Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Flycatcher ID help

Expand Messages
  • Dan Casey
    Scott: I agree with your assessment of Dusky. Note that the bird looks short-winged (short primary projection), and therefore long-tailed. The lores (in front
    Message 1 of 5 , Jul 10, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Scott:

      I agree with your assessment of Dusky. Note that the bird looks short-winged (short primary projection), and therefore long-tailed.  The lores (in front of the eye) are light, and as you note, the head does not seem large and angular (e.g. Hammond's), but rather round-headed.  Coloration is also good for Dusky.

      Dan Casey
      Somers

      --- In MOB-Montana@yahoogroups.com, "steel_rsd" wrote:
      >
      > MOB,
      > I hope I'm not beating this topic to death. I've posted 3 pictures of the same Flycatcher in ID album.
      >
      > This bird was seen on a mountain road (in the north Crazy Mnts.), maybe 6000 - 6500 feet. I first watched it moving about a dense thicket with an insect. It flew to another thicket across the road against a bank and maybe brought the insect to the nest? It then perched at the top of a nearby conifer tree. I saw it quickly "catch" a flying insect and return to it's perch. It also flicked it's tail a few times. No vocalization.
      >
      >
      > I think it can be narrowed down to Hammond's/Dusky by habitat, bill size/color, extent of eye ring. I'm favoring Dusky for a couple reasons. The bill may not be quite small enough for Hammond's. This bird shows a rounded head where as a Hammond's will show a steeper forehead. Also this bird does not appear to show a vest as a Hammond's might. The presumed nesting location also points to Dusky.
      >
      > Anybody willing to give this a positve ID?
      >
      > Scott Dean
      > Clyde Park, MT
      >
    • Forrest Rowland
      Scott: I concur with Dan. All proportions are consistent with that species, as are plumage and coloration marks. Good Birding, Forrest Rowland Livingston, MT
      Message 2 of 5 , Jul 10, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Scott:
        I concur with Dan. All proportions are consistent with that species, as are plumage and coloration marks.

        Good Birding,

        Forrest Rowland
        Livingston, MT
        --------------------------------------------
        El mié, 7/10/13, Dan Casey <danielcasey55@...> escribió:

        Asunto: [MOB-Montana] Re: Flycatcher ID help
        A: MOB-Montana@yahoogroups.com
        Fecha: miércoles, 10 de julio de 2013, 01:49 pm
















         










        Scott:
        I agree with your assessment of Dusky. Note that
        the bird looks short-winged (short primary projection), and
        therefore long-tailed.  The lores (in front of the eye)
        are light, and as you note, the head does not seem large and
        angular (e.g. Hammond's), but rather round-headed.
         Coloration is also good for Dusky.
        Dan CaseySomers
        --- In MOB-Montana@yahoogroups.com, "steel_rsd"
        wrote:
        >
        > MOB,
        > I hope I'm not beating this topic to death.
        I've posted 3 pictures of the same Flycatcher in ID
        album.
        >
        > This bird was seen on a mountain road (in the north
        Crazy Mnts.), maybe 6000 - 6500 feet. I first watched it
        moving about a dense thicket with an insect. It flew to
        another thicket across the road against a bank and maybe
        brought the insect to the nest? It then perched at the top
        of a nearby conifer tree. I saw it quickly
        "catch" a flying insect and return to it's
        perch. It also flicked it's tail a few times. No
        vocalization.
        >
        >
        > I think it can be narrowed down to Hammond's/Dusky
        by habitat, bill size/color, extent of eye ring. I'm
        favoring Dusky for a couple reasons. The bill may not be
        quite small enough for Hammond's. This bird shows a
        rounded head where as a Hammond's will show a steeper
        forehead. Also this bird does not appear to show a vest as
        a Hammond's might. The presumed nesting location also
        points to Dusky.
        >
        > Anybody willing to give this a positve ID?
        >
        > Scott Dean
        > Clyde Park, MT
        >
      • steel_rsd
        Thanks Forrest and Dan. I was hoping for some comments on proportions and form. Forrest s article he posted a couple weeks ago was quite interesting. A
        Message 3 of 5 , Jul 11, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks Forrest and Dan. I was hoping for some comments on proportions and form. Forrest's article he posted a couple weeks ago was quite interesting. A great learning experience to be able to photograph a nice speciman and be able to evaluate it without vocalizations.

          Scott

          --- In MOB-Montana@yahoogroups.com, Forrest Rowland <rowbird2005@...> wrote:
          >
          > Scott:
          > I concur with Dan. All proportions are consistent with that species, as are plumage and coloration marks.
          >
          > Good Birding,
          >
          > Forrest Rowland
          > Livingston, MT
          > --------------------------------------------
          > El mié, 7/10/13, Dan Casey <danielcasey55@...> escribió:
          >
          > Asunto: [MOB-Montana] Re: Flycatcher ID help
          > A: MOB-Montana@yahoogroups.com
          > Fecha: miércoles, 10 de julio de 2013, 01:49 pm
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >  
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Scott:
          > I agree with your assessment of Dusky. Note that
          > the bird looks short-winged (short primary projection), and
          > therefore long-tailed.  The lores (in front of the eye)
          > are light, and as you note, the head does not seem large and
          > angular (e.g. Hammond's), but rather round-headed.
          >  Coloration is also good for Dusky.
          > Dan CaseySomers
          > --- In MOB-Montana@yahoogroups.com, "steel_rsd"
          > wrote:
          > >
          > > MOB,
          > > I hope I'm not beating this topic to death.
          > I've posted 3 pictures of the same Flycatcher in ID
          > album.
          > >
          > > This bird was seen on a mountain road (in the north
          > Crazy Mnts.), maybe 6000 - 6500 feet. I first watched it
          > moving about a dense thicket with an insect. It flew to
          > another thicket across the road against a bank and maybe
          > brought the insect to the nest? It then perched at the top
          > of a nearby conifer tree. I saw it quickly
          > "catch" a flying insect and return to it's
          > perch. It also flicked it's tail a few times. No
          > vocalization.
          > >
          > >
          > > I think it can be narrowed down to Hammond's/Dusky
          > by habitat, bill size/color, extent of eye ring. I'm
          > favoring Dusky for a couple reasons. The bill may not be
          > quite small enough for Hammond's. This bird shows a
          > rounded head where as a Hammond's will show a steeper
          > forehead. Also this bird does not appear to show a vest as
          > a Hammond's might. The presumed nesting location also
          > points to Dusky.
          > >
          > > Anybody willing to give this a positve ID?
          > >
          > > Scott Dean
          > > Clyde Park, MT
          > >
          >
        • steel_rsd
          My wording was wrong on my last post. hoping meaning, I m glad Forrest and Dan offered observations on proportions and form. thanks again.
          Message 4 of 5 , Jul 11, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            My wording was wrong on my last post. "hoping" meaning, I'm glad Forrest and Dan offered observations on proportions and form. thanks again.

            --- In MOB-Montana@yahoogroups.com, "steel_rsd" <steel_rsd@...> wrote:
            >
            > Thanks Forrest and Dan. I was hoping for some comments on proportions and form. Forrest's article he posted a couple weeks ago was quite interesting. A great learning experience to be able to photograph a nice speciman and be able to evaluate it without vocalizations.
            >
            > Scott
            >
            > --- In MOB-Montana@yahoogroups.com, Forrest Rowland <rowbird2005@> wrote:
            > >
            > > Scott:
            > > I concur with Dan. All proportions are consistent with that species, as are plumage and coloration marks.
            > >
            > > Good Birding,
            > >
            > > Forrest Rowland
            > > Livingston, MT
            > > --------------------------------------------
            > > El mié, 7/10/13, Dan Casey <danielcasey55@> escribió:
            > >
            > > Asunto: [MOB-Montana] Re: Flycatcher ID help
            > > A: MOB-Montana@yahoogroups.com
            > > Fecha: miércoles, 10 de julio de 2013, 01:49 pm
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >  
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Scott:
            > > I agree with your assessment of Dusky. Note that
            > > the bird looks short-winged (short primary projection), and
            > > therefore long-tailed.  The lores (in front of the eye)
            > > are light, and as you note, the head does not seem large and
            > > angular (e.g. Hammond's), but rather round-headed.
            > >  Coloration is also good for Dusky.
            > > Dan CaseySomers
            > > --- In MOB-Montana@yahoogroups.com, "steel_rsd"
            > > wrote:
            > > >
            > > > MOB,
            > > > I hope I'm not beating this topic to death.
            > > I've posted 3 pictures of the same Flycatcher in ID
            > > album.
            > > >
            > > > This bird was seen on a mountain road (in the north
            > > Crazy Mnts.), maybe 6000 - 6500 feet. I first watched it
            > > moving about a dense thicket with an insect. It flew to
            > > another thicket across the road against a bank and maybe
            > > brought the insect to the nest? It then perched at the top
            > > of a nearby conifer tree. I saw it quickly
            > > "catch" a flying insect and return to it's
            > > perch. It also flicked it's tail a few times. No
            > > vocalization.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > I think it can be narrowed down to Hammond's/Dusky
            > > by habitat, bill size/color, extent of eye ring. I'm
            > > favoring Dusky for a couple reasons. The bill may not be
            > > quite small enough for Hammond's. This bird shows a
            > > rounded head where as a Hammond's will show a steeper
            > > forehead. Also this bird does not appear to show a vest as
            > > a Hammond's might. The presumed nesting location also
            > > points to Dusky.
            > > >
            > > > Anybody willing to give this a positve ID?
            > > >
            > > > Scott Dean
            > > > Clyde Park, MT
            > > >
            > >
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.