Jump to content
Whatbird Community

Recommended Posts

Several hummingbirds were flagged as unconfirmed on ebird, and I wanted to list them correctly.  If it is too difficult to use the links, I can dig up the pics.

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/283499551

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/59677861

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/212047391

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/212047381

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/210823531

https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/210823521

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1.  https://ebird.org/checklist/S76802359  (Baldwin co. AL)

2.  https://ebird.org/checklist/S37236664  (Phoenix, AZ)

3.  & 4.  https://ebird.org/checklist/S65181107  (Baldwin co., AL)

5.  & 6.  https://ebird.org/checklist/S64837256 (Baldwin co., AL)

Some of these were ID'd as Black-chinned by a hummingbird bander who was here, but it is completely possible I misunderstood, and since I don't have any band numbers, I would prefer to ID by photo only.  

 

While on this topic, I was going to buy the Peterson's FG to Hummingbirds (Sheri Williamson), but the most recent edition is 2002 & it is slated for a new edition.  Should I wait, should I purchase the '02 version, or is/are there (a) better guide(s) out there?

 

 

 

Edited by floraphile
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, AlexHenry said:

The first one is likely a Ruby-throated, but Archilochus sp. is the safest call I suppose.

I can’t see any of the other photos. When I click on the link it says Restricted Access.

Was it flagged because Trochlidae (which I called it) was too broad a category?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, floraphile said:

Was it flagged because Trochlidae (which I called it) was too broad a category?

No, I don’t understand why that would be flagged, as it clearly is a “hummingbird sp”. You were correct. However, I think it is encouraged to be more specific when possible - and in the case of this one photo, it is definitely good enough to be more specific. But I don’t understand why someone would flag that as incorrect because it is clearly correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, AlexHenry said:

No, I don’t understand why that would be flagged, as it clearly is a “hummingbird sp”. You were correct. However, I think it is encouraged to be more specific when possible - and in the case of this one photo, it is definitely good enough to be more specific. But I don’t understand why someone would flag that as incorrect because it is clearly correct.

Sometimes spuhs are flagged in the county level filters. This may be the case here. For example, in my home county, tanager sp. and new world oriole sp. are both flagged as rare.

Now, if your eBird posts were originally fine (meaning accepted) and someone flagged your media then that’s interesting to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DLecy said:

Sometimes spuhs are flagged in the county level filters. This may be the case here. For example, in my home county, tanager sp. and new world oriole sp. are both flagged as rare.

Now, if your eBird posts were originally fine (meaning accepted) and someone flagged your media then that’s interesting to me.

Forgive my ignorance, but what's a "spuh"?  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, floraphile said:

Was it flagged because Trochlidae (which I called it) was too broad a category?

 

38 minutes ago, AlexHenry said:

No, I don’t understand why that would be flagged, as it clearly is a “hummingbird sp”. You were correct. However, I think it is encouraged to be more specific when possible - and in the case of this one photo, it is definitely good enough to be more specific. But I don’t understand why someone would flag that as incorrect because it is clearly correct.

Interesting--it won't let me add "Archilochus sp." 

 

Edited by floraphile
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, floraphile said:

1.  https://ebird.org/checklist/S76802359  (Baldwin co. AL) -

2.  https://ebird.org/checklist/S37236664  (Phoenix, AZ) -

3.  & 4.  https://ebird.org/checklist/S65181107  (Baldwin co., AL)

5.  & 6.  https://ebird.org/checklist/S64837256 (Baldwin co., AL)

While on this topic, I was going to buy the Peterson's FG to Hummingbirds (Sheri Williamson), but the most recent edition is 2002 & it is slated for a new edition.  Should I wait, should I purchase the '02 version, or is/are there (a) better guide(s) out there?

 

1. I would only go as far as Archilochus sp. here.

2. Are these the same bird? The shape of the first bird's primaries look better for RTHU than BCHU to me, but the color of the gorget on the second appears to point towards BCHU. Archilochus sp.

3., 4? I only see one bird here. RTHU, based on what I can see of the shape of the primaries and the brighter green above.

5., 6? Again, only one bird. Leaning RTHU, but not entirely sure.

As for field guides on hummingbirds, the old Peterson Guide is worth picking up used online for cheap. The new one will be worth picking up when it comes out, and I also recommend Steve N.G. Howell's Hummingbirds of North America: A Photographic Guide.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DLecy said:

1. I would only go as far as Archilochus sp. here.

2. Are these the same bird? The shape of the first bird's primaries look better for RTHU than BCHU to me, but the color of the gorget on the second appears to point towards BCHU. Archilochus sp.

3., 4? I only see one bird here. RTHU, based on what I can see of the shape of the primaries and the brighter green above.

5., 6? Again, only one bird. Leaning RTHU, but not entirely sure.

As for field guides on hummingbirds, the old Peterson Guide is worth picking up used online for cheap. The new one will be worth picking up when it comes out, and I also recommend Steve N.G. Howell's Hummingbirds of North America: A Photographic Guide.

2.--These could very well be different birds.  These pics were taken when we were merely birdwatching rather than birding.  lol.

I'm not sure why the other pics aren't showing, but the additional pics are not any more informative.  I will list them as Archiclochus sp.  That is, if I can get ebird to accept such as a "species".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, floraphile said:

I will list them as Archiclochus sp.  That is, if I can get ebird to accept such as a "species".

This is the right tack to take. WAAAAY too many eBird filters have WAAAAY too few spuhs on them. It seems as if most reviewers/filter-makers make filters for experts rather than for everyone else. My Colorado filters often have 30-40% of the entries being spuhs. Granted, some of those spuhs have limits of zero, but anytime that a particular species has a non-zero filter limit, any relevant spuh entry should have AT LEAST the same filter limits. That is, if at least one species of sparrow has a non-zero limit for a particular temporal period, then sparrow spuh should have AT LEAST the same limit. Of course, much of that I blame on the American education system which does not, for the most part, teach logic and critical thinking.

Edited by Tony Leukering
addition
  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Tony Leukering said:

This is the right tack to take. WAAAAY too many eBird filters have WAAAAY too few spuhs on them. It seems as if most reviewers/filter-makers make filters for experts rather than for everyone else. My Colorado filters often have 30-40% of the entries being spuhs. Granted, some of those spuhs have limits of zero, but anytime that a particular species has a non-zero filter limit, any relevant spuh entry should have AT LEAST the same filter limits. That is, if at least one species of sparrow has a non-zero limit for a particular temporal period, then sparrow spuh should have AT LEAST the same limit. Of course, much of that I blame on the American education system which does not, for the most part, teach logic and critical thinking.

Totally agree. The American education system is fundamentally wrong and is based on the wrong things.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 7/9/2021 at 12:21 PM, Tony Leukering said:

WAAAAY too many eBird filters have WAAAAY too few spuhs on them.

I'm just across county boundaries and just got pugetensis (only local ssp. this time of year) and Cormorant sp. flagged as rare. It's amazing how different neighbouring filters can be.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/9/2021 at 2:21 PM, Tony Leukering said:

 Of course, much of that I blame on the American education system which does not, for the most part, teach logic and critical thinking.

I had just better shut up, before I get started about the school system.

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/9/2021 at 3:44 PM, Quiscalus quiscula said:

Of course, much of that I blame on the American education system which does not, for the most part, teach logic and critical thinking.

I might agree =IF= I had any knowledge of other countries' success in teaching these concepts.

Edited by Charlie Spencer
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Seanbirds said:

You homeschooled?

Yes.

16 hours ago, Kevin said:

I had just better shut up, before I get started about the school system.

 I have a lot of thing I would like to say, but I am trying very heard not to start an argument.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kevin said:

 I have a lot of thing I would like to say, but I am trying very heard not to start an argument.

Remember, this is Whatbird, not Birdforum. 😉 Let’s just get back to those hummingbirds! 
 

PS. You can PM me and argue in private if you want. :classic_tongue:

Edited by Seanbirds
  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...