Date: 12/6/25 6:45 pm From: Ron W <ourwildplaces...> Subject: Re: [cobirds] Re: Unknown Woodpecker, Montrose Colorado, Dec 04 25
Great finds Eric. Many have found interest in this bird. Whatever it is,
it's rare at least in some way for this location. As mentioned, I've
walked this area for over two years and not seen this bird, so this adds to
my doubt that it's a resident Northern Flicker.
You can see from these images of melanistics, that if shot in direct
sunlight from the back, they will not mirror the bird in my report.
Note the detail my zoomed in phone captured in the tree bark, it would have
easily registered the variation on the back of any Northern Flicker.
There are often more than a couple of woodpeckers in these trees together,
as a friend at a nearby residence feeds heavily, to say that they often
have up to a hundred ground birds along their fence. Flicker come to their
feeders as they do mine, and if this is a very rare Flicker occurrence, I
feel I'll very likely see it again.
On Saturday, December 6, 2025 at 6:54:39 PM UTC-7 Eric DeFonso wrote:
> Because I find this really interesting regardless of the ID (FWIW, I too
> am in the "flicker camp"), I briefly searched for aberrant plumaged
> Northern Flickers in the Macaulay Library, and quickly found four
> interesting shots, which I'm linking to here. (There may be many more in
> the library, these are just ones I came across with a more targeted search.)
>
> https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/299920271 > https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/189692901 > https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/36307531 > https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/189693021 >
> Three of these pics are from Bountiful, UT, spread over 6 years.
>
> In the case of that 4th link, what I find interesting is that even a
> melanistic flicker can show a fairly light underside, which jibes with what
> I see in the phone-pics. Before this, I wasn't even aware of melanism in
> flickers, so the sharing of this sighting is still enlightening to me.
>
> Eric
>
> -------
> Eric DeFonso
> Boulder County, CO
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2025 at 4:50 PM Ron W <ourwil......> wrote:
>
>> If it's a Flicker, then it will likely remain in the area, and I'll no
>> doubt see it again. If it's not, then I likely won't. I walk this route
>> 365 days of the year. Of course, I'll also still welcome an image of a
>> similar Northern Flicker, as mentioned before.
>>
>> Thanks all.
>>
>> On Saturday, December 6, 2025 at 4:35:18 PM UTC-7 David Suddjian wrote:
>>
>>> CoBirders,
>>>
>>> Unless there is something of substance to add or a point that has not
>>> already been made, I recommend we please now end this CoBirds thread. The
>>> eBird reviewer can evaluate the report for the eBird public record, and the
>>> observer can do what he likes with it as far as his personal records are
>>> concerned.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> David Suddjian
>>> CoBirds list moderator
>>> Littleton, CO
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 6, 2025 at 4:24 PM 'Woodcreeper29' via Colorado Birds <
>>> <cob......> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Submit it to the records committee. Colorado will still have no
>>>> accepted record of BBWO!
>>>> Steve Larson
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 6, 2025, at 4:15 PM, Ron W <ourwil......> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No one in Flicker Camp has shown me an example image of the species
>>>> with a uniform dark back from tail to head. You lightened the photo and it
>>>> still doesn't look like one. The bird was smaller than a Northern Flicker,
>>>> and black. the head still looks black even with you lightening it.
>>>> Furthermore, the underside of the bird is dusty white. The image you
>>>> linked to is a male Black-backed, which has distinctive barring yes, but
>>>> the female's can be nearly absent from this angle and there are images
>>>> showing this.
>>>>
>>>> If this is so easily a Northern Flicker then we would have seen a link
>>>> to one, similarly in full sun, from behind, looking just like this bird.
>>>> Show me that bird and I'll consider changing my mind.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ron
>>>>
>>>> On Saturday, December 6, 2025 at 3:49:40 PM UTC-7 Tony Leukering wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> All:
>>>>>
>>>>> The bird in question is certainly a Northern Flicker and, perhaps,
>>>>> identifiable as a Red-shafted Flicker. I lightened a screen grab of one of
>>>>> the photos and, with no other alterations, present it below. The upperparts
>>>>> are brownish, the nape and crown are noticeably grayer, the sides are white
>>>>> with dark spotting, and the whitish rump contrasts strongly with the dark
>>>>> tail.
>>>>>
>>>>> [image: NOFL-not-BBWO.jpg]
>>>>>
>>>>> As can be seen on the bird here
>>>>> <https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/326303601>, Black-backed
>>>>> Woodpeckers entirely lack white on the upper side of the body (excluding
>>>>> tail), so that white rump rules that species out. Additionally, the
>>>>> extensively white side to the bird is not a feature of Black-backed, which
>>>>> has the sides so heavily barred (see here
>>>>> <https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/615176281>) that in relatively
>>>>> poor views (such as on your bird), the birds look dark-sided (see here
>>>>> <https://macaulaylibrary.org/asset/646203877>).
>>>>>
>>>>> In my extensive birding experience in Michigan, New York, California,
>>>>> and Montana, I've seen many, many Black-backed Woodpeckers, so I
>>>>> immediately recognized the subject of the checklist's photos as not a
>>>>> Black-backed. I've also seen 10s of 1000s of Northern Flickers, and your
>>>>> bird struck me immediately as one.
>>>>>
>>>>> You're welcome to reject my advice (as you have that of others), as
>>>>> it's no skin off my back.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>
>>>>> Tony Leukering
>>>>> Denver
>>>>>
>>>>> On Friday, December 5, 2025 at 10:53:03 AM UTC-7 Ron W wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello all, as my field report states :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Roughly 9" with a short tail. In full sunlight, the bird shows no
>>>>>> markings on its all dark back. Similarly the head is also all dark, with a
>>>>>> possible dark red semicircle below the eye. I observed this bird from
>>>>>> roughly 15' for around 2 minutes (equipped with only a cell phone). In that
>>>>>> time woodpecker made no vocalizations."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4 photos are included with the report.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://ebird.org/checklist/S287390731 >>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to <cob......>
>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds >>>> * All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city.
>>>> Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
>>>> * Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/ >>>> ---
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>> an email to cobirds+<u......>
>>>> To view this discussion visit
>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/<80b5b7da-7951-422c-9525-2f43e52eab34n...> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/<80b5b7da-7951-422c-9525-2f43e52eab34n...>?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> .
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
>>>> To post to this group, send email to <cob......>
>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds >>>> * All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city.
>>>> Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
>>>> * Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/ >>>> ---
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>> an email to cobirds+<u......>
>>>>
>>> To view this discussion visit
>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/<90B7BF5A-0D55-42D4-AB24-AE606BF9E6A3...> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/<90B7BF5A-0D55-42D4-AB24-AE606BF9E6A3...>?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> .
>>>>
>>> --
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Colorado Birds" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to <cob......>
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds >> * All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city.
>> Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
>> * Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/ >> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Colorado Birds" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to cobirds+<u......>
>>
> To view this discussion visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/<a70ee6c0-a0a5-4788-ae34-fdc5b46bac8an...> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/<a70ee6c0-a0a5-4788-ae34-fdc5b46bac8an...>?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> .
>>
>
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To post to this group, send email to <cobirds...>
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/cobirds * All posts should be signed with the poster's full name and city. Include bird species and location in the subject line when appropriate.
* Join Colorado Field Ornithologists https://cobirds.org/membership/ ---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Colorado Birds" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cobirds+<unsubscribe...>
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cobirds/<c14a0e90-4f38-4521-9b70-b14f7f068d6fn...>
