Date: 2/8/18 8:09 am
From: Bob Archer <rabican1...>
Subject: [obol] Re: Dowitcher 2d
The caurinus version of Short-billed does tend to be be darker than other
Short-billed, and it takes multiple points to id any dowitcher but I am
seeing:

1) It is February and in Brownsmead
2) Dark centered coverts, not overall pale, but caurinus are darker. Can't
decide if they are fringed buff or white, should be buff on Long-billed.
3) very bold white lower eye arc, not slight or absent, I look for this and
it holds true most times, this bothers me the most on a Short-billed. But
I did not look for this feature when I wintered in San Diego in my sailing
days, so can't really say I have tons of experience with basic-plumaged
Short-billed lower eye arcs. But take a gander at on line pics and try
iding dowitchers solely on this feature.


I think I see wide dark bars on tail, but this is no good when comparing
caurinus to Long-billed.

So I would accept dowitcher sp or Long-billed Dowitcher until I see
underwing or it calls.

Bob Archer
PDX

On Wed, Feb 7, 2018 at 10:46 PM, Owen Schmidt <oschmidt...> wrote:

>
> …… the bird shows a short-ish bill (for a dowitcher) and supercilium wider
> in front of the eye, good for Short-billed. The bird didn’t call and it
> didn’t turn to face me. The “loral angle” field mark did pan out on this
> photo, but as the cited article points out there is quite an overlap
> between the dowitchers.
>
> <oschmidt...>
> Wednesday, February 7, 2018
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 7, 2018, at 10:32 PM, David Irons <llsdirons...> wrote:
>
> The Lee and Birch Dowitcher article is in my opinion one of the most
> unfortunate and misleading ID articles ever published in BIRDING.
> Depending on posture and photo angle the “loral angle” is a highly plastic
> and basically useless field mark.
>
> About a year or so after this article came out I took about a dozen photos
> of an actively feeding basic plumaged Long-billed Dowitcher at Crescent
> City, CA. The apparent loral angle was all over the map from non-existent
> (flat) to quite steep. Feathers and skin move which results in changes in
> facial expression just like in other animals, albeit more subtle in birds.
>
> If you can share the photos without the graphic overlay this bird might be
> easier to ID.
>
> If one is interested in more helpful ID tips for dowitchers Claudia Wilds’
> article in BIRDING many years earlier has stood the test of time and the
> illustrations in the Sibley Guides are also very well done.
>
> Dave Irons
> Beaverton, OR
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 7, 2018, at 10:10 PM, Owen Schmidt <oschmidt...> wrote:
>
>
> …… in a flooded pasture near Brownsmead, Clatsop County, shows field marks
> for Short-billed, which is not expected as a migrant for another month.
> The “loral angle” holds up for Short-billed as well, nearly 30 degrees,
> well within the range for Short-billed but practically outside the range
> for Long-billed. ID source:
> https://www.surfbirds.com/ID%20Articles/dowitchers1005/dowitchers.html
>
> <oschmidt...>
> Wednesday, February 7, 2018
>
> <Screen Shot 2018-02-07 at 9.57.53 PM.png>
>
>
>
> <Screen Shot 2018-02-07 at 9.57.53 PM.png>
>
>
>

 
Join us on Facebook!