> The swamp sparrow supposedly loses much of the reddish color to the crown
> stripes during winter. Swamp sparrows also have alot of reddish brown in
> the wings which I did not see. I also did not notice the mustache or white
> throat contrasting with gray breast.
>
> The chipping sparrow is also supposed to lose much of the reddish-brown
> color in the crown stripes during winter. The eye stripe of the chipping
> sparrow is too black and
> I did not see the white supercillium.
>
> Frankly, the head of the American tree sparrow looks closest to what I
> remember. However, the dark central breast spot and the white wing bars do
> not fit the bird I saw.
>
> For me, this is an opportunity to learn a few things that will make me
> better next time around. I'm sure that, now that I know what markings to
> look for, I will be able to quickly focus on the most important
> characteristics and come up with a fairly confident identification. As it is
> now, I am a little bewildered.
>

Kelly - Do not despair. One definition of art is "skill gained through repetition".
Field IDing birds holds up to this definition. If all birds were to be taken in
toto, there would be a myriad of field marks needed to be keyed out to be able
to ID all birds. The trick is to zero in on the ones which you need in the
viewing time available to you. In 80% of cases, Murphy rears up and dictates
that: 1) you will never actually see the key field marks; and 2) you will
never have enough time to find them anyway. The only way to defeat Murphy is
to practise enough so that you can narrow down the field marks needed quickly.
For instance with the sparrows, in addition to head striping and feather color,
the color of the bill is also important since Am. Tree Sparrow has a two-toned
one with a dark upper mandible and paler yellowish lower mandible. Also, many
Tree Sparrow's breast spots are almost invisible in winter plumage. If the bird
were in heavy molt, then the tips of the wing coverts which form the wingbars
may have been worn off and there would be no wingbars. I am not saying that
this bird was an Am. Tree Sparrow. I am trying to tell you that IDing a bird
will get easier with time if one practises enough. My suggestions for a
battle plan goes something like this (for the royal "you"):

- don't be afraid to be wrong - it's is still the best way to learn (after
all, we are talking bird ID here, not nuclear war).
- don't be afraid to ask seemingly dumb questions - how else will you learn?
- try to find an accomplished birder(s) to go birding with - the learning
will be more focussed and quicker.
- be aware of the limitations of field guides - none show all the plumages of
a bird in the infinite shades of lighting of the real world.
- study the morphology of a bird such that you can relate the various feather
structures such as coverts, scapulars, bare parts, etc. to what you see in
real life - a visit to a museum can be an eye-opener here.
- try to learn the songs/call notes of your more common birds - it can help
immeasurably in separating various otherwise similar species.
- if you have the discipline, writing down what you see/hear in a field
notebook can be the best learning tool ever.
- do *not* try to be a "100% hero" i.e. someone whose sole mission in life
seems to be to always come back with the best bird - they seldom can live
up to such a narrow limitation, and they risk becoming a marginalized
observer who disregards everything around them save for the rarity, when
what is really needed is better base data of our more common birds.

By the way, even good birders who have been locked in the office for too long
have to go through a re-learning process once they do get outside. It comes
back quickly, but they still have to get tuned up. Yes, some people seem to
have an innate gift for bird IDing, just as some lucky ones could read Greek
at age five. But with due diligence and a good support group, most people can
become proficient in their own good time.

- Jack



Jack Bowling
Prince George, BC
jcbowling at mindlink.bc.ca