Fwd: Yakima Delta Stint identificationI have several out-of-focus photos that point more toward Little than Red-necked Stint. I noticed both the intensity and amount of color on the head and neck change between views, and that showed up in different photos. I remember a very brief morning view (less than a second) seeming intense reddish and extensive, while the later afternoon view the following day was more orange or even golden. The breast band with extensive white throat shows up well only on a frontal shot but barely on side views. Tertials never looked gray, always black with rufous. Spotting on breast blended with pale rufous/golden/deep buff background.

I tried viewing Munson's photos but the link didn't work for me. Is it correct?

Randy Hill
Othello
----- Original Message -----
From: Matt Bartels
To: tweeters at u.washington.edu ; inland birders
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 11:06 PM
Subject: [inland-NW-birders]Fwd: Yakima Delta Stint identification


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




--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20040817/45b5d97f/attachment.htm