Date: 3/22/25 11:08 am From: Zac Denning via groups.io <zdenning1...> Subject: Re: [SFBirds] apparent WINTER WREN @ Golden Gate Heights Park
PS - there seems to have been an astounding number of proposed WIWR
observations this year. I really wonder if this was a bigger than usual
influx of birds? Or, are birders just better primed to notice them? I
suspect it’s some of both.
I for one, wasn’t looking for WIWR this past winter (and I had never
studied them), though I had observed birds in the midwest over the past
year. Certainly, finding my first bird made it easier to recognize the next
one I encountered. But I suspect that any time one is found, it maybe
raises awareness a little more for everyone.
Or, but to play devil’s advocate, perhaps this year wasn’t unusual at all,
and they’ve been under our noses the whole time in similar numbers,
skulking in undergrowth and making their less than attention catching barks
- and only now are they being noticed.
In any case, the glut of WIWR reports, assuming some of the pending
candidates are accepted, may soon contribute to this bird meeting CBRC’s
threshold, and being taken off of the review list?
Either way, this will remain a truly challenging ID.
Pardon the aimless musings …
Happy birding,
Zac Denning
Albany
On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 10:08 AM Zac Denning via groups.io <zdenning1=
<gmail.com...> wrote:
> Awesome find Rajan!
>
> I very much defer to the experts, but based on feedback from the 3 WIWR
> candidates I encountered this Winter, this seems at least promising. The
> sonogram for the bark calls looks as expected, with stacked inverted
> chevron shaped harmonics, and with the highest energy portion below 4 KHz.
>
> I’m not sure if software would improve things, but to help rule out the
> uncommon ‘tweener’ calls (that I understand PAWR can occasionally make), a
> better recording may be helpful. This would ideally show the shape of the
> lowest harmonic band in the sonogram, which is indistinct / overwhelmed by
> background noise in these sonograms. Ethan Monk and others are far more
> expert in this, but that’s what crude understanding I’ve gleaned from
> recent birds.
>
> Also, based on my recent experience, there seems to be a very short window
> in which WIWR can be more easily observed. All 3 birds that I saw were most
> easily observed at the initial encounter and for a very short period
> afterward. After that, the bird may go deep into cover, may stop responding
> to pishing or playback, or may perhaps move on. So now would be the time to
> try to get better recordings of this bird!
>
> That’s what little I know - and the experts will have better feedback I’m
> sure. Nice find once again!
>
>
>
> Zac Denning
> Albany
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 8:39 AM Dominik Mosur via groups.io <dominikmosur=
> <gmail.com...> wrote:
>
>> Good morning SF Birders,
>>
>> Yesterday afternoon (3/21/25), one of our young superstar birders, RAJAN
>> RAO, discovered an apparent WINTER WREN at Golden Gate Heights Park.
>>
>> Here's Rajan's list with recordings and photos:
>>
>> https://ebird.org/checklist/S219870675 >>
>> Several people who have experience with Winter Wren expressed that
>> it sounds really good for a potential winter wren but more documentation
>> would be great.
>>
>> I stopped there yesterday evening to follow up and was not able to
>> relocate it hearing only a typical Pacific Wren at the same spot. BUT, a
>> visit at sunrise today turned up both a Pacific and the putative WINTER
>> WREN at these approximate GPS coordinates :
>> 37.74947, -122.4689
>>
>> Do note that this is a state review species so if you go see the bird
>> and manage photos/recordings please submit them to the California BIrd
>> Record Committee at this link:
>> https://californiabirds.org/report_sighting.html >>
>> Happy Spring,
>>
>> Dominik Mosur
>> San Francisco
>>
>>
>
>
