Jump to content
Whatbird Community


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by DLecy

  1. Yes, some level of domestic bird and/or GWFG x goose sp. There are many hybrids or other possibilities with geese. This photo is inconclusive. The bill looks too thin and long for Bean Goose to me.
  2. You're right. Apparently, Marsh Sandpiper is also now a Code 4. It was a 5 when I saw it. I guess I've seen lots of Code 4's...and only one current Code 5.
  3. Sinaloa Wren in AZ, and Marsh Sandpiper in CA.
  4. Willow Warbler, yes. the Turtle Dove and Common Cuckoo are code 4 and 3 respectively, I think. The fact that some species are regular in Alaska really skews the coding.
  5. Remember, the ABA does encompass the entire ABA region. So, a White-eyed Vireo, while locally a really rare bird, is not rare at all in the scale of the ABA. They are year round residents in coastal SE US, and they breed over about 1/4 of the entire US, concentrated in the Southeast. Not rare at all by ABA standards. FWIW, I’ve only ever seen three ABA code 5’s.
  6. Maybe not the best photo of the day, but my favorite. https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/581278331
  7. TWO Hooded Warblers...Connor C. found one of them. Will post my other photo in the favorite photos of the day thread. https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/581278271
  8. Lesser Nighthawk. A really good bird for the county. A very impressive find by the original finder (not me)! https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/581039841
  9. I would drop everything to go see that bird…
  10. This field mark is suuuper subtle. Most field marks in hummingbirds are, but you can find lots of examples in Macaulay where ALHUs appear to have clean white upper breasts. Many very good photos show a slight hint of orange in the center of the white on ALHU, but this is really nuanced. It may be a field mark worth considering, but it’s far from diagnostic, IMO.
  11. Agreed about the ID’s and reasoning behind timing. But, be very careful about using the last point as a reliable field mark…it’s not one. 😊
  12. Ok, this is a little complicated...but you are actually not totally wrong to call this a first year bird. It sort of depends on who is describing the bird. Birders, bird banders, and other scientists generally define bird ages slightly differently. People who deal with Hawk Watch and hawk banding also use slightly different terms. I bird in its first plumage after a post-juvenile molt is technically a "First Year" bird. However, bird banders always consider a bird in its second calendar year of life (after Jan.1) a "Second Year" bird. Sometimes you hear the terms "Hatch Year" and "After Hatch Year" too. You don't use the term "first winter" and "first summer" for birds that molt only once a year.
  13. This was from yesterday. Easily my best looks at Townsend's Solitaire. https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/579507621
  14. I would not wager an ID on this bird given the photos.
  15. "First Year" is not accurate because it would indicate this bird was born this calendar year, which it wasn't.
  16. The Outer Point was good today. Hope you were out there.
  17. Could be. I only listened to it once and didn’t study the spectrogram. I can take another listen later, but both are possibilities at that location.
  18. Tough bird. I would lean Hammond's here. The tail morphology, small tiny dark bill, and spacing between primaries 4-6 all seem very HAFL like. The last photo screams Hammond's to me. Although, at the risk of being a broken record, it never hurts to leave as bird as a slash.
  19. Check out the Bay Nature article I linked. It gives a brief explanation of a concept called “mirror-image misorientation.” You can also Google it and find a number of scholarly articles.
  20. https://soundapproach.co.uk These guys are some of the best birders in the world (see Killian Mullarney). The web books and articles are worth checking out.
  • Create New...