Hello, tweets.

I usually stay away from ID questions posed on tweeters, not because I'm not interested but because I'm often too busy, and especially because I only get the digest, and by the time I respond to something, a half-dozen others may have already responded.

As my name was taken by a couple of people, I'd rather not have it taken in vain, so I did look at this puzzling bird. As was said, identification of dowitchers in basic (nonbreeding, winter) plumage is not an easy matter. It's distinctly harder than identifying juveniles or alternate (breeding)-plumaged birds. So in this case, it wouldn't be too far off to say "he can't tell them apart either," except to say that I often can tell them apart, but this one seems harder than many others I have seen.

Jack Stephens listed all the right field marks (except call, of course, which is the ultimate and by far the most easily assessed character):

"Non-breeding dowitchers are tough, but I will stick my neck out and vote for Short-billed. Basis for this call is:

Breast is speckled gray, rather than even gray as on Long-billed
Barring on the flanks is darker than the breast color, and distinct against a white background. Long-billed background tends to light gray, and barring less distinct.
White bars on the tail about equal or greater in width than the black bars, in Long-billed black bars should be wider
Dark centers of mantle feathers are thin, giving the upper parts an even appearance. Long-billed tends to larger dark centers on these feathers, giving a blotchy look"

Unfortunately from my standpoint, the photos on the web aren't big enough to examine in the way I would like to. I love it when people post full-size photos on photo sites like Flickr, and you can click on "Original," as then I can enlarge them considerably and see the kinds of details I would like to have visible.

Jack is spot-on in his assessment of how to distinguish them, but I'm not convinced "beyond a reasonable doubt" that he's right. Notice these caveats in his commentary: "tends to" "should be" "tends to"

I have photos of unquestioned Long-billed Dowitchers that are colored pretty much like this bird, with a bit of speckling on the breast, flank bars about that color, and back about like that, and I have Short-billed that look about the same too. The average differences between them aren't absolute in this plumage, and that includes the tail barring. I don't care which shorebird book you are using as a reference, they all should have included this caveat. A lot of southeastern wintering dowitchers have white tail bars wider than this one; Short-billed tails vary tremendously, Long-billed much less so but still some.

I do lean toward Short-billed, but not enough that I would stake anything more than a beer or a latte, depending on the time of day, on it. The fact that it's on salt water plays a part, although I've seen Long-billed on salt water in the winter. You're supposed to capture all lone dowitchers and tickle them until they call!

I'm curious how David identified the flying bird as a Long-billed, as I would put it in the same category as the other one, unless it was identified by call. It does have the blotchy look on the scapulars typical of Long-billed, and the tail barring certainly could be Long-billed.

Dowitchers are usually different in their status and habitat use just about everywhere they occur, and both of those can be a clue to identification, if you know what's going on in the local area. I should add that when I was a boy birdwatcher, they were all just dowitchers. Life WAS easier then.
-----
Dennis Paulson
1724 NE 98 St.
Seattle, WA 98115
206-528-1382
dennispaulson at comcast.net