Dennis Paulson wrote in part:

>Immature Red-shoulders are either entirely streaked below (eastern) or
>heavily barred and streaked (western). Immatures of the western subspecies
>show reddish "shoulders" (actually the lesser coverts). They should never
>show the clear area on the breast characteristic of Red-tail.

This bird IS heavily streaked on the belly and chest. The light area is
small and only just below the chin and appears to look more like some dark
streaked feathers are missing and that more white feathers are showing. It
is NOT the clear breast area seen on RTHA. It just has a little more white
than the field guides show for the immature RSHA. In our opinion, the
breast is not characteristic of a RTHA.



>The tail in a Red-shoulder is *dark with light bars*, that of an immature
Red-tail is
>light with dark bars; the description "striped" above doesn't make the tail
>pattern clear (and, by the way, "striped" usually refers to markings along,
>rather than transverse to, the body axis).
>

The tail is barred but the light bars aren't as narrow as seen in the field
guide pictures of the adults. They do look very much like the illustration
of the immature western RSHA in the Nat. Geo. field guide.



>Red-shoulders fly with rapid wingbeats, more like a large accipiter than a
>Red-tail. Red-shoulders are also woodland-based birds, and I'd be shocked
>to see one way out on the prairie.

Although yesterday Tony saw this bird mostly flying, this morning it did not
fly long distances. It spent its time going from one perch to another. It
would hunt by dropping down to the ground from its perch. It is hard for
us to comment on other aspects of its flight pattern. However, on Sunday we
did see the bird briefly hover. Is this observation alone enough to rule
out RSHA? If this bird were a RSHA and out of its normal range and in
abnormal habitat, could it behave uncharacteristically?



>As was pointed out briefly in the
>kesstrel vs. sharp-shin thread, where a bird is and what it is doing are
>very powerful parts of the field-identification process.

We agree here. Powerful but not absolute. There are also birds that go out
of range and we have had our share of them. We shouldn't have had a
Steller's Eider nor a Heermann's Gull. One doesn't usually expect a Red
Knot or a Red Phalerope, but they too have been here. A RSHA in is far less
out of place than the Green-tailed Towhee currently in Rhode Island. More
over, the location that it is in is river bottom / riparian growth, not
prairie. This habitat is somewhat similar to the Ridgefield National
Wildlife Refuge where a RSHA is currently being observed.


> Red-shoulders are considerably smaller than Red-tails, probably weighs
from 50-70% as much.

Clark provides the following weight and length ranges:

RTHA: Weight 1.5 - 3.3 lbs -- Length 17 - 22 in
RSHA: Weight 1.1- 1.9 lbs -- Length 15 - 19 in

If these numbers are accurate, there appears to be overlap in sizes.



>Why in heck did anyone call this bird a Red-shoulder in the first place?

We think that the reason people identified it as a RSHA is that the markings
look very much like the RSHA shown in field guides and in other literature.
In our opinion, this bird is on the very low end of the RTHA size range.
The beak is less massive as are the legs/feet. The chest streaking is
heavy. The white wing crescents are present and very visible from the
underwing. There are no patagial marks. The tail is barred, upper and
lower views. The wider light terminal tail band of a RTHA is not present.

In our opinion, there is enough here to suggest a RSHA. It clearly does not
fit the norm of a red-tailed. Since it is out of range, we are trying to be
careful and want to base our identification on more than just range. This
is why we asked for more information.

We plan on taking our own photos. At the very minimum, this bird is an
interesting study and we DO NOT feel it should be dismissed yet.

Note that the above observations are our own. The post from the previous
day essentially represented Tony Greager's observations.

Thank you for your time and thoughts.


Bill and Nancy LaFramboise
Richland, WA
wlafra at oneworld.owt.com