Empid! And unknown sound.

[Jerry Friedman]

All from riparian woods in Española, N. M., yesterday morning.

1. Very close to the Rio Grande, about eye level in a low tree.  Dusky?  Sorry, it seemed to want to hide its primaries.

2. I think this is the same bird.  Individual frames and other shots available on request.

https://imgur.com/a/Ti1S2Gv

3.  I'm interested in the chipchip at 3, 8, and 15 seconds.

https://clyp.it/f5ul1mss

Edited May 26, 2020 by Jerry Friedman
Attempt to embed video didn't seem to work.

[Jefferson Shank]

bump

[Kevin]

8 minutes ago, Jefferson Shank said:

bump

?!? It was posted an hour ago.

[Connor Cochrane]

I'm just going to comment on the first bird. I have a problem seeing this as a Dusky. Since the primary's are obscured, it is really hard to get an Identification, so I'm going to be relying on the bill color size and shape, as well as head shape. While hard to tell in the photos, you can see in the video that the bird has a very blocky head shape. Also, this bird has a very dark bill, in the video you can see only the closest part of the lower mandible to the face is yellow. Hammonds have both of these features. I'm not sure a positive ID can be made, but I'm leaning Hammond's.

[Benjamin]

Hmm.... It's a Dusky/Hammond's type, could you post some more photos? It has a fairly strong eyering and what appears to be a very steep forehead, which is suggestive of Hammond's. It's not really strongly on either side of the spectrum, though. I don't know which type is more common in your area, but I do know that I'd be very surprised to see both in my area this late, especially a Hammond's.

[Phalarope713]

I’d call the first bird a Dusky with that very long, slender bill. Both Hammond’s and Dusky have fairly dark bills, but Hammond’s is much shorter and stubbier. 

[Kevin]

The first bird is a Dusky. Hammond's Flycatcher: "Shorter narrow tail, always notched" David Sibley.

[Jerry Friedman]

4 hours ago, Benjamin said:

Hmm.... It's a Dusky/Hammond's type, could you post some more photos? It has a fairly strong eyering and what appears to be a very steep forehead, which is suggestive of Hammond's. It's not really strongly on either side of the spectrum, though. I don't know which type is more common in your area, but I do know that I'd be very surprised to see both in my area this late, especially a Hammond's.

Most of my photos look like the ones I posted, only worse.  Here's one taken from the video that might give an idea of the wing and tail proportions, maybe, to someone with a lot of experience with these species.  Is there anything else you're looking for?

Maybe I should say that this is at low elevation, 5600 feet, in pinyon-juniper territory (though what's adjacent to the woods is current and former famland).  I wouldn't be surprised if Hammond's were mostly up in the mountain forests by now.  But I don' t know how reliable that is.

[Melierax]

I like Dusky for the first one as well. Hammond's just look generally stubby to me, with shorter bills and heads that look quite large and round. This bird looks relatively long tailed and lean to me. Pretty positive the chip chip is the end of a Bullock's Oriole song. You can hear an identical chatter before every call.

[Jefferson Shank]

 

?!? It was posted an hour ago.

@Kevin, Over a time when the posting is very active, if a post is already over half of the way down, there's nothing wrong with "bumping" it.

[Benjamin]

On 5/26/2020 at 4:52 PM, Kevin said:

The first bird is a Dusky. Hammond's Flycatcher: "Shorter narrow tail, always notched" David Sibley.

Is this true? It seems like a lot of factors can influence tail appearance including molt, wear, time of year, etc. I looked at a bunch of photos of Hammond's on eBird and while most birds do have clearly forked tails there are some that don't.

Also, after looking at these photos I'll concur with Dusky, the bill seems fairly strong here.

[Jerry Friedman]

Thanks, everybody.  I'll go with Dusky.