medium-sized geese in central Canada. 


Geese that are genetically Canada and as small as "Lesser" have been found 
breeding only in central and southern Alaska, wintering in the Pacific states, 
although it sounds like there has been little study of geese in northwestern 
Canada. Unanswered questions (as far as I know) include where and how, or if, 
these small Canada Geese interact with neighboring populations, especially with 
*taverneri* Cackling Goose to the north or larger Canada Geese to the east. 


I don't know enough about the rules of nomenclature to know what this means for 
the name *parvipes*, which is based on a specimen from Veracruz, Mexico, but 
certainly in the birding world and discussions like this one it sounds like the 
whole concept of "Lesser Canada Goose, *B. c. parvipes*" 

should be retired, and the Alaska population should get a new name and a fresh 
start. 


Best, 
David Sibley 
Concord, MA 
sibleyguides AT gmail.com 
www.sibleyguides.com 

On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Peter Post  wrote: 

> I photographed this goose, yesterday, 13 February, on the Central 
> Park Reservoir, New York City. I would appreciate comments concerning 
> ID. I'm leaning toward B. canadensis parvipes. Thanks. 
> 
> Photos can be found here: 
> http://www.ardithbondi.com/page127.html 
> 
> Peter Post 
> New York City, NY 
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html 
> 

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

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

Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
Subject: Re: goose ID
From: Alvaro Jaramillo <chucao AT COASTSIDE.NET>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 19:15:45 -0800
David et al. 
 A fresh nomenclatural start is a good idea. There are other issues that 
require some work to sort out what is going on. These two have bugged me for 
some time 1) Canada Geese in Anchorage, are listed as "Lesser" Canada Geese. 
Yet they are pretty darn dark on the breast and underparts. I have wondered 
exactly what makes these NOT Dusky Canada Geese, or a northern, paler version 
(cline?) of Dusky Canada Geese. I googled for some images, this newspaper 
article actually has some good photos for you all to see what I am talking 
about. 
http://www.adn.com/article/20140914/too-many-waterfowl-too-much-foul-water-anchorage 

2) What are the geese in Nome? Those birds look indeterminate to me, Cackling 
or Lesser. What are they? Are these the real Lesser? Are they hybrids? Are they 
the real Taverner's? The answer has never been clear to me, and there seems to 
be many opinions out there, and an annual assortment of tour guide leaders who 
do not know what to do with them. Any thoughts someone? 

Googled some images from Nome, here are some to look at 
http://www.birdspix.com/north-america/ducks-geese-and-swans-anatidae/geese/cackling-goose-2 


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

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

Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 2:55 PM
To: BIRDWG01 AT LISTSERV.KSU.EDU
Subject: Re: [BIRDWG01] goose ID

I agree with the comments by Ken Abraham and Shai Mitra about the difficulty of 
identifying the Central Park goose, and would only add that there's no way to 
rule out the possibility of a Cackling Goose X Canada Goose hybrid. 


I also wanted to emphasize and expand on the point made by Ken Abraham, that 
"Lesser" Canada Goose simply doesn't exist outside of the westernmost states 
and provinces. This is contrary to virtually all published references 
(including the Sibley Guide to Birds, ahem, but changed in the forthcoming 
revised Eastern and Western guides). The latest evidence suggests that the 
breeding white-cheeked geese of north-central Canada are simply Canada Goose 
(subspecies *interior*) and Cackling Goose (*hutchinsii*), both showing a cline 
of size slightly larger in the south and smaller in the north, and with some 
amount of interbreeding where they meet. There is apparently no widespread and 
uniform population of medium-sized geese in central Canada. 


Geese that are genetically Canada and as small as "Lesser" have been found 
breeding only in central and southern Alaska, wintering in the Pacific states, 
although it sounds like there has been little study of geese in northwestern 
Canada. Unanswered questions (as far as I know) include where and how, or if, 
these small Canada Geese interact with neighboring populations, especially with 
*taverneri* Cackling Goose to the north or larger Canada Geese to the east. 


I don't know enough about the rules of nomenclature to know what this means for 
the name *parvipes*, which is based on a specimen from Veracruz, Mexico, but 
certainly in the birding world and discussions like this one it sounds like the 
whole concept of "Lesser Canada Goose, *B. c. parvipes*" 

should be retired, and the Alaska population should get a new name and a fresh 
start. 


Best,
David Sibley
Concord, MA
sibleyguides AT gmail.com
www.sibleyguides.com

On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Peter Post  wrote:

> I  photographed this goose, yesterday, 13 February, on the Central 
> Park Reservoir, New York City. I would  appreciate comments concerning 
> ID. I'm leaning toward B. canadensis parvipes. Thanks.
>
> Photos can be found here:
> http://www.ardithbondi.com/page127.html
>
> Peter Post
> New York City, NY
> Archives: http://listserv.ksu.edu/archives/birdwg01.html
>

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

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