Dan Victor forwarded Andy's comments to me, more of them than were in Ray's
forwarding. I'll reply briefly to them, to add to what I wrote earlier.

>Dennis, Although I did not travel to check out the alleged Red-shoulder, I
>briefly reviewed the messages on Tweeters about this bird. One thing that
>surprised me was most, if not all reports failed to mention this bird in
>flight. In my experience (from California in the distant past and more
>recently at Ridgefield), a Red-shoulder is quite readily recognizable in
>flight from a Red-tail, both in flight style and silhouette. Instead, we see
>the reports dealing with detailed plumage descriptions. When one considers
>the incredible variation in plumage - pattern and color in Buteos - I guess
>I want to skip it all. Thats why I'm a Dunne fan and have found his *Hawks
>in Flight* most valuable. The line drawings by Sibley are works of a genius,
>pure and simple. The prose is almost as illuminating.

I agree entirely that Red-shoulders are recognizable by shape, flight
style, "jizz." But the problem happens with people who *don't* have
experience with the species but try to use these somewhat subjective
characters. I really think they're unable to judge the differences that
those of us who have seen a lot of the birds take for granted. The bird is
a Red-tail, as Scott's photos make clear, yet quite a few people apparently
were convinced that it was a Red-shoulder. One of the reasons I questioned
the report in the first place was that the description submitted didn't
point out any real differences in size or shape between the "Red-shoulder"
and the Red-tails with which it was compared. So this validates what you
wrote above.

But there is no record committee that would accept a report of a rare hawk
without detailed plumage description. And in fact there are plenty of
differences between Red-tails and Red-shoulders--in plumage--that have to
be documented for an acceptable record, where one of the species is rare
(for example, the Red-tailed Hawk on the Florida Keys!).

So please, Andy, don't "skip it all." There *are* perfectly fine plumage
differences among bird species, and heaven forbid that jizz would become
our primary identification tool. Sorry, but I won't believe someone who
tells me they have identified a dark-morph buteo just by its jizz.

I think the only reason this bird was called a Red-shoulder is that it
looked a bit different in plumage from the other Red-tails, and that
difference produced raritomania, or whatever it might be called by
psychologists. Raritomania surely stems from raritophilia, and were it not
for that malady, such a bird as this would surely have been called "an
interesting Red-tail" and some effort would have been made to learn about
Red-tail variation in the available books. And of course all my blathering
on is really a response to that, not to the correct or incorrect
identification of a particular bird. I apologize to the observers,
honestly, as I really shouldn't put imagined motives in your heads. But I
think this is a pervasive problem in the birding world, one that is clearly
contagious to new birders.

>Thats why I'm bothered some by Scott's "in flight" photo. The bowing of the
>wings looks odd for a Red-tail. I'm not sure it is totally out-of-character
>for a Red-tail...I'm just bothered by it. You did not mention anything about
>this.

Yep, because there wasn't much I could say. A Red-tail, just as it began a
wingflap, could have a silhouette looking exactly like that. In addition,
I've seen just about every species of hawk glide, at least briefly, with
wing position not typical. Just as soon as I tell a van full of people on
a class trip that you can distinguish eagles by wing position, there's a
Bald Eagle overhead with a dihedral! "Give," as in "I give up," is only
the first four-letter word that comes to mind.

Andy, you must have seen Scott's photos, and you have Wheeler & Clark with
which to compare. Do you still think the bird might be a Red-shoulder?

>I'm also surprised nobody played a tape to this bird. If it responded with
>even a brief call, the case would be open and shut in my opinion.

I agree. Where they are common, Red-shoulders are very vocal, much more so
than Red-tails, in my experience. Have people heard any of the Ridgefield
birds calling?

Scott, you've done us all a great service by posting those fine photos.
And I still remember how exciting it was to see Mike's photos of the
Steller's Eider, instantly assuaging my critical response to such an
extraordinary rare-bird report. I'd much rather have it assuaged than
reinforced, believe me. This is the "up" side of birding, and I hope more
and more people are able to connect to the World Wide Web and learn from it
and delight in it. Some day I'll have my own web page, The Birding
Curmudgeon.

Dennis Paulson phone: (206) 756-3798
Slater Museum of Natural History fax: (206) 756-3352
University of Puget Sound e-mail: dpaulson at ups.edu
Tacoma, WA 98416