Hi all -

I'm surprised not to see any comments yet on the lists about Nancy &
Bill's email this morning calling into question the Stint ID. Seems
like this would be a topic of interest to at least all of us who
came, saw, and were content enough with our id skills to agree on
the Red-necked ID.

I'm maybe more interested in the process of pondering this question
than in the outcome -- how did we get to our initial ID, and how is
it that [as of yet] no one on Frontiers has even questioned the
re-labelling.

Thanks for throwing the question out there.

Here are a few meager attempts to defend a Red-necked Stint id. I go
into this announcing loudly that my experience in the field is
non-existent on this question -- the Yakima Delta bird is my first
Red-necked/Little Stint. But I'm willing to try to compare the photos
and some memory with Paulson's descriptions to see what I come up
with:

From the photos, the white-throat looks much more substantial than I
recalled in person. That, together with those clear white mantle
lines & lack of spotting below the breast seem to be the big elements
that point toward a Little Stint. Nevertheless, from the outset I'm
cautioned by Paulson that "[Red-necked Stints] with white throats
could be mistaken for Little Stints"(257)

However, there are elements that point the other way, I think.
Breast color:
For one, wasn't there a lot of rufous below the throat patch on the
Yakima delta bird? Not just a slight bit, but enough that the white
throat was even hard to see in person when it was out-shone by the
rufous? I don't see this amount of rufous reflected in the pictures
posted, so I guess I'd like to hear from others whether or not they
recall the same thing. Are there other photos out there that do or
don't show this?

From the guidebooks I have and especially Paulson's description, it
would seem that a Little Stint should not show such extensive rufous
on the breast. Paulson says of the Little's breast "Throat white,
contrasting with a rufous head; dark streaks and spots on sides of
breast, with traces of rufous in same area in some
individuals."[259]. On distinguishing between the 2 species in
breeding plumage, this is the first mark he mentions: "Typical
breeding plumage Little Stints have crown and race rufous,
contrasting with the white throat and breast. Rufous-necked are
usually entirely rufous about the head and breast in this plumage,
although individuals, especially in early autumn, may be faded enough
so the rufous on the breast is not especially apparent (or some of it
may have been lost in molt)."[260]
A couple other books I have do mention a "wash of rufous" on the
breast of a Little or "some rufous" -- so perhaps the distinction is
more subtle than it sounds in Paulson. In any case, I don't see the
rufous breast depicted in any of those photos, and would be
interested in learning whether that was a misperception on my part.

Coverts:
Paulson writes [again speaking of breeding plumage differences]: "In
Little the coverts have dark centers and pale edges, whereas in
rufous-necked the coverts are usually largely gray, contrasting
strongly with the mantle and scapulars. Again, however, occasional
Rufous-necked have coverts as brightlymarked as typical Little."[260]
Looking at the photos, I don't see any sign of dark centers on the
coverts. Pictures 10 & 11 offer maybe the clearest view of the
coverts, and if anything it looks to me like the coverts are grey
with some dark on the tip, right?

Tertials:
Paulson says: "In most Little's the tertials are bright and
contrasty, while in most Rufous-necked the coverts are usually
largely gray, contrasting strongly with the mantle and
scapulars."[260]

Looking at picture 4 especially, it seems the tertials stand out as
plainer than the mantle - definitely not as bright and contrasty as
the mantle, though also not as plain as the coverts.


One more minor element that I really have no basis for relying on too
seriously, but I just noticed it: It looks like the Red-necked
migrates earlier &/or leaves breeding grounds closer to us than the
Little. Little records, the few mentioned in Paulson, seem to be from
September while Red-necked come in July & August. How much does that
matter for a vagrant?

I'd love to hear a little more discussion from others -- speculative
or not. It seems there are elements that are wrong for either
species , though some of the problems with Red-necked seem
potentially explainable by molt (Paulson "molt out of [breeding
plumage] begins in July, with white feathers appearing on throat and
breast and gray feathers on back and wings"[256]).

As I said at the outset, please feel free to set me straight with
better analysis based on experience, books or really anything -
Knowing that I would have left this as an unquestioned "Red-necked"
in my records had the issue not been raised leaves me curious and
eager to learn from the process.

Matt Bartels
Seattle, WA



>
>Birders,
>
>After reviewing excellent photos taken by Tom Munson, we had
>concerns about the id of the Yakima Delta stint as a Red-necked
>Stint. The spotting was mostly contained within the rufous area.
>The leg length, the rufous tertials and greater coverts, and the
>scapular marks had bothered us all along. These are characteristics
>shown by Little Stint.
>
>Tom's photos are now posted with his permission at
>http://photos.yahoo.com/arctic_warbler
>
>We sent a message to ID Frontiers and the initial responses are
>supportive for Little Stint.
>
>Bill & Nancy


--