Hello, tweets.

If I may, I'll put in my 2 cents here. I couldn't pass up a question
about shorebird ID.

Both species of dowitchers have dots on their breasts and bars on
their sides, but if you go to the side of the breast, as Connie
wrote, the markings should be species-specific - bars for Long-billed
and spots for Short-billed. There is enough variation that some
individuals can be confusing, but usually this works. There are other
ways to identify breeding adult dowitchers, but they work better in
spring than fall.

Of the two in the photo, the one on the right is an obvious Long-
billed because of the bars on the sides of the breast. Also, the bill
is pretty darned long, certainly longer than the great majority of
Short-billed. But I would agree with Doug and Gene that the left bird
is also a Long-billed. I think the bars on the sides of the breast
just aren't very visible in that photo. I think they are sufficiently
visible just under the tail of the right-hand bird to be convincing
to me.

Some of the characteristics in the article that Connie refers to are
far from definitive. There are average differences, but as soon as
the article was published, I started looking at a lot of dowitcher
photos and found that the differences in the supercilium, for
example, just didn't hold up. In other words, you couldn't use that
character to identify an individual dowitcher with certainty. I have
been deliberating diligently on dowitcher discrimination for more
years than I care to admit, and I can only say that the Mariners are
more likely to win the pennant than any of us is to successfully
identify every dowitcher we see. I've often wished that all
dowitchers had name tags!

I agree with Gene that the vast majority of dowitchers at Montlake
Fill should be Long-billed, and I think great care should be taken to
document Short-billed there. What does the record show, Connie?

Dennis

On Jul 21, 2009, at 12:00 PM, tweeters-
request at mailman2.u.washington.edu wrote:

> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 13:08:25 -0700
> From: Connie Sidles <constancesidles at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Tweeters] Montlake Fill dowitchers
> To: "Eugene and Nancy Hunn" <enhunn323 at comcast.net>
> Cc: Tweeters <tweeters at u.washington.edu>
> Message-ID: <3C1909B4-4A24-4A92-B08A-45E92DDB1BC3 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Hey tweets, thank goodness for photos. I agree that one of the
> dowitchers the Doug photographed was probably a Long-billed, and I
> should have been more ambiguous in my identification of it. The second
> bird was perhaps a Long-billed as well, although I don't think so. The
> third one, however, I still believe was a Short-billed. It is the one
> facing the camera in Doug's shot showing two dowitchers. I am going by
> the area on the breast between the foreneck and nape (going east and
> west on the bird, so to speak) and between the lower neck and marginal
> (or lesser) coverts where the wing starts to bend back (going north
> and south on the bird). In my experience, if this area shows vertical
> crescents or barring, the bird is a Long-billed. If this area shows
> dots, it is a Short-billed. Oftentimes, it is difficult to determine
> whether there are dots or crescents here. There is overlap between the
> two species, probably due to wear and other factors. Also, sometimes
> the birds scrinch up their necks and distort the markings. But if you
> get a bird that shows this field mark distinctly, then I think it is
> pretty safe to identify it. The bird on the right in Doug's photo
> shows more of the crescents, but the bird on the left shows more of
> the dots. In the field, I thought this was even more true, as the
> birds paraded up and down in various postures and angles.
>
> Another field mark that I look for is the V-shape made by the
> supercilium when looking at a bird head-on. Short-billed Dowitchers
> tend to have wider supercilia around the lores, so their V-shape is
> wavy or more tapered. Long-billed Dowitchers have slightly narrower
> supercilia in this region and look sharper and more pointy. (See Lee
> and Birch's discussion of this feature and other dowitcher ID marks
> - http://www.surfbirds.com/ID%20Articles/dowitchers1005/
> dowitchers.html)
>
> I do agree with Gene that identifying fall adult dowitchers is tricky,
> and probably many mistakes are made. Juveniles are more distinct
> because of the differences in tertial marks, so I am looking forward
> to their migration later in the fall.
>
> This morning, by the way, there were three dowitchers again on the
> Main Pond, along with five Least Sandpipers. All three dowitchers
> were, I believe, Long-billed. They did not appear to be the same birds
> as yesterday, but two of them may have been. Without name tags, it's
> hard to tell. - Connie
>
>
> On Jul 20, 2009, at 9:17 AM, Eugene and Nancy Hunn wrote:
>
>> Tweets,
>>
>> A cautionary note on the mid-summer adult dowitcher identification
>> challenge. Connie reported what were presumably the same three
>> dowitchers Doug Parrott photographed yesterday at the Montlake Fill.
>> She identified them as Short-billed while Doug called them Long-
>> billed. Fortunately, we have two excellent photos by Doug. In my
>> opinion they are Long-billed Dowitchers. The one facing right shows
>> a very long bill but beyond that shows heavy barring on the sides of
>> the breast rather than spotting. The bird also seems heavy bodied.
>> For what it?s worth, these features suggest Long-billed as opposed
>> to Short-billed. Neither observer mentioned vocalizations, which
>> ought to be definitive but which, in my experience, are frequently
>> frustratingly ambiguous or absent.
>>
>> I have been struggling with these late summer, somewhat worn adult
>> dowitchers in King County for some time now and believe they are
>> often virtually impossible to identify with perfect certainty. I
>> believe that dowitchers on fresh water in King County are most
>> likely Long-billed, and since we have so little salt water or
>> brackish habitat in King County Short-billed Dowitchers are most
>> likely very rare in the county. I did see (and it was photographed
>> by Steve Caldwell) a juvenile Short-billed two years ago at KVI
>> beach on Vashon Island, one of the few decent salt-water habitats in
>> the county, but suspect that many reports of Short-billed are more
>> likely Long-billed.
>>
>> Gene Hunn
>> 18476 47th Pl NE
>> Lake Forest Park, WA
>> enhunn323 at comcast.net
>>
>> From: tweeters-bounces at mailman2.u.washington.edu [mailto:tweeters-
>> bounces at mailman2.u.washington.edu
>> ] On Behalf Of Doug Parrott
>> Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2009 10:31 PM
>> To: tweeters
>> Subject: [Tweeters] Forbes Road Everett, Stillwater, Montlake Fill
>> 7/19/09
>>
>> Hi Tweets,
>> It was a full day. I was up in Everett at Forbes Road at 7:00 am
>> this morning. The highlights for this location were as follows:
>> American Bittern flying over the dike
>> Long & Short billed Dowitchers approx 30
>> Spotted Sandpipers
>> Western or Least Sandpipers too far to ID
>> Bullocks Oriole
>> Swainsons Thrush
>> Eastern Kingbird fledglings (two from nest that I have been
>> monitoring for the last two months.)
>>
>> At around 11:30 I was at Stillwater attempting to photograph the
>> elusive American Redstart. I was successful in catching the female.
>> I did see the male but it was too far away and too quick for me.
>> I'll be back!! This is the 5th time I've been out there and finally
>> got a photo. I have however seen them on 3 other occasions. There
>> was also a very curious Bewicks Wren who got to within 10 ft of me,
>> gave me the Bronx Cheer, then took off. I also captured a BC
>> Chickadee trying to get a sun tan. That?s a first for me.
>>
>> Around 2:00 pm I was home, at the Montlake Fill. To my delight there
>> were three Long-billed Dowitchers and Least Sandpipers at the north
>> end of the Central Pond. In addition at the Southwest Pond the
>> fledged Pied-billed Grebes were putting on a trying to eat show. The
>> parents caught a pretty big fish and the kids were attempting to
>> gobble it up. It was pretty humorous watching them. Photos
>> at:http://www.flickr.com/photos/birdhouse_wa/sets/72157621718445234/

-----
Dennis Paulson
1724 NE 98 St.
Seattle, WA 98115
206-528-1382
dennispaulson at comcast.net



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20090721/dfd65594/attachment.htm