Jump to content
Whatbird Community

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 09/12/2018 in all areas

  1. At the risk of sounding rude because this site is run by the iBird developers, I wanted to share a couple thoughts about the programmed bird ID idea in general and how it relates to this birds like these. Different strokes for different folks, but I personally believe that relying on a computer program to make bird identifications is fraught with problems, and distracts from the point of birding as a whole. In depending on apps like this or Merlin, we’re prone to getting inaccurate IDs like this one. Statistically, it gets the job done most of the time, but it shouldn’t be the only source people use, because no computer program can now or ever will be able to make identifications like experts can- experts are irreplaceable . I also think it takes the “fun” out of birding- the challenge of pouring through sources and photos to make the ID. This way is much better for learning. Apps like this are good resources to figure out possible identifications for birds, but they don’t really teach people anything, or help them become better birders- learning comes from the challenges of research, emails to friends, and the many headaches . My main point is that apps like iBird or Merlin are good resources for identifying a bird, but nothing beats sorting through field guides, which makes much better birders in the long run, rather than those relying on a photo-trained program. @JP48 this is nothing towards you personally- I just wanted to give my general perspective about using apps vs field guides.
    4 points
  2. That's funny, I don't see any of that. It looks pretty gray, the eyering looks rather weak, and the primaries look like a medium length to me. My impression was Traill's.
    2 points
  3. 2 points
  4. I believe this is a lesser black-backed gull, which is rare for North Dakota, and most of the USA in general. Date is right now, September 12th, 5:45pm But please tell me if I'm right or wrong. Thanks!
    1 point
  5. To be clear, if this isn't a Lesser, it's better - so we need to do this one right.
    1 point
  6. Thank you! A Least Sandpiper is a new one for me!
    1 point
  7. It looks to me like this bird is going through a messy molt! That long-billed look can be attributed to a lack of feathers due to molting.
    1 point
  8. Sorry to hear that! Birding can be a Gambel ('s quail) sometime.
    1 point
  9. The short tail appears to be a molt issue. The plumage says House Wren, and the posture fits just fine. (In general, be careful of posture in photos unless the bird's obviously at rest -- a photo grabs a moment in time, and may not be representative -- look at shots of Major League pitchers, and imagine holding your arm that way!) Pyle doesn't list any hybrids for either species, although that doesn't mean there aren't any.
    1 point
  10. At second glance I think I can see Traill's here. I still think the overall coloring looks fine for Least, but I agree what you're saying about the eyering and primary projection. The bill doesn't look that small either. Assuming it is a Traill's, it's more likely an Alder in my opinion: overall coloring, eyering, bright white wingbars, overall structure and flat-headed look would work better for Alder than Willow. But we obviously can't make that call without an excellent array of photos or a recording.
    1 point
  11. My impression was Trail’s as well.
    1 point
  12. 2 is definitely Bay-breasted. 3 is a Parula. Pass on 4, although Blackpoll is a possibility.
    1 point
  13. 1. Lincoln's Sparrow - Nothing else has that crisp black on brown chest pattern. 2. Possibly Bay-breasted, but total lack of any eye stripe is unusual. I'd vote Chestnut-sided Warbler. - c.f. Peterson Warblers first fall Chestnut-sided Warbler p. 239
    1 point
  14. Ditto. Tail's too short and wings aren't dark enough for an Orchard Oriole. It also doesn't have wingbars or dark feet like an oriole.
    1 point
  15. Other than adult males, aging and sexing Merlin is not easy, and basically depends upon details of the underwing and tail.
    1 point
  16. I hear and understand all of this. To set the record straight (not that anyone cares), I'm not making identifications based on the results returned from Sleuth. In this case, I was unsure of my own ID (Song Sparrow) for these birds, and ran them through Sleuth to see what came back. I was surprised to see one of them come back as Savannah, and entered it here in an attempt to see if I'd missed something. I never recorded it as a Savannah Sparrow. When I use Sleuth I do it to give myself ideas to work with in order to do further research in the manner suggested. Rather than being detrimental, I think this makes me better at making an ID. Using this forum in this way, for me, is a way of asking others if there is a reason to believe the app over my own impression. I was in a hurry when I wrote the original post, and should have taken the time to explain the situation better. I'm new to all this, but should know better. I share any skepticism toward letting a computer making an ID, but I think (for me at least), that it has it's place. My apologies, especially for not being clear to begin with.
    1 point
  17. Greater with that long bill.
    1 point
  18. Looks like a Yellow Warbler to me.
    1 point
  19. A rather pale Song Sparrow.
    1 point
  20. I’m thinking Least- greenish/olive coloring on the back, nice eyering, and short primaries.
    1 point
  21. Just a side note about computer-made drawings like this- they’re not always accurate either. The Song Sparrow image looks like a cross between a Song Sparrow and an American Tree Sparrow, and the Swamp Sparrow doesn’t look like a Swamp Sparrow very much at all, in my opinion.
    1 point
  22. Yep, I see it now. I was so focused on the bill that I neglected to look at the tail. 🙂 Do I get a point for at least getting gray and catcher right? lol!
    1 point
  23. Agreed. @The Bird Nuts are much better at making IDs than a programmed app
    1 point
  24. 1 point
  25. 1 point
  26. YAY!!!!!!!! One of the best news I've ever heard in my entire life!!
    1 point
  27. Both are Song Sparrows.
    1 point
  28. They're Red Phalaropes -- the bill's fairly heavy, but more importantly Red-necked doesn't show the rufous on the rear flanks or rump that you see here. They're still molting, which makes what you can see of the back pattern problematic as an ID point.
    1 point
  29. Well, I'd quibble about the wing bars -- I don't think we can say for sure what those two apparent spots are, given the angle. But overall, I think I agree -- Blackpoll. Thanks for actually spelling it out.
    1 point
  30. Looks like Red-necked Phalarope to me.
    1 point
  31. Yes, overall structure, streaking, plus orange feet point to Blackpoll.
    1 point
  32. Also the bill here is more blunt than is expected for OCWA.
    1 point
  33. Besides the streaking which seems a little too dark for an Orange-crowned, it appears to have two white wingbars which rules out Orange crowned.
    1 point
  34. Yeah, I might have jumped the gun on #1. I could see it as a Blackpoll -- so I'll turn the question around. Why isn't it an Orange-crowned?
    1 point
  35. I'm with psweet (and who isn't?) on the third one. The bill looks too long with respect to the head for a Robin. The long streaks on the breast are also a better fit for a Starling.
    1 point
  36. 1 point
  37. 1) Orange-crowned, I think. Prairie would show stronger face markings and better-defined streaks. Also, Prairie is quite rare in the immediate Chicago area. 2) Yes, I think you're right. 3) I think this is a Starling. With the brown wings, probably a youngster still molting in his first adult feathers.
    1 point
  38. Yellow-billed Cuckoo by Mark Goodwin, on Flickr
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...