Melierax

Agreed with those rufous feathers.

Wilson's Snipe is correct!

I agree!

Can you change the photo format? I've never heard of HEIC and I don't think most people will be able to read them like me.

Please don't mind me, just throwing posts in the wrong places...

From a couple days ago:

I just showed up today to check out the forum. I haven't used my reactions for a while. I made one reaction, and the very next one said I could not add any more reactions. This system is broken - and I still think that we shouldn't have a reaction limit.

Maybe check out Downy or Hairy Woodpeckers? Females do not have red. EDIT: Also check out Yellow-bellied Sapsuckers. Their backs appear pretty much black in the field, and they have a prominent white rump which may have been partly what you saw when it opened its wings.

1. Yes 2. House Finch 3. Yes 4. and 6. (And I think 5.) California Gnatcatcher 7. Looks like it 8. Yes 9. and 11. Song Sparrow 10. and 12. are White-crowned Sparrows.

The reason our previous forum succeeded was that there was a dedicated General/off topic area where we had chats for people to discuss birds that didn't clog up any of the other specific threads. I agree - the General section is too specific ironically. Just a "General Birding" thing might be better. I liked having the different stuff for other critters besides birds - those went down to the bottom so they didn't interfere with the main purpose of the website so I don't have a problem with them being off topic. Right now it's basically "post pictures or ID a bird", not really forum-like at all, more like a reddit or yahoo answers or something. It needs more.

Agreed with American Pipit.

Agreed! Nice!

Having seen both female VEFL and SAPH, agreed with SAPH due to lack of eye stripe and strong yellowish underparts. Shape is much better for SAPH as well.

193: Song Sparrow? Congrats!

Since we only have a back view, the size is bad to use here. You could compare the head size to the size of the dark morph's head. They appear to be about the same.... with the amount of distortion I wouldn't want to say Ross's in any case. The bill appears small but it's so distorted it's hard to tell. I can't see a dirty patch near the base of the beak. I would lean Snow but the photo is just too distorted, sorry ?

Yeah... the Greater "rounded head" thing comes from comparing it to the Lesser. Lessers have a peak making a sharp change in head slope direction. Greaters don't, meaning there's a continuous change in direction around the head, giving them a "rounded" look. Imo I think the bill on the male in the top photo is better for Greater due to how large it appears. I agree the head looks a bit odd with the peaked forehead, but I see no hint of a peak near the back of the head.

I'd say the females are greater and the top left male is a greater as well in the top photo.

I guessed it before I clicked, I swear ? This is an American Pipit. Ninja'd!

Sure is!

It was completely cloudy here ? Amazing photos!

Broad winged Rough leg

The dark tail tip ID point still stands - both dark morph Rlha and bwha have substantial dark tail tips.

Harlan's are highly variable but here are some images from google that are similar to your bird. This one's tail matches: And this one's facial pattern matches. if this one were a bit younger, it would have white spots on its back and a striped tail. Immature Red-tails are basically splotchier versions of the adults.

Dark Harlan's. Wings are not long enough for Swainson's. Rough-legs and Broad-wings have an obvious dark tail band. Not an accipiter. Hefty appearance with wide tail. Harlan's are very dark with distinct white speckling, matching this bird perfectly. I like the white mask ?

I agree with those ID points. Very light colored head is a good mark as well. Back is a softer gray with white spots localized on the wings. Stance, behavior, and wing length are also good things to look at.