Jump to content
Whatbird Community
Galen Frantz

Is this an immature red-shouldered hawk?

Recommended Posts

https://www.audubon.org/news/seagull-or-gull-who-really-cares

Don't get me wrong at all, and please keep correcting me. I realize that terminology matters a lot, and that a juvenile is definitely a better word for this bird. But just for everyone (I'm not just talking about Tony here), if you could please be mindful of this for beginner birders, especially in real-life, that would be great. In this "virtual-world," it's completely fine to correct people because you have no idea how experienced they are/how interested they are in birding (and you don't want to have misguided "knowledgeable" people). But in real-life, if it's apparent that a person is just getting started in the birding world, it's important to only correct terms that are completely vital for learning. 

Thank you. And just to reiterate, I am very happy that you corrected me, Tony.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tony Leukering said:

No, it is a juvenile Red-shouldered Hawk.

usually you're making the opposite correction to people...

14 minutes ago, akandula said:

https://www.audubon.org/news/seagull-or-gull-who-really-cares

Don't get me wrong at all, and please keep correcting me. I realize that terminology matters a lot, and that a juvenile is definitely a better word for this bird. But just for everyone (I'm not just talking about Tony here), if you could please be mindful of this for beginner birders, especially in real-life, that would be great. In this "virtual-world," it's completely fine to correct people because you have no idea how experienced they are/how interested they are in birding (and you don't want to have misguided "knowledgeable" people). But in real-life, if it's apparent that a person is just getting started in the birding world, it's important to only correct terms that are completely vital for learning. 

Thank you. And just to reiterate, I am very happy that you corrected me, Tony.

ha... I've been birding about 6 years and I have to learn by experience rather than books, mostly... so, there's still a LOT for me to learn, but I'm learning... and my first time being corrected by tony on terminology frustrated me a little... I got over it but, I STILL have to correct myself at times because those two terms seem interchangeable to me...  for humans at least. HA...  And I used the word "baby" to describe a bird once and got corrected... and, no offense, I have no problem using that word in that way again in the future. Just like I might say "aint" sometimes. The terminology matters in some places, not so much in others... I'm more bothered by the BROAD use of "sparrow hawk" and "hoot owl."  And lots of other wrong terms and phrases... but I give lots of grace because I'm still learning and, (love the article title) who cares... ha. 
It's really, really good to correct and educate as long as it isn't done in a snobbish way that puts people off from learning.

With birds like this... we have to keep in mind that many people still struggle with what species it is. We're all on very different levels.
Anyway... I am rambling. I apologize. If I could earn money by rambling I'd be a rich man.  😛 

For the record,  I can't look at this bird and tell if it's immature or juvenile... I am not that learned... and, I might not ever be.
Okay, I have to stop... so many thoughts racing through my head...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't tell by looking, but Red-shouldered Hawks and most other buteos (the White-tailed Hawk is one exception, and I don't remember whether there are any others) don't have an immature plumage, just juvenile (first plumage with non-down feathers) and adult.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jerry Friedman said:

You can't tell by looking, but Red-shouldered Hawks and most other buteos (the White-tailed Hawk is one exception, and I don't remember whether there are any others) don't have an immature plumage, just juvenile (first plumage with non-down feathers) and adult.

That's interesting and frustrating... I'll forget. I will call one thing by the wrong name... I'm sure of it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@akandula Immature is perfectly correct. Juvenile is just more specific.

See definition 2 of immature in the PDF.

Since we’re fixating on semantics, here’s a term birders round here use - “nomenclature nazi”.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not know about the terminology. But it is definitely a Red-shouldered Hawk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, AlexHenry said:

Since we’re fixating on semantics, here’s a term birders round here use - “nomenclature nazi”.

I think some of our members sometime forget not everyone who posts here wants to become a serious birder. 

Many post asking for a single identification and may never be seen again.  A link to AAB may be of more use to them than recommending they buy a field guide.  It's certainly a cheaper introduction to our activity, and may be more likely to 'set the hook'.  We also have photographers who want to know what they took a picture of, but may not be interested in acquiring their own identification skills.

Not all posts require the same type of response, level of detail, or semantic analysis.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the discussion.  I have worked as an entomologist for the past 40+ years, and having to translate insect biology to professors on one hand and farmers on the other, I can definitely appreciate that words make a difference.  From the insect world, immature is pretty accepted for all non-adult stages, but the terms larva, pupa, sub-imago, etc., definitely transfer more information than the more general term. 

I have been using the heck out of the AAB site, but recognize that it has limitations.  I also haven't bought a field guide since I got a copy of RT Peterson's book many years ago (now falling apart).  I am open to suggestion regarding a good field guide, if for no other reason than I feel a bit guilty coming to you guys every time I have a question. ...that and I still enjoy learning.

I also have a question about posting photos to topics on this site (especially related to European birds) where the posting needs to have a URL.  WTF??  How do I do that???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect the most common responses will be "The Sibley Guide to Birds" and "National Geographic Complete Birds of North America", both have their specific strengths.

I am not sure I even understand your last question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Galen Frantz said:

I am open to suggestion regarding a good field guide

Most will say Sibley's Sibley's Sibley's... ha.  The Sibley guide to Birds, the 2nd edition. Most of them are decent but that's probably the most up to date... and if you have a smart phone, there are a few good apps you can use. The Audubon guide and Merlin are both good and free.

 

14 minutes ago, Galen Frantz said:

if for no other reason than I feel a bit guilty coming to you guys every time I have a question

Sometimes that's the best way to learn... for me, I get more from learning in the field and people explaining things than I can from reading a book. And we enjoy answering so keep asking. 🙂

I can't say anything about the images... There's something under where you're typing where you're supposed to be able to just upload photos. I'm not sure if that's working. Many people just go to an image hosting site like imgur and then paste here... some use flickr, and others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Galen Frantz said:

I have been using the heck out of the AAB site, but recognize that it has limitations.  I also haven't bought a field guide since I got a copy of RT Peterson's book many years ago (now falling apart).  I am open to suggestion regarding a good field guide, if for no other reason than I feel a bit guilty coming to you guys every time I have a question. ...that and I still enjoy learning.

I also have a question about posting photos to topics on this site (especially related to European birds) where the posting needs to have a URL.  WTF??  How do I do that???

The most popular field guides include Sibley, RTP, Audubon, and National Geographic.  The classic Golden Guide is a good entry point for beginning / very young birders but I suspect you're past it.  If you don't roam much, you might consider a guide targeted to your specific state, or to a region smaller than 'Eastern / Western US'.  If you have access to a brick-and-mortar bookstore or birding store (Wild Birds Unlimited, etc.), you can compare them and see which one you prefer.  I prefer a guide that uses illustrations instead of photos.  The advantages to a newer guide include listings for birds whose names may have changed, subspecies that have been promoted to species, species that have been split, and up-to-date range maps.

As to photos, I usually just crop around the bird and paste it directly into my post.  But there's an 'Insert other media' button in the bottom right corner of the window where you enter your post.  Click it and you'll see 'Insert image from URL'.

I have privacy objections to some apps that require access to my phone, camera, etc. 

Edited by Charlie Spencer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Galen Frantz said:

Thanks for the discussion.  I have worked as an entomologist for the past 40+ years, and having to translate insect biology to professors on one hand and farmers on the other, I can definitely appreciate that words make a difference.  From the insect world, immature is pretty accepted for all non-adult stages, but the terms larva, pupa, sub-imago, etc., definitely transfer more information than the more general term. 

I have been using the heck out of the AAB site, but recognize that it has limitations.  I also haven't bought a field guide since I got a copy of RT Peterson's book many years ago (now falling apart).  I am open to suggestion regarding a good field guide, if for no other reason than I feel a bit guilty coming to you guys every time I have a question. ...that and I still enjoy learning.

I also have a question about posting photos to topics on this site (especially related to European birds) where the posting needs to have a URL.  WTF??  How do I do that???

If the URL has /XXXXXX.jpg at the end it should automatically embed into the post if you copy paste the link.

As far as guides go, RobinHood is correct... I use a Sibley's. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

National Geographic definitely is a good guide. But if I was going to pick which one was better I would say Sibley's.

Sibley Guide to Birds

National Geographic Field Guide

3 hours ago, Charlie Spencer said:

The most popular field guides include Sibley, RTP, Audubon, and National Geographic.

What does RPT stand for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Kevin said:

What does RPT stand for?

 

13 minutes ago, millipede said:

Roger Troy Peterson, I guess?  Peterson's guide...

Yep.  I was replying to Galen, who had already used 'RT Peterson' in his post.  Otherwise I would have spelled it out completely.  Sorry for any confusion.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...