Jump to content
Whatbird Community

Soohegan

Members
  • Content Count

    115
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

24 Excellent

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Coastal Southern California I've never seen a Glossy but the face seems to have some similarity to descriptions for GLIB.and the eye is pretty dark.
  2. On second look there were actually two, different plumages. Expected for this at this time of year would probably be something like Baird's I guess, which I have subsequently seen. This new photo showing somewhat rufous brown.
  3. Coastal Southern California at a shorebird hotspot. Around the same size as nearby WESA. Here he is top right - providing this for a different view of upperparts/tail.
  4. These birds looked overall different at a glance from the LESAs I had been observing daily. Simply the immediate, unprompted sense that they were different. The brown was different, and their feathers gave more of a coarse texture look. I wanted to find out why they looked different, and there are basically two options: LTST or some kind of LESA "color morph" or "type" or whatnot, but I haven't seen anything about these type of LESA variations. My goal was to explain my observation and not cheat by making any assumptions. One of the first pictures that I set aside when I first saw this flock was titled "LESA - very short very straight bill" as an example...
  5. Thanks. Regarding the toe length the people who found one in England said that it's not so much how the middle toe compares to the other toes - they instead compared the ratio between the middle toe and tarsus lengths, but ultimately said the ratios aren't reliably distinct from Least. Same with the "almost always" pale lower mandible - the confirmed Oregon bird showed a regular black bill. I've been doing this as more of an exercise of learning the systems and learning the LESA field markings; if I take a list of LTST distinguishing features and then look at some LESAs, that should be a great way for me to refine my recognition of LESA traits. The problem is many of those traits end up not carrying much weight, so it's seems subjective. I literally don't care if it's impossible that a LTST would be nearby; I thought that using LTST criteria to examine LESAs would enable me to fully support my LESA ID. How hard is it to justify a LESA ID when it's the only possibility? I'm putting pressure on the process to find out how reliable it is. I'm not "trying to prove it's a LTST", I'm trying to use LESA/LTST differentiators to make the ID - not LAT LONG. Anyway, cheers!
  6. That's fine I should do more personal study and understand this all better. You don't have to answer me, and perhaps you know the explanation, but one of the things I'm going to try to figure out is: where is all of the rufous fringe that should be at least SOMEWHERE in the lower scapular area and especially the whole wing coverts area? There's no rufous there, just some creamy buff wash and significant areas of "white" fringes. Can be seen also in the crisp white outer tertial fringe. Its said that the head and face patterns are really the most reliable approach to identification of these, so perhaps this doesn't matter. So long - and thanks for all the fish...
  7. I guess it's technically LTST but it really should be LOST because these birds certainly are.
  8. This was very difficult to figure out but: 1a. LOST left WHSA right 1b. Both LOST 2. All LOST 3a. Both LOST 3b. All LOST 4. LOST
  9. Check that... it's a White-rumped Sandpiper (in "pre-basic molt" I think).
  10. It's not a pec because the size was a camera angle / zoom illusion. It's not as big as it looks.
  11. The split supercilia photo also show the white base of lower mandible and white throat, along with the two long lines of feathers that form the frame of the mantle "triangles".
×
×
  • Create New...